University Ranking Framework: A Comprehensive Guide | UPSC

Introduction 

• In recent years, university ranking frameworks have garnered significant attention, with global ranking systems gaining prominence for evaluating universities worldwide. 
• India, too, has established its own ranking system, the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF), specifically for assessing the performance of Indian universities.

Common University Ranking Frameworks

Global Frameworks:

• • QS World University Rankings: Compiled by Quacquarelli Symonds, this ranking system evaluates universities based on six metrics:
  • Academic Reputation: Surveys academic peers to gauge perceived quality.
  • Employer Reputation: Assesses how employers view graduates from different institutions.
  • Faculty/Student Ratio: A measure of teaching resources available to students.
  • Citations per Faculty: Reflects research impact by measuring citations per academic staff.
  • International Faculty Ratio: Indicates the diversity of faculty members.
  • International Student Ratio: Shows the institution’s global appeal and inclusivity.

Read also: Israel-Lebanon War: Causes, and Global Impact | UPSC

Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU):

• • Also known as the Shanghai Ranking, ARWU is one of the oldest and most respected global university ranking systems. It primarily focuses on research output and quality, evaluating factors such as:
  • Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals: Counts the number of alumni and staff awarded.
  • Highly Cited Researchers: Tracks individuals who are among the top 1% in their fields.
  • Research Output: Evaluates publications in top-tier journals.

Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings:

• • This ranking offers a comprehensive analysis of university performance across 13 indicators, categorized into five areas:
  • Teaching: Assesses the learning environment.
  • Research: Considers volume, income, and reputation.
  • Citations: Measures the influence of research.
  • International Outlook: Evaluates diversity among staff, students, and research collaborations.
  • Industry Income: Examines partnerships that contribute to innovation.

Indian Framework:

• • National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF): Released annually by the Ministry of Education, Government of India, NIRF ranks Indian higher education institutions based on parameters such as teaching, learning, and resources, research and professional practices, graduation outcomes, outreach and inclusivity, and perception.

Key Highlights of India Rankings 2024 NIRF 2024 rankings have also been introduced for ‘open universities’, ‘skill universities,’ and ‘state-funded government universities’. Integration of “Innovation” ranking into the India Rankings using NIRF framework. Indian Institute of Technology Madras retains its 1st position in Overall Category for the sixth consecutive year. Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru tops the Universities Category for ninth consecutive year. IIM Ahmedabad tops in Management subject retaining its first position for fifth consecutive year. All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi occupies the top slot in Medical for the seventh consecutive year.

 

Advantages of University Ranking Frameworks

Global Recognition:

• • High rankings enhance a university’s visibility on the global stage. For example, Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Bombay’s rise in rankings has attracted international students and faculty, boosting its global stature.

Performance Assessments:

• • Rankings provide critical insights into an institution’s standing compared to peers, enabling targeted improvements. Universities can identify areas of weakness and allocate resources strategically to enhance their performance. For instance, Delhi University uses its NIRF ranking to identify areas where it lags behind other top universities.

Quality Enhancement:

• • The competitive nature of rankings motivates institutions to improve educational quality and research output. Universities often invest in infrastructure, faculty development, and student services to climb the ranks. For example, Harvard University, consistently ranked among the top universities, invests heavily in state-of-the-art facilities and comprehensive faculty development programs.

Collaboration Opportunities:

• • High-ranking universities are more likely to attract partnerships for research projects and exchange programs. For example, collaborations between Stanford University and Indian institutions like IIT Delhi have led to significant research advancements in fields such as renewable energy and artificial intelligence, showcasing how these partnerships can lead to impactful outcomes. 

Alumni Connections:

• • Graduating from a highly-ranked university often opens doors to networking opportunities, internships, and job placements. Alumni from top-ranked institutions frequently form successful networks that benefit current students. For instance, alumni from Oxford University have access to an extensive global network, which has proven beneficial for securing internships at leading organizations like Goldman Sachs and Google. 

Arguments Against Ranking Frameworks

Overemphasis on Research:

• • Global rankings tend to prioritize research output, often neglecting the quality and societal relevance of research. For instance, Soka University in Japan, known for its strong emphasis on student-centered learning and social impact rankd in the 701-750 range QS World University Rankings 2023 while The University of Tokyo ranked 23rd globally. This focus on research can lead to a misrepresentation of the institution’s overall educational quality and impact on society.

Increased Education Fees:

• • The pursuit of higher rankings can compel public institutions to raise student fees, disproportionately affecting economically disadvantaged students. For example, University of Delhi has faced criticism for increasing fees in response to its rankings. As a result, many students from lower-income backgrounds find it challenging to afford higher education, limiting access and perpetuating social inequalities. This financial burden undermines the university’s mission to provide inclusive education.

Decline of Teaching Standards:

• • The obsession with metrics can diminish the focus on teaching excellence. Faculty may prioritize research over student engagement, compromising the quality of education. At Harvard University, reports have highlighted that some professors spend more time on their research outputs to meet promotion criteria, leading to fewer office hours and reduced student interaction. This trend can result in a less engaging learning environment, which is detrimental to student success.

Compromise in Research Quality:

• • The “publish or perish” culture fosters an environment where the quantity of publications often trumps quality, potentially leading to issues like plagiarism. This phenomenon has been observed in fields such as social sciences, where researchers might prioritize publishing in lesser-known journals to boost their publication counts. For instance, the Chinese Academy of Sciences faced scrutiny when it was revealed that many researchers were publishing in predatory journals, sacrificing research integrity for the sake of meeting publication quotas.

Bias and Lack of Inclusivity:

• • Many ranking systems exhibit biases that favor Western institutions, marginalizing universities from developing countries or those that emphasize teaching over research. For example, universities in countries like India or Nigeria often struggle to achieve high rankings despite significant contributions to education and community development. The University of Ibadan in Nigeria, despite being one of the oldest and most reputable institutions in Africa, is frequently overshadowed by Western universities in global rankings, resulting in a skewed academic landscape that overlooks diverse educational approaches and achievements.

Read also: Explore the growing trend of India’s increasing imports from China | UPSC

Way Forward

• Balancing Research and Teaching: Universities should strive for a harmonious balance between research and teaching. Institutions like the University of California, Berkeley, have initiated programs to ensure that teaching excellence is equally valued alongside research output.
• Separation of Research and Teaching Focused Faculties: Creating distinct tracks for research-focused and teaching-focused faculty can prevent burnout and enhance job satisfaction. This approach allows faculty to excel in their respective areas without the pressures of conflicting expectations.
• Shift of Focus to Value Research: Universities need to foster a culture that values research for its societal impact, not just journal citations. For example, institutions that emphasize community-oriented research can lead to meaningful changes in local and global contexts.
• Focus on Enhancing Student Creativity: Moving beyond metrics-driven approaches can help universities fulfill their educational mission. By emphasizing creativity and critical thinking, institutions can prepare students to tackle real-world challenges and become responsible citizens, as seen in progressive education models around the world.

https://epaper.thehindu.com/ccidist-ws/th/th_delhi/issues/102033/OPS/GOMDDO7OD.1+GCVDDPS5N.1.html