“The history of rankings shows that measuring the wrong things”can produce distortions and perverse actions,” zei EllenHazelkorn, lid van de Commissie Veerman en professor aan het DublinInstitute of Technology in Parijs. Zij komt binnenkort met eennieuwe boek over deze discussie: Rankings and the Battle forWorld Class Excellence – How rankings are reshaping highereducation.
“The drive towards metrics-based tools appear to be a cheap andcheerful transparency instrument but it encourages simplisticsolutions, skewing agendas and policies to become what is measured.Ultimately the public policy imperative is lost in the belief thatquantification equals quality. Policy-making by numbers is not thesolution many governments think it is,” voegde zij toe.
Vice-chancellor van de California State University, Charles Reed,noemde op het OECD-congres over hoger onderwijs rankings “adisease”. Oxford and Cambridge “are different, they are not better.All universities are good because they add value to what wedo.”
Brian Denman van de University of New England in Australië kwam meteen wat andere invalshoek bij het kijken naar rankings en hunrelevantie.”In the future, institutions will not base theirreputation on league tables but on the networks they create. Whilethey may do so out of economic imperatives more than anything else,what appears promising is that international consortia help tobroaden not only the reputations of those scholars who representthe group, but also the institutions to which they arerelated.”