Using Rankings to Drive Internal Quality Improvements Dr. Kevin Downing City University of Hong Kong & Ms. Mandy Mok QS Asia

2 Presentation Outline 1 What’s Wrong With Rankings? 2 What’s the Use of Rankings? 33 Final Remarks 44 Dominant Global Ranking Systems

Academic Peer Review 40%  Academics indicate which field they specialise in and then list up to 30 universities they regard as leaders in this field.  Composite score drawn from peer review survey (which is divided into five subject areas). Results compiled based on three years’ worth of responses totaling 6,354 in  Safeguards against individuals voting for their own university strengthened.  Rise of Asian universities is least apparent in this ranking. International Staff 5%  Score calculated based on the proportion of Full Time Equivalent (FTE) faculty that are international. Employer Review 10%  Score based on responses to employer survey. 2,339 responses in  Recruiter names are sourced through QS databases, media partners and partner schools & universities.  Responses are weighted by region to reach a final score. Staff/Student 20%  Score based simply on the student faculty ratio, the higher the number of faculty per student the higher the score.  Full- and part-time numbers for staff and students obtained; FTEs used throughout as far as possible. Citation/Staff 20%  Score based on research performance factored against the size of the research body.  Five years of publication data with citations from Scopus.  Number of citations is divided by the number of FTE staff to give an indication of the density of research. International Student 5%  Score calculated based on the proportion of total students that are international. THE-QS Rankings THE-QS World University Rankings

Shanghai Jiao Tong Rankings Quality of Education 10%  Alumni of an institution winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals. Research Output (SSCI and SCI) 20%  Total number of articles indexed by Science Citation Index-Expanded and Social Science Citation Index in the previous year. Only publications of article type are considered. Quality of Faculty (B) 20%  Highly cited researchers in 21 broad subject categories. Per Capita Performance 10%  Per capita academic performance of an institution. Shanghai Jiao Tong Academic Ranking of World Universities Research Output (Nature and Science) 20%  Articles published in Nature and Science in the previous year.  A weight of 100% is assigned for corresponding author affiliation, 50% for first author affiliation (second author affiliation if the first author affiliation is the same as corresponding author affiliation), 25% for the next author affiliation, and 10% for all other author affiliations. Only publications of article type are considered. Quality of Faculty (A) 20%  Staff of an institution winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals.

What is Wrong with Rankings - The THE-QS Example?

Competition: McDonald’s or The Rosetta Stone?

What’s the use of rankings?

Using Rankings to Improve Institutional Quality

What’s the use of rankings? Examples from City University of Hong Kong Use ranking criteria to identify appropriate benchmarks in line with institutional aspirations. Benchmark against ‘best practice’ and learn from peer institutions. Establish panel of management and external experts to consider anomalous data or representations from departments. Strategy can then be developed to address issues of accountability and improve quality.

Performance Indicators % Faculty to Total Academic Staff Number of Students Per Faculty % Self-financed Students % International Students Average Entry A-Level Score Average Entry English Score % Faculty with PhD or Professional Accreditation % International Faculty % Graduates with FT Employment (within 6 months of completion) % Outbound Exchange Students % Student with Internship Experience

Threshold  (One star) Towards Excellence  (Two star) Excellence  (Three star) Output Quality Index Staffing and Resources Index Input Quality Index Staircase Model

Example Growth Chart (Department X)

Example Growth Chart (Department Y)

Rankings provide comparative measures of institutions global standing, they can foster healthy competition among the best higher education institutions. “ ’’ Final Remarks

Rankings can be effective self- evaluation tools for universities to bring about practical positive strategic change which will benefit both stakeholders and students. “ ’’ Rankings are here to stay, so better make the best use of them. “ ’’