Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Ranking universities: The CHE Approach Gero Federkeil CHE – Centre for Higher Education Development International Colloquium “Ranking and Research Assessment.

Published by Modified over 8 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Ranking universities: The CHE Approach Gero Federkeil CHE – Centre for Higher Education Development International Colloquium “Ranking and Research Assessment."— Presentation transcript:

1 Ranking universities: The CHE Approach Gero Federkeil CHE – Centre for Higher Education Development International Colloquium “Ranking and Research Assessment in Higher Education” 12 & 13 December 2007, Bruxelles

2 2 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles Presentation I.The CHE – Centre for Higher Education Development II.Rankings – Aims and methodology III.The CHE ranking approach  Basic Approach  Indicators and data base  Publication  Impacts

3 3 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles I. CHE – Center of Higher Education Development private, not-profit organisation founded in 1994 by Bertelsmann Foundation and German Rectors Conference purpose: promotion of reforms in German higher education Ranking of German universities among founding tasks of CHE activities: HE policy issues consulting ranking, since 1998 staff: ~ 30 people more information: www.che.de

4 4 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles First ranking published in 1998 after two years of preparation Published in co-operation with media partner: since 2005 weekly newspaper „Die Zeit“ responsibility for concept & data exclusively at CHE „Zeit“: publication / distribution High international reputation (Usher & Savino, Tavenas, OECD) Internationalisation: since 2004: Austrian universities 2005: Swiss universities 2006/07: EU-funded pilot project with Dutch/ Belgian (Flemish) universities 2008: Dutch universities, University Bozen/Bolzano (I) I. The CHE: ranking tradition

5 5 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles II. Rankings: Aims and Methodology Ranking refers to a method: comprehensive comparison of HEIs by quantitative indicators made by external/independant institutions/actors  Ranking is different from benchmarking / evaluation: external vs. internal target groups publication of all results vs. confidentiality focus on indicators vs. processes no causal analysis in rankings !

6 6 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles II. Rankings rankings differ by target groups, particular goals information for prospective students (US News, CHE) information about global positioning (Shanghai Jiatong, THES) Information for HE community (Germany: National Science Foundation Ranking of Research Grants, CHE Research Ranking) even: basis for accreditation (e.g.Nigeria) Rankings vary in aims and target groups as well as „in terms of what they measure, how they measure it and how they implicitly define quality“ (Usher & Savino)

7 7 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles II. Rankings: Aims and Methodology Main target group of (most) rankings is least informed group on higher education  need for reduction of complexity of information Higher education institutions themeselves use data for comparison  need for detailed & sophisticated information Rankings have to find a balance in order to both reach target group & get acceptance within HE

8 8 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles II. The most popular ranking... clear, unequivocal rank positions clear, uncontested rules for calculation of overall score one rank can make a difference

9 9 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles Exampe: THES World Rankings Can we rank universities like this? – Some Do! composite overall score weights of indicators ? is Johns Hopkins 92,9 % as good as Harvard? league table with clear rank positions ranking of whole universities

10 10 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles No individual ranks in league tables No overall score from weighted indicators No ranking of whole universities Multidimensional ranking Ranking of single fields / programmes Rank groups top intermediate bottom III. THE CHE approach – an alternative

11 11 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles CHE rankings CHE ranking data target group: prospective students target group: HE sector CHE University RankingCHE Research Ranking Indicators on:  teaching  resources  research Detailed analysis of data/ indicators on  research

12 12 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles labour market, employability city, university students study outcome teachingressources research overall assessment (students, professors) internatio- nalisation III. The CHE-Ranking: Indicators 20 – 25 indicators...

13 13 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles III. The CHE-Ranking: Indicators... from different data sources… research  publications /citations (bibliometric analysis)  research grants (faculties/departments)  research reputation (professors survey)

14 14 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles III. The CHE-Ranking:Indicators... facts as well as judgements teaching  student-staff-ratio (fact)  student assessment of contact between students and professors  student assessment of course organisation

15 15 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles III. The CHE ranking: Data sources Survey among universities / departments Student survey Professor survey Bibliometric analysis Patent analysis Official higher education statistics

16 16 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles III. Publication analysis DIE ZEIT overview 5 indicators; „Study Guide“ all data + Interactive ranking www.das-ranking.de densification differentiation

17 17 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles III. The CHE ranking: Internet Publication

18 18 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles 1. Ranking overview

19 19 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles 1. Ranking overview Reputation

20 20 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles 1. Ranking overview Reputation

21 21 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles University Heidelberg, Medicine 2. Detailed results

22 22 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles 3. Personal Ranking Selection of (up to ) 5 indicators

23 23 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles 3. Personal Ranking... giving personal „weights“ to indicators:

24 24 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles 3. Personal Ranking... and the result – a personal ranking:

25 25 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles 3. Personal Ranking... taht looks different with different indicators:

26 26 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles III. Impacts: Individual 2/3 of students use ranking as one source of information differences by fields /types of students:  law, medicine, engineering  humanities studies show: ranking covers needs of information of prospective students (indicators)

27 27 Ranking and Research Assessment, 12/07, Bruxelles III. Impacts: Institutional Ranking not used for funding decisions /allocation of money !!! Institutions use data (published data & additional analysis) as a starting point for analysis of strengths and weaknesses for internal comparison / benchmarking between faculties, incl. contracts between president - faculties for external comparison / benchmarking with other institutions But ranking helps to identify deficits & asking questions, but does not give all answers

28 Thank you very much! More information: www.che-ranking.de Mailto: gero.federkeil@che-ranking.degero.federkeil@che-ranking.de International Colloquium “Ranking and Research Assessment in Higher Education” 12 & 13 December 2007, Bruxelles

Download ppt "Ranking universities: The CHE Approach Gero Federkeil CHE – Centre for Higher Education Development International Colloquium “Ranking and Research Assessment."

Similar presentations

Current initiatives in rankings: how do you see them from the perspective of your agency? Tia Loukkola 28 September 2009.

Current initiatives in rankings: how do you see them from the perspective of your agency? Tia Loukkola 28 September 2009.
www.che.de CHE and Coimbra Group 1 Ranking, Rating, Benchmarking... what is serving which purpose?

CHE and Coimbra Group 1 Ranking, Rating, Benchmarking... what is serving which purpose?
Excellence in Europe and the Institute of Physics Eötvös Loránd University Budapest, HUNGARY Jenő KÜRTI 20. March 2010 www:

Excellence in Europe and the Institute of Physics Eötvös Loránd University Budapest, HUNGARY Jenő KÜRTI 20. March www:
Www.che.de Multi-dimensional, field-based rankings Gero Federkeil, CHE, Germany Special Workshop: Introduction to Academic Rankings for the Rectors of.

Multi-dimensional, field-based rankings Gero Federkeil, CHE, Germany Special Workshop: Introduction to Academic Rankings for the Rectors of.
Professor Sabiha Essack B. Pharm., M. Pharm., PhD Dean and Head of School Quality Promotion and Assurance in Teaching and Learning A Pilot Study in the.

Professor Sabiha Essack B. Pharm., M. Pharm., PhD Dean and Head of School Quality Promotion and Assurance in Teaching and Learning A Pilot Study in the.
CYPRUS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Internal Evaluation Procedures at CUT Quality Assurance Seminar Organised by the Ministry of Education and Culture and.

CYPRUS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Internal Evaluation Procedures at CUT Quality Assurance Seminar Organised by the Ministry of Education and Culture and.
: Institutional Research Consultancy Unit League and Ranking Tables and their Influence on Graduate Surveys Presentation to Victorian Statistical Officers.

: Institutional Research Consultancy Unit League and Ranking Tables and their Influence on Graduate Surveys Presentation to Victorian Statistical Officers.
Mapping Diversity – The U-Multirank Approach to Rankings Gero Federkeil Workshop Universidade Nova de Lisboa, 29th June 2012.

Mapping Diversity – The U-Multirank Approach to Rankings Gero Federkeil Workshop Universidade Nova de Lisboa, 29th June 2012.
Facilitators: Janet Lange and Bob Munn

Facilitators: Janet Lange and Bob Munn
Www.che-ranking.de The CHE Research Ranking of German Universities Sonja Berghoff International Colloquium “Ranking and Research Assessment in Higher Education”

The CHE Research Ranking of German Universities Sonja Berghoff International Colloquium “Ranking and Research Assessment in Higher Education”
Ranking - New Developments in Europe Gero Federkeil CHE – Centre for Higher Education Development The 3rd International Symposium on University Rankings.

Ranking - New Developments in Europe Gero Federkeil CHE – Centre for Higher Education Development The 3rd International Symposium on University Rankings.
University of Vienna Rectorate – Office of the Rectorate May 30, 2008 Claudia Kögler University of Vienna, Office of the Rectorate.

University of Vienna Rectorate – Office of the Rectorate May 30, 2008 Claudia Kögler University of Vienna, Office of the Rectorate.
Quality Assurance and Development Unit College of Applied Medical Sciences Females 1.

Quality Assurance and Development Unit College of Applied Medical Sciences Females 1.
EURASHE FORUM 1. Content of Presentation 2 I.General observations on staff mobility II.Findings of the Bologna Follow-Up Group (BFUG) Working Group on.

EURASHE FORUM 1. Content of Presentation 2 I.General observations on staff mobility II.Findings of the Bologna Follow-Up Group (BFUG) Working Group on.
Introductory Task 1. What term means a belief in the importance of traditional values and competition? 2. What term means the idea that human behaviour.

Introductory Task 1. What term means a belief in the importance of traditional values and competition? 2. What term means the idea that human behaviour.
Market Research. Market Research – What is it? Gathering information on (for example)… …finding new markets …evaluating public opinion …gaining insight.

Market Research. Market Research – What is it? Gathering information on (for example)… …finding new markets …evaluating public opinion …gaining insight.
Institutional Internationalisation Strategies and their (possible) impact on the quality of educational programs Arthur Mettinger Austrian Bologna Expert,

Institutional Internationalisation Strategies and their (possible) impact on the quality of educational programs Arthur Mettinger Austrian Bologna Expert,
Quality teaching in higher education, an OECD approach Fabrice Hénard, December 2010.

Quality teaching in higher education, an OECD approach Fabrice Hénard, December 2010.
Workshop on research assessment in CERIF Stephen Grace, Brigitte Jörg, Aija Kaitera, Maximilian Stempfhuber.

Workshop on research assessment in CERIF Stephen Grace, Brigitte Jörg, Aija Kaitera, Maximilian Stempfhuber.
Rating and Ranking: Pros and Cons Dr. Mohsen Elmahdy Said Professor, Mechanical Design and Production Department Faculty of Engineering – Cairo University.

Rating and Ranking: Pros and Cons Dr. Mohsen Elmahdy Said Professor, Mechanical Design and Production Department Faculty of Engineering – Cairo University.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google