The University of Zurich, known as the “alma mater” of Albert Einstein, has taken a bold step by deciding to withdraw from one of the most famous rankings of higher education institutions in the world – “Times Higher Education World University” (THE Rankings). According to the university, the ranking creates false incentives and fails to reflect the quality of teaching and research.
The University of Zurich is the largest university in Switzerland. It is among the top three higher education institutions in the country and has more than 25,000 students.
THE Rankings rank the 500 best universities in the world. The organization’s mission is to provide “data-driven research that empowers everyone in higher education to make smarter, more informed decisions.” In the latest ranking for 2024, published in September 2023, the University of Zurich was ranked 80th in the list of the best universities globally. For comparison, Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski” does not appear at all among the first 500, and the top three are Oxford University, Stanford University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The benefits and impact of rankings on academia have long been the subject of controversy. The Swiss university has for many years actively campaigned both nationally and internationally for a culture of openness in academia. According to the graduate school, “open science” means open exchange, transparency and reproducibility, and should promote high-quality, efficient and impactful research.
Rankings like THE Rankings mostly focus on measurable results. According to critics, the pressure of ratings often leads to the publication of irrelevant research that undermines scientific principles. Instead of focusing on quality, universities end up becoming “publishing machines” seeking only recognition. Opposing this profit-oriented approach, the University of Zurich aims to maintain its integrity and prioritize genuine academic development. The management of the Swiss educational institution is convinced that scientific quality should be a decisive factor in all decisions in the field of research policy.
As a result of the controversial research approaches on which the ranking rests, the University of Zurich has decided not to provide its data in the future.
What are the distortions in the rankings
An example of the absurdity of the criteria by which higher education institutions are evaluated in the ratings is given in her article by Jelena Branković from the London School of Economics and Political Science. According to her, in September 2019, the German “Der Spiegel” published an article in which it reported on THE Rankings, which had just been published at the time. Germany’s status as “the third most represented country in the Top 200,” the article says, has been reaffirmed. Another piece of news stands out as “particularly noteworthy”: “The University of Bielefeld jumped from position 250 to 166”.
Although Bielefeld has featured in this particular ranking since its first edition in 2011, for most of that time the university has been positioned differently – somewhere between places 201 and 400. Then, in the 2020 edition of the ranking, Bielefeld is among the top 200. The news is, of course, well received in Germany. The rector of Bielefeld thanked everyone “who contributed to the wonderful result”.
Bielefeld’s management is quite puzzled by its result. They cannot guess what exactly they did to mark this remarkable improvement. In order to get to the bottom of the matter, they decided to investigate.
It’s pretty obvious from the start that the “jump” is probably about quotes. The more scientific articles written at the university are cited, the higher it ranks. According to this criterion alone, Bielefeld is in the top 100 universities in the world and 6th in Germany.
It turns out that Bielefeld has climbed more than 120 places in just two ranking cycles. It turns out that the huge jumps in the ranking are now linked to a major international collaboration in the field of global health – the Global Burden of Disease study. The method of counting citations is such that in some cases even one scholar is enough to improve a university’s rank, and significantly and rapidly from one year to the next.
Just ten papers account for about 20% of Bielefeld’s total citations in those two years. Each of these can be linked to the Global Burden of Disease study. All but one were published in The Lancet and signed by hundreds of authors. One of the authors – and only one – comes from Bielefeld.
Bielefeld’s rise up the rankings is, as analysis by the London School of Economics and Political Science shows, down to a single scientist.
The event provides a clear picture of how meaningful the relationship really is between the “performance” of a university – an entire institution – and its rank.
#Einstein #University #withdraws #international #ranking #disagreement