Inconsistencies and Doubtful of World University Rankings

  • J Koto Ocean and Aerospace Research Institute, Indonesia
  • A.A Wijaya Mechanical Engineering, Uniiversiti Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia
  • M Putrawidjaja Komuniti Gas Indonesia, Indonesia
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.36842/jomase.v57i1.26

Abstract

University rankings have become a trend to gauge the credibility and quality of the university. The university rating has generated much debate about the usefulness, method and accuracy of the assessment results. There are some institution who issued university rankings such as QS, 4ICU, CWUR and Webometrics. The universities were assessed depending on research indicators and opinion surveys. There are many anomalies in ranking gap values between universities as well some clumsiness of values at certain regions. The inadequacy of those tabulation indicators to assess most universities will look purely for reasons of obvious statistical instability. Statistically, there are three regions of ranking gap values: low, medium and high. Standard deviation of ranking gap values for universities in USA and UK is 6-7, Japan is 16, South Korea is 70, and Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia are no applicable. Those values indicate inconsistency of judgment and invalid and inaccuracy data used in the assessment.

##Keywords:## World University Ranking, Indicators Tab, QS, CWUR
Published
Oct 7, 2018
How to Cite
KOTO, J; WIJAYA, A.A; PUTRAWIDJAJA, M. Inconsistencies and Doubtful of World University Rankings. Journal of Ocean, Mechanical and Aerospace -science and engineering-, [S.l.], v. 57, n. 1, p. 5-11, oct. 2018. ISSN 2527-6085. Available at: <https://isomase.org/Journals/index.php/jomase/article/view/26>. Date accessed: 26 may 2026. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.36842/jomase.v57i1.26.
Citation Formats
Issue
Vol 57 No 1 (2018): Journal of Ocean, Mechanical and Aerospace -science and engineering- (JOMAse)
Section
Articles

References

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_and_university_rankings.
2. Marklein, Mary Beth. "Rankings create 'perverse incentives' – Hazelkorn". University World News. University World News. Retrieved 14 September 2016.
3. Caroline Damanik, Jangan Salah Kaprah soal Ranking Kampus di Dunia, 28 February 2013.
4. https://cwur.org/methodology/world-university-rankings.php.
5. Nadim Mahassen, A quantitative approach to world university rankings, Center for World University Rankings.
6. http://www.webometrics.info/en/About_Us.
7. https://www.4icu.org/.
8. Fred L. Bookstein, Horst Seidler, Martin Fieder, Georg Winckler, 2010, Too much noise in the Times Higher Education rankings, Scientometrics, Volume 85, Issue 1, pp 295–299.
9. https://www.topuniversities.com/.
10. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2018/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats.
11. Raan, F. J, 2005, Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics, 62(1), 133–143. 12. https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2018.
13. http://cwur.org/2018-19.php.
14. J.Koto, Nazri Nasir, 2018, Experimental Method for Mechanical Engineering, Ocean & Aerospace Research Institute, Indonesia.