Cargando…

Too much noise in the Times Higher Education rankings

Several individual indicators from the Times Higher Education Survey (THES) data base—the overall score, the reported staff-to-student ratio, and the peer ratings—demonstrate unacceptably high fluctuation from year to year. The inappropriateness of the summary tabulations for assessing the majority...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bookstein, Fred L., Seidler, Horst, Fieder, Martin, Winckler, Georg
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2927316/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20802837
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0189-5
_version_ 1782185744355295232
author Bookstein, Fred L.
Seidler, Horst
Fieder, Martin
Winckler, Georg
author_facet Bookstein, Fred L.
Seidler, Horst
Fieder, Martin
Winckler, Georg
author_sort Bookstein, Fred L.
collection PubMed
description Several individual indicators from the Times Higher Education Survey (THES) data base—the overall score, the reported staff-to-student ratio, and the peer ratings—demonstrate unacceptably high fluctuation from year to year. The inappropriateness of the summary tabulations for assessing the majority of the “top 200” universities would be apparent purely for reason of this obvious statistical instability regardless of other grounds of criticism. There are far too many anomalies in the change scores of the various indices for them to be of use in the course of university management.
format Text
id pubmed-2927316
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-29273162010-08-27 Too much noise in the Times Higher Education rankings Bookstein, Fred L. Seidler, Horst Fieder, Martin Winckler, Georg Scientometrics Article Several individual indicators from the Times Higher Education Survey (THES) data base—the overall score, the reported staff-to-student ratio, and the peer ratings—demonstrate unacceptably high fluctuation from year to year. The inappropriateness of the summary tabulations for assessing the majority of the “top 200” universities would be apparent purely for reason of this obvious statistical instability regardless of other grounds of criticism. There are far too many anomalies in the change scores of the various indices for them to be of use in the course of university management. Springer Netherlands 2010-02-10 2010 /pmc/articles/PMC2927316/ /pubmed/20802837 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0189-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2010 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Article
Bookstein, Fred L.
Seidler, Horst
Fieder, Martin
Winckler, Georg
Too much noise in the Times Higher Education rankings
title Too much noise in the Times Higher Education rankings
title_full Too much noise in the Times Higher Education rankings
title_fullStr Too much noise in the Times Higher Education rankings
title_full_unstemmed Too much noise in the Times Higher Education rankings
title_short Too much noise in the Times Higher Education rankings
title_sort too much noise in the times higher education rankings
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2927316/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20802837
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0189-5
work_keys_str_mv AT booksteinfredl toomuchnoiseinthetimeshighereducationrankings
AT seidlerhorst toomuchnoiseinthetimeshighereducationrankings
AT fiedermartin toomuchnoiseinthetimeshighereducationrankings
AT wincklergeorg toomuchnoiseinthetimeshighereducationrankings