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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |