Harmonising data semantics of rankings fileHarmonising data semantics of rankings. Results from...
Transcript of Harmonising data semantics of rankings fileHarmonising data semantics of rankings. Results from...
Harmonising data semantics of rankings
Results from Italy & Flanders
Hanne PoelmansSadia Vancauwenbergh ECOOM-Hasselt, Hasselt University, Belgium
Luciana SacchettiStefano PiazzaAMS Università di Bologna, Italy
Introduction university rankings
Visibility
Bench-marking
Policy formation
universityrankings
Introduction data semantics
“Mouse”
“Apple”
Introduction data semantics
Example “academic staff”: ranking organisations
Times Higher Education U-Multirank QSAcademic staff Academic staff Faculty staff
= staff employed in an academic post (e.g., lecturer, reader, professor)
EXCLUDEnon-teaching “fellows”,researchers (only doing research), postdoctoral researchers
= personnel whose primary assignment is instruction, research or public service
= staff who are responsible for planning, directing and undertaking academic teaching only, research only or both academic teaching and research within HEI.
teaching teaching + research teaching + research≠
≠
=
=
The Flemish ranking initiative
Interuniversity working group consisting of 4 HEIs in Flanders (Belgium)concerned with semantic harmonisation of university ranking indicators.
Participants
Goals- Increase data collection efficiency and quality- Create correctly comparable ranking data in Flanders- Improve branding and visibility of the Flemish HEI
The Italian ranking project72 Italian HEIs working group on Global rankings, a CRUI initiative.Coordinators
2018 BENCHMARK ACTIVITIESCRUI Universities QS
2019THE
2019GREENMETRIC
2018Ranked 28 39 25
Not ranked 45 33 47
Provide datafor benchmark
28/72 35/72 15/72
Results Times Higher Education rankingThe harmonisation process
EMILIA R. STUDENT RESEARCH STAFF ACADEMIC STAFFTo include Regular
(undergraduate,graduate, PhD,Professional Mastersprograms,Specialization Schools)
regular = student enrolledfor less than or equal tothe legal length of thedegree program
Research fellow Full professor,Associate professor,Senior AssistantProfessor (tenured),Junior assistant-professor (fixed-term), Seniorassistant professor(fixed-term)
To exclude Non regular student,summer school
Academic staff Research fellow,Adjunct professor(fix-term)
Results Times Higher Education rankingThe harmonisation process
FLEMISH INITIATIVE STUDENT RESEARCH STAFF ACADEMIC STAFF
To include Regular (undergraduate, graduate, PhD,Professional Masters programs,Specialization Schools)
regular = student enrolled to an entire degree program (not singlecourses)
Research fellow (post-doc)
Full professor, Associate professor, Senior Assistant Professor (tenured), Junior assistant-professor (fixed-term), Senior assistant professor (fixed-term)
To exclude Non regular student, summer school, exchange students, postgraduate courses
Academic staff Research fellow,Adjunct professor (fix-term)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
univ1 univ2 univ3 univ4 Mean
Academic staff Emilia R.
2018 not harmonised 2019 harmonised
Results Times Higher Education rankingEffect of harmonisation
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
univ1 univ2 univ3 univ4 Mean
Academic staff Flanders
2018 not harmonised 2019 harmonised
-0,1% -2,6% +5,1% -64,6% -17,3%-30,7% +11,8% -38,9% +1,8% -9,1%
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
univ1 univ2 univ3 univ4 Mean
Students Flanders
2018 not harmonised 2019 harmonised
-6%
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
univ1 univ2 univ3 univ4 Mean
Students Emilia R.
2018 not harmonised 2019 harmonised
-13,2% +4,2% -0,2% -3,6% +7,5% -22,2% +0,2% +4,0% +0,6%
Results Times Higher Education rankingEffect of harmonisation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Teaching Research Citations Industryincome
Internat.outlook
Overall
Univ Mean Flanders
2018 not harmonised 2019 harmonised
Results Times Higher Education rankingPillar indicators (scores)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Teaching Research Citations Industryincome
Internat.outlook
Overall
Univ Mean Emilia R.
2018 not harmonised 2019 harmonised
+3,1 +0,4 +0,3 +2,0 +4,1 +1,5 +4,1 +3,4 +2,8 +3,3 +0,6 +3,2
THE WUR 2019Flanders
THE WUR 2019Emilia R.
Conclusion
COMPETITON & RANKINGS
COOPERATION & BENCHMARK
COMPETITION = threshold of competitive advantage of the leadinguniversities must be respected in any case
COOPERATION = a mutual vision as Sistema Italia implies the willingness toexchange data and information
Conclusion
Data semantics
Data quality
Efficiency
Transparancy
Benchmarking
Branding