The controversy of Global University Rankings

The allure of global university rankings, particularly those by Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) and Times Higher Education (THE), has become undeniable globally and particularly in Pakistan. These prestigious lists promise a world of benefits — international recognition, increased funding and the ability to attract top faculty and students. However, a closer look reveals a potential mismatch between the metrics these rankings prioritise and the true needs of Pakistani higher education. They perpetuate a narrow view of what constitutes excellence in higher education by prioritising reputation over substance and the academic impact of research over their benefits for the domestic economy and society.

Before reviewing them any further, let us first look into how these rankings are worked out. QS and THE rankings evaluate universities through different lenses. QS uses six specific metrics: 40% for academic reputation (how well-regarded the university is), 10% for employer reputation (graduate employability), 20% for faculty-to-student ratio, another 20% for research impact (measured by citations per faculty member) and 5% each for the international makeup of both faculty and students. THE, on the other hand, utilises five broader categories: 30% for teaching (learning environment quality), another 30% for research (volume, funding and reputation), 30% for research impact (citations), 7.5% for international diversity (staff, students and research) and a final 2.5% for industry income (research’s practical applications). Ultimately, both rankings aim to assess a university’s overall academic strength, research productivity, global appeal and connection to the professional world.

The current emphasis on research output and reputational factors in QS and THE rankings creates challenges for Pakistani universities. Imagine a dedicated teacher pressured to churn out high-impact research for international journals, sacrificing valuable time he/she could spend mentoring students or tackling crucial local issues. This relentless pursuit of prestige can come at the expense of fostering a dynamic learning environment and conducting research that directly addresses the specific needs of Pakistani society.

The undeniable importance of academic research is increasingly overshadowed by a focus on quantity over quality within global university rankings. This relentless pursuit of publications in high-impact journals can incentivise generic, safe research, potentially stifling groundbreaking scholarship and innovation.

Professor Ellen Hazelkorn, a prominent scholar in higher education, argues that the emphasis on publication metrics has significantly undermined the significance of pedagogical quality and student experience within institutions of higher learning. He aptly observes, “There is a paucity of empirical evidence to suggest that rankings effectively measure the quality of teaching, yet they continue to exert a dominant influence on our perception of what constitutes a good university.”

Moreover, the reliance on research output, frequently measured through citation counts, can disadvantage universities with strengths in the humanities and social sciences. Citation practices within these disciplines tend to differ from those in the natural sciences, often resulting in lower citation frequencies. This inherent bias within citation-based metrics creates an uneven playing field for universities across disciplines.

Concerns also arise from the inherent biases within these rankings. Universities with established reputations are more likely to receive favourable scores in reputational surveys, making it difficult for newer or less well-known institutions to climb the charts. This reinforces existing advantages and creates a system that’s hard to break into. Similarly, the emphasis on internationality can lead universities to prioritise attracting foreign students over addressing the needs of their domestic student body, potentially creating a disconnect between the university and the local community it’s supposed to serve.

Pakistan’s higher education landscape faces unique challenges that global rankings often fail to capture. Many universities grapple with outdated curricula, inadequate facilities and insufficient faculty training. These critical issues are largely overlooked in the current ranking systems. Additionally, higher education in Pakistan must cater to a diverse and economically varied population. The high cost of education and limited access to financial aid pose significant barriers for many students, yet these factors are not accounted for in the rankings. Including affordability and accessibility in the evaluation criteria would provide a more accurate picture of how universities are serving their local communities.

Universities in Pakistan should not only provide quality education but also play a vital role in addressing local and national issues, from economic development to social challenges. Current ranking systems often ignore the contributions of universities to their local economies and communities. Imagine metrics that consider a university’s involvement in poverty alleviation, cultural preservation initiatives, or contributions to regional development. Such metrics would highlight the importance of universities’ engagement with their communities and showcase how these institutions contribute to societal advancement.

The good news is there’s a growing movement towards more balanced approaches to university evaluation. Alternative ranking systems like the University Ranking by Academic Performance (URAP) and the U-Multirank system offer a wider range of indicators, including teaching quality and regional engagement. These models could provide a more nuanced understanding of how Pakistani universities are performing.

Moving forward, a holistic approach to university evaluation is crucial to enhance the quality and relevance of higher education in Pakistan. This approach should promote teaching excellence, community engagement and affordability, ensuring universities remain accessible and responsive to the specific needs of Pakistani society.

Ultimately, aligning university missions with national development and social progress goals will lead to a more inclusive and effective higher education system, one that serves not just rankings, but the future of Pakistan.