For decades informetricians have studied journal rankings. More recently university ranking league tables have come into the focus of attention: the QS World University Rankings, Times Higher Education (THE) and Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU).
These rankings aim at measuring the research performance of world universities and are based on indicators such as research output, research impact, academic reputation, employer reputation, and citation per faculty. The indicators are either quantitative (e.g. research output and citations) or qualitative (e.g. student-staff ratio, teaching quality and alumni network).
As the ranking lists have become well known they have started to attract the attention of international researchers and research policy makers. However, the question is whether these rankings really provide meaningful information about world-class universities or whether they contribute to a race for prestige and resources that may have negative effects on schools and universities.
In a recent article Van Parijs pointed out the potential dangers of university ranking: They create incentives that can lead to universities focusing too much on publishing frequently and not enough on quality, thus increasing research churn and inflating metrics. Furthermore, he argues that rankings can have detrimental effects on university culture, turning it into a race for prestige that may distract from other priorities such as serving students and the community or adhering to codes of conduct.
While it is important to know what the world’s best universities are, it is equally essential that you consider your personal academic and career goals when selecting a university. Many factors besides the ranking, such as location, language of instruction and internship opportunities should be taken into account.