Academic Quality and Ranking: A Methodical Approach for Departmental Ranking of Colleges and Universities in Saudi Arabia

Abstract

Özet: The importance of academic ranking as a marketing strategy in the educational market is evinced even in Middle East countries in recent times. The paper attempts to develop an academic quality assessment model using a composite index which can be applied to colleges and universities in Saudi Arabia. The criteria applied in the model are based on the quality indicators used by major global ranking agencies in the field such as Shanghai ranking, THES ranking and so on. Using the department-level data collected from Yanbu Industrial College the model is demonstrated and departments are rated and ranked. The academic quality index and its indicator indices are useful to identify the department level strengths and weaknesses.

Abstract

Özet: The importance of academic ranking as a marketing strategy in the educational market is evinced even in Middle East countries in recent times. The paper attempts to develop an academic quality assessment model using a composite index which can be applied to colleges and universities in Saudi Arabia. The criteria applied in the model are based on the quality indicators used by major global ranking agencies in the field such as Shanghai ranking, THES ranking and so on. Using the department-level data collected from Yanbu Industrial College the model is demonstrated and departments are rated and ranked. The academic quality index and its indicator indices are useful to identify the department level strengths and weaknesses.

References

1. Asia Week. (2000). Asia’s Best Universities 2000.
2. Camilli, G., & Firestone, W. A, (2000). ‘Values and State Ratings: An Examination of the State-by-State Education Indicators in Quality Counts’, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. Vol.18. No. 4.
3. CHE. (2007). Your Gateway to the University Ranking. German Centre for Higher Education Development.
4. Clarke, M, (2002). ‘News or Noise: An Analysis of US News and World Report’s Ranking Scores’, Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. Vol.21. No. 4.
5. Clarke, M. (2002). ‘Some Guidelines for Academic Quality Rankings’, Higher Education in Europe, Vol. 27. No. 4.
6. Institute Of Higher Education, Shanghai Jiao Tong University (IHE-SJTU). (2005). Academic Ranking of World Universities.
7. Linn, R., ed. Educational Measurement, 3rd edn. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, (1993).
8. Meredith, M. (2004). ‘Why do Universities Compete in the Ratings Game: An empirical Analysis of the Effects of the U.S. News and World Report College Rankings,’ Research in Higher Education, Vol. 45.

9. Merisotis. J. P. (2002). ‘Summary Report of the Invitational Roundtable on Statistical Indicators for the Quality Assessment of Higher/tertiary Education Institutions: Ranking and League Table Methodologies’, Higher Education in Europe, Vol. 27.
10. SANOFF, A. (1998). ‘Rankings are Here to Stay: Colleges can Improve Them’, Chronicle of Higher Education. Vol. 45 No. 2. September.
11. Siwinski, Perspektywy. W. (2002). ‘Ten Years of Rankings,’ Higher Education in Europe, Vol. 27.
12. The Times Higher Education Supplement (THES, 2005), The Times Higher World University Rankings.
13. Webster, D. S. (1986). Academic Quality Rankings of American Colleges and Universities. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas.
14. Yanbu Industrial College (YIC, 2013). Academic Catalog- 2012-2013, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia