Türkiye’deki Üniversitelerin Çok Boyutlu Ölçekleme Analizi ile Karşılaştırılması

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 3, 597 - 606, 31.12.2021

Gonca Yüzbaşı Künç

https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.20.700380

Öz

Yükseköğretim kurumları bir ülkenin en temel bileşendir. Üniversiteler bir ülkenin dışarıya açılan en temel kurumları olmakla birlikte, uluslararası düzeyde bir ülkeyi temsil eden en önemli birimleridir. Üniversitelerin bulundukları ülkelere birçok farklı açıdan fayda sağladığı yadsınamaz bir gerçektir. Dünyadaki değişimin temel öncü birimlerinden olan üniversitelerin performanslarının incelenmesi daha da önemli olmaktadır. Bu bağlamda Türkiye’deki üniversitelerin 2008–2009 ve 2018–2019 dönemlerine ait konumları çok boyutlu ölçekleme analizi ile incelenmiştir. Özellikle yeni açılan üniversitelerin konumlarının değişimi ve başarılı üniversitelere olan yakınlık veya uzaklıkları bu çalışmanın konusunu oluşturmaktadır. Çalışmada yükseköğretim kurumlarını ilgilendiren değişkenler ele alınıştır. Bunlar ön lisans ve lisans düzeyinde öğrenci sayısı, öğretim elemanı sayıları, doktora öğrenci sayısı, toplam yayın sayısı, yüksek lisans öğrenci sayısı değişkenleridir. Çalışmada “her ile bir üniversite” politikası kapsamında kurulan üniversitelerin konumlarında anlamlı bir farklılık olmadığı tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Çok boyutlu ölçekleme, çok değişkenli istatistik, üniversite sıralama değişkenleri, üniversiteler, yükseköğretim

Comparison of the Universities in Turkey with Multidimensional Scaling Analysis

Öz

Higher education institutions are among the keystones of a country. Besides being the primary institutions of a country that expand overseas, universities are the most important organizations representing it at the international level. It is an undeniable fact that a university benefits the country in which it is located in many ways. It is crucial to examine the performances of universities, which are among the major drivers of global change. As such, the positions of the Turkish universities during the 2008–2009 and 2018–2019 periods were examined by multidimensional scaling analysis. Especially the change in the positions of the recently-opened universities and their proximity or distance to the established universities constitute the primary focus of this study. The universities in Turkey were analyzed through multidimensional scaling analysis by using the variables of the number of students at associate and undergraduate level, the number of academic staff, the number of doctoral students, the total number of publications, and the number of graduate students. No significant difference was found between the positions of the universities that were opened under the policy of “one university for each city”.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Higher education, multidimensional scaling, multivariate statistics, universities, university ranking variables

Kaynakça

• Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C., & Solazzi, M. (2010). National research assessment exercises: A measure of the distortion of performance rankings when labor input is treated as uniform. Scientometrics, 84(3), 605–619.
• Abramo, G., & D’Angelo, C. A. (2015). Evaluating university research: Same performance indicator, different rankings. Journal of Informetrics, 9(3), 514–525.
• Agasisti, T., Barra, C., & Zotti, R. (2019). Research, knowledge transfer, and innovation: The effect of Italian universities’ efficiency on local economic development 2006–2012. Journal of Regional Science, 59(5), 819–849.
• Bengoetxea, E., & Buela-Casal, G. (2013). The new multidimensional and user-driven higher education ranking concept of the European Union. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 13(1), 67–73.
• Bernardino, P., & Marques, R. C. (2010). Academic rankings: An approach to rank Portuguese universities. Ensaio: Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, 18(66), 29–48.
• Cheung, K. W., & So, H. C. (2005). A multidimensional scaling framework for mobile location using time-of-arrival measurements. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 53(2), 460–470.
• Cortés-Aldana, F. A., Garcia-Melon, M., Fernandez-De-Lucio, I., Aragones-Beltran, P., & Poveda-Bautista, R. (2009). University objectives and socioeconomic results: A multicriteria measuring of alignment. European Journal of Operational Research, 199(3), 811–822.
• Çetin, M. (2007). Bolgesel kalkınma ve girişimci üniversiteler. Ege Academic Review, 7(1), 217–238.
• Çetinsaya, G. (2014). Büyüme, kalite, uluslararasılaşma: Türkiye yükseköğretimi için bir yol haritası. Ankara: Yükseköğretim Kurulu.
• Dachyar, M., & Dewi, F. (2015). Improving university ranking to achieve university competitiveness by management information system. 3rd International Conference on Manufacturing, Optimization, Industrial and Material Engineering (MOIME 2015), March 28–29, 2015, Bali, Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Materials Sscience and Engineering, 83, 012023. Philadelphia, PA: IOP Publishing.
• Daraio, C., Bonaccorsi, A., & Simar, L. (2015). Rankings and university performance: A conditional multidimensional approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 244(3), 918–930.
• Dill, D. D. (2009). Convergence and diversity: The role and influence of university rankings. In Kneight J (Ed.), Global perspectives on higher education. University rankings, diversity, and the new landscape of higher education (Vol. 18, pp. 97–116). Leiden: Brill/Sense.
• Dill, D. D., & Soo, M. (2005). Academic quality, league tables, and public policy: A cross-national analysis of university ranking systems. Higher Education, 49(4), 495–533.
• Ding, L., & Zeng, Y. (2015). Evaluation of Chinese higher education by TOPSIS and IEW – The case of 68 universities belonging to the Ministry of Education in China. China Economic Review, 36, 341–358.
• Ead, H. A. (2019). Globalization in higher education in Egypt in a historical context. Research in Globalization, 1, 100003.
• Fitzgerald, L. F., & Hubert, L. J. (1987). Multidimensional scaling: Some possibilities for counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34(4), 469–480.
• Frey, B. S., & Rost, K. (2010). Do rankings reflect research quality? Journal of Applied Economics, 13(1), 1–38.
• Geuna, A. (1998). The internationalisation of European universities: A return to medieval roots. Minerva, 36, 253–270.
• Goldstein, H., & Renault, C. (2004). Contributions of universities to regional economic development: A quasi-experimental approach. Regional Studies, 38(7), 733–746.
• Hazelkorn, E. (2009, January). Impact of global rankings on higher education research and the production of knowledge. UNESCO, Forum on Higher Education, Research and Knowledge, Occasional Paper No 16. Paris: UNESCO.
• Hout, M. C., Papesh, M. H., & Goldinger, S. D. (2013). Multidimensional scaling. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 4(1), 93–103.
• Kalkan, S. B., Başar, Ö., & Özden, Ü. (2015). Üniversite tercihlerinde URAP sıralamasında kullanılan değişkenlerin etkilerinin genelleştirilmiş tahmin denklemleri ile incelenmesi. Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 37(1), 95–110.
• Kalkan, S. B., & Özden, Ü. H. (2017). Dünya üniversitelerinin itibarını etkileyen değişkenlerin kanonik korelasyon analizi ile belirlenmesi. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 6(2), 11–19.
• Knudsen, D. D., & Vaughan, T. R. (1969). Quality in graduate education: A re-evaluation of the rankings of sociology departments in the Cartter report. The American Sociologist, 4, 12–19.
• Kruskal, J. B. (1964). Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis. Psychometrika, 29(1), 1–27.
• Lai, H. H., Lin, Y. C., & Yeh, C. H. (2005). Form design of product image using grey relational analysis and neural network models. Computers & Operations Research, 32(10), 2689–2711.
• Leeuw, J., & Heiser, W. (1982). Theory of multidimensional scaling. In P. R. Krishnajah, & L. N. Kanal (Eds.), Handbook of statistics (Vol. 2, pp. 285–316). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
• Lukman, R., Krajnc, D., & Glaviã, P. (2010). University ranking using research, educational and environmental indicators. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(7), 619–628.
• Millot, B. (2015). International rankings: Universities vs. higher education systems. International Journal of Educational Development, 40, 156–165.
• Orhunbilge, N. (2010). Çok değişkenli istatistik yöntemler. İstanbul: İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Yayını.
• Peters, M. A., & May, T. (2004). Universities, regional policy and the knowledge economy. Policy Futures in Education, 2(2), 263–277.
• Ramsden, P., & Martin, E. (1996). Recognition of good university teaching: Policies from an Australian study. Studies in Higher Education, 21(3), 299–315.
• Rauhvargers, A. (2011). Global university rankings and their impact. Brussels: European University Association.
• Reddy, K. S., Xie, E., & Tang, Q. (2016). Higher education, high-impact research, and world university rankings: A case of India and comparison with China. Pacific Science Review B: Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(1), 1–21.
• Röpke, J. (1998). The entrepreneurial university: Innovation, academic knowledge creation and regional development in a globalized economy. Marburg: Department of Economics, Philipps University Marburg.
• Saka, Y., & Yaman, S. (2011). Üniversite sıralama sistemleri: Kriterler ve yapılan eleştiriler. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 1(2), 72–79.
• Scott, P. (Ed.). (1998). The globalization of higher education. London: Open University Press.
• Stensaker, B., Frølich, N., Huisman, J., Waagene, E., Scordato, L., & Bótas, P. P. (2014). Factors affecting strategic change in higher education. Journal of Strategy and Management, 7(2), 193–247.
• Şeremet, M. (2015). Türkiye ve İngiltere yükseköğretimindeki uluslararasılaşma politikalarına karşılaştırmalı bir yaklaşım. Yükseköğretim ve Bilim Dergisi, 5(1), 27–31.
• Taylor, P., & Braddock, R. (2007). International university ranking systems and the idea of university excellence. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 29(3), 245–260.
• Taylor, J., & Taylor, R. (2003). Performance indicators in academia: An x-efficiency approach. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 62(2), 71–82.
• Toutkoushian, R. K., Porter, S. R., Danielson, C., & Hollis, P. R. (2003). Using publications counts to measure an institution’s research productivity. Research in Higher Education, 44(2), 121–148.
• Van der Wende, M. (2007). Internationalization of higher education in the OECD countries: Challenges and opportunities for the coming decade. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3–4), 274–289.
• Wickelmaier, F. (2003). An introduction to MDS. Sound Quality Research Unit, Aalborg University, Denmark, 46(5), 1–26.
• Williams, R., de Rassenfosse, G., Jensen, P., & Marginson, S. (2013). The determinants of quality national higher education systems. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 35(6), 599–611