2010
DOI: 10.1007/s10780-010-9110-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Canadian University Rankings: Buyer Beware Once Again

Abstract: We present a data-based perspective concerning recent (e.g., 2008) Maclean's magazine rankings of Canadian universities, including cluster analysis of the 2008 data.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Overall, the present analysis of Maclean's ranked indices from 2011-2015 corroborate those of prior studies (1991-2010), wherein (a) individual indices correlated with overall rank approximately half the time, (b) high versus low ranking schools were significantly different on roughly half the indices, and (c) cluster analysis produced largely meaningless and incomprehensible (albeit empirically similar) families of institutions (cf. Cramer & Page, 2007;Page & Cramer, 2001;Page, Cramer, & Page, 2008, 2010. That is, the ranking results generally illustrate Aghaz et al, 2015;Amsler & Bolsman, 2012;Huang et al, 2015).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 84%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Overall, the present analysis of Maclean's ranked indices from 2011-2015 corroborate those of prior studies (1991-2010), wherein (a) individual indices correlated with overall rank approximately half the time, (b) high versus low ranking schools were significantly different on roughly half the indices, and (c) cluster analysis produced largely meaningless and incomprehensible (albeit empirically similar) families of institutions (cf. Cramer & Page, 2007;Page & Cramer, 2001;Page, Cramer, & Page, 2008, 2010. That is, the ranking results generally illustrate Aghaz et al, 2015;Amsler & Bolsman, 2012;Huang et al, 2015).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…Most noteworthy for the present study is their evaluation of the Maclean's Canadian ranking exercise, judged to be the most inadequate of the national systems reviewed, chiefly because they relied heavily on subjective rankings of reputation and utilized principally input measures. Previous research has specifically investigated the validity and interpretability of Maclean's rankings (Cramer & Page, 2007;Page et al, 2008Page et al, , 2010, and similar conclusions were reached, namely that the indices selected by Maclean's: (1) did not perform adequately under the psychometric and statistical microscope, (2) were only somewhat relevant to the types of information sought by students and families in their choice of an institution of higher learning, and (3) may incite more harm than good concerning student welfare and institutional self-portrayal. We will similarly show how these outcomes remain unchanged in a five-year analysis of the most recent data.…”
Section: Notementioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations