The discursive resilience of university rankings

Abstract

If there is one thing all university rankings have in common, it is that they are the target of widespread criticism. This article takes the many challenges university rankings are facing as its point of departure and asks how they navigate their hostile environment. The analysis proceeds in three steps. First, we unveil two modes of ranking critique, one drawing attention to negative effects, the other to methodological shortcomings. Second, we explore how rankers respond to these challenges, showing that they either deflect criticism with a variety of defensive responses or that they respond confidently by drawing attention to the strengths of university rankings. In the last step, we examine mutual engagements between rankers and critics that are based on the entwinement of methodological critique and confident responses. While the way rankers respond to criticism generally explains how rankings continue to flourish, it is precisely the ongoing conversation with critics that facilitates what we coin the discursive resilience of university rankings. The prevalence of university rankings is, in other words, a product of the mutual discursive work of their proponents and opponents.

Why shouldn't university rankings be used to evaluate research and researchers?

“…Thus, most researchers support the view that global university rankings should not be used for research evaluation, but they are still used, nonetheless. On the other hand, constant criticism from the academic community led to the development of rankers' "discursive resilience: the ability to engage with critics in a productive way in order to navigate a potentially hostile environment" (Hamann & Ringel, 2023).. In this regard, we would like to mention two events in 2022 which may radically change the future situation.…”

“…Secondly, at the end of 2022, some prestigious American law and medical schools announced their intention to quit the U.S. News & World Report (Hamann & Ringel, 2023). This is not the end of the "ranking power," but more than a clear signal from the academic community.…”

Research Impact Education: A Systems Perspective on Two Competing Views of Higher Education

“…Subsequently, as rankings fulfil this convenient simplification function, they persist. This is despite all their adverse consequences in relation to the process of knowledge creation and apparent methodological flaws in showcasing what they intend to measure [68].…”

„Tudsz úszni?” Magyar egyetemek 2019 és 2022 közötti, Scopus-azonosítóval rendelkező publikációinak elemzése • “Can you swim?” Analysis of Hungarian Universities’ Scopus-indexed Publications between 2019 and 2022

“…A kiválasztott gazdálkodástudományi kar (generikusan és kitalált névvel felruházva: Top American Business School, TABS) egy nagy, állami egyetem részeként hosszú múlttal és átfogó oktatási-kutatási profillal rendelkező intézmény, tízezernél több hallgatóval és több tucat magasan rangsorolt programmal. A TABS teljesítményértékelési listáján közel 150 folyóirat szerepel, amelyek -a Financial maGYar EGYETEmEK a NEmZETKÖZI raNGSoroKBaN A nemzetközi egyetemi rangsorokkal kapcsolatban két dolog nyilvánvaló: egyrészt, többek között módszertani hiányosságokra hivatkozva, széles körben kritizálják őket (Sasvári et al, 2022), másrészt viszont, ezek a rangsorok, a diszkurzív ellenállás taktikájával (Hamann-Ringel, 2023) élnek és szaporodnak, mert -a rangsorok készítői szerint mindenképpen -fontos marketing és ismeretterjesztő funkciót töltenek be. A 4. táblázat alapján megállapítható, hogy a rangsorokban a magyar egyetemek helyezése 2019-hez viszonyítva -a Semmelweis Egyetem (SE) kivételével -általában nem javult, sok esetben romlott.…”