University Rankings in Sport Science: A True Reflection of Excellence?

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 PHYSIOLOGY International journal of sports physiology and performance Pub Date : 2024-09-13 DOI:10.1123/ijspp.2024-0109
Ivana Matic Girard,Olivier Girard
{"title":"University Rankings in Sport Science: A True Reflection of Excellence?","authors":"Ivana Matic Girard,Olivier Girard","doi":"10.1123/ijspp.2024-0109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nUniversity rankings often serve as benchmarks for excellence in academic evaluation. For example, ShanghaiRanking data from 2016 to 2023 for the Global Ranking of Sport Science Schools and Departments reveal consistent dominance by Australia (23.1%), Canada (18.0%), and the United States (12.0%), collectively counting over half of the top 50 universities worldwide. Nevertheless, there is uncertainty about how the methodology behind these rankings shapes a reality as much as it reflects one.\r\n\r\nPURPOSE\r\nOur intention is to discuss the complexity of university rankings, using ShanghaiRanking as an example, to highlight how these rankings reflect academic excellence within the field of sport science. Current Evidence: When ranking universities in sport science, several aspects of academic excellence could be considered in addition to research metrics currently considered in ShanghaiRanking (publication, citation, citations per publication, top 25% journal publications, and internationally collaborated publications). These aspects may include (1) teaching quality, (2) practical training, (3) industry links and employability, (4) support services, (5) facilities and equipment, (6) international network, (7) community engagement, (8) sustainability and ethical practices, and (9) interdisciplinary approach. Altogether, they could provide a more comprehensive view of the quality and effectiveness of a sport-science program.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nThe ranking of sport-science institutions poses a complex challenge due to diverse factors influencing academic excellence. Engaging in a broader dialogue and refining internationally relevant evaluation methodologies are crucial. These steps enable comparability between countries and provide a holistic understanding of the multidimensional nature of academic excellence in sport science.","PeriodicalId":14295,"journal":{"name":"International journal of sports physiology and performance","volume":"29 1","pages":"1-5"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of sports physiology and performance","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2024-0109","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND University rankings often serve as benchmarks for excellence in academic evaluation. For example, ShanghaiRanking data from 2016 to 2023 for the Global Ranking of Sport Science Schools and Departments reveal consistent dominance by Australia (23.1%), Canada (18.0%), and the United States (12.0%), collectively counting over half of the top 50 universities worldwide. Nevertheless, there is uncertainty about how the methodology behind these rankings shapes a reality as much as it reflects one. PURPOSE Our intention is to discuss the complexity of university rankings, using ShanghaiRanking as an example, to highlight how these rankings reflect academic excellence within the field of sport science. Current Evidence: When ranking universities in sport science, several aspects of academic excellence could be considered in addition to research metrics currently considered in ShanghaiRanking (publication, citation, citations per publication, top 25% journal publications, and internationally collaborated publications). These aspects may include (1) teaching quality, (2) practical training, (3) industry links and employability, (4) support services, (5) facilities and equipment, (6) international network, (7) community engagement, (8) sustainability and ethical practices, and (9) interdisciplinary approach. Altogether, they could provide a more comprehensive view of the quality and effectiveness of a sport-science program. CONCLUSIONS The ranking of sport-science institutions poses a complex challenge due to diverse factors influencing academic excellence. Engaging in a broader dialogue and refining internationally relevant evaluation methodologies are crucial. These steps enable comparability between countries and provide a holistic understanding of the multidimensional nature of academic excellence in sport science.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
体育科学大学排名:卓越的真实反映?
背景大学排名通常是学术评价的卓越基准。例如,上海2016-2023年全球体育科学院系排名数据显示,澳大利亚(23.1%)、加拿大(18.0%)和美国(12.0%)始终占据主导地位,合计占全球前50所大学的一半以上。我们的目的是以上海排名为例,讨论大学排名的复杂性,以强调这些排名如何反映体育科学领域的学术卓越性。现有证据:在对体育科学领域的大学进行排名时,除了目前上海排名所考虑的研究指标(论文发表、论文引用、每篇论文引用、前 25% 的期刊论文发表和国际合作论文发表)之外,还可以考虑学术卓越性的几个方面。这些方面可包括:(1) 教学质量,(2) 实践培训,(3) 产业联系和就业能力,(4) 支持服务,(5) 设施和设备,(6) 国际网络,(7) 社区参与,(8) 可持续性和道德实践,以及 (9) 跨学科方法。由于影响学术卓越性的因素多种多样,体育科学院校的排名是一项复杂的挑战。开展更广泛的对话和完善与国际相关的评估方法至关重要。这些步骤使各国之间具有可比性,并能全面了解体育科学学术卓越性的多层面性质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
12.10%
发文量
199
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance (IJSPP) focuses on sport physiology and performance and is dedicated to advancing the knowledge of sport and exercise physiologists, sport-performance researchers, and other sport scientists. The journal publishes authoritative peer-reviewed research in sport physiology and related disciplines, with an emphasis on work having direct practical applications in enhancing sport performance in sport physiology and related disciplines. IJSPP publishes 10 issues per year: January, February, March, April, May, July, August, September, October, and November.
期刊最新文献
Manual Dexterity in Open-Water Wetsuited Swimmers: A Cohort Crossover Study. No Effect of Individualized Sodium Bicarbonate Supplementation on 200-m or 400-m Freestyle-Swimming Time-Trial Performance in Well-Trained Athletes. Comparing Differences and Relationships Between Traditional and Resisted Sprints in Elite Youth Rugby Backs and Forwards. Erratum. "Falling Behind," "Letting Go," and Being "Outsprinted" as Distinct Features of Pacing in Distance Running. An Educational Review on Machine Learning: A SWOT Analysis for Implementing Machine Learning Techniques in Football.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1