对高等教育的误判?大学排名的腐蚀效应

D. Robinson
{"title":"对高等教育的误判?大学排名的腐蚀效应","authors":"D. Robinson","doi":"10.3354/ESEP00135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines the limitations and biases of world university rankings and asks what drivers explain their ongoing proliferation and popularity. It is argued that rankings are hav- ing a corrosive effect on higher education systems, institutions and staff by encouraging policy reforms at the governmental level and a reallocation of resources at the institutional level that may improve standings in the rankings but do not necessarily enhance quality research and teaching. Global rankings are linked to the rise of an international market in higher education, particularly with respect to international students. The author argues that what is at stake in the debate over university rankings is fundamentally whether higher education is to be thought of as having intrinsic value, or whether it is defined narrowly in instrumentalist and consumerist terms.","PeriodicalId":40001,"journal":{"name":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","volume":"43 1","pages":"65-71"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The mismeasure of higher education? The corrosive effect of university rankings\",\"authors\":\"D. Robinson\",\"doi\":\"10.3354/ESEP00135\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper examines the limitations and biases of world university rankings and asks what drivers explain their ongoing proliferation and popularity. It is argued that rankings are hav- ing a corrosive effect on higher education systems, institutions and staff by encouraging policy reforms at the governmental level and a reallocation of resources at the institutional level that may improve standings in the rankings but do not necessarily enhance quality research and teaching. Global rankings are linked to the rise of an international market in higher education, particularly with respect to international students. The author argues that what is at stake in the debate over university rankings is fundamentally whether higher education is to be thought of as having intrinsic value, or whether it is defined narrowly in instrumentalist and consumerist terms.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40001,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"65-71\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00135\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00135","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

摘要

本文考察了世界大学排名的局限性和偏见,并询问是什么驱动因素解释了它们的不断扩散和流行。有人认为,排名正在对高等教育系统、机构和工作人员产生腐蚀性影响,因为它鼓励政府一级的政策改革和机构一级的资源重新分配,这可能会提高排名,但不一定能提高研究和教学质量。全球排名与高等教育国际市场的崛起有关,尤其是在国际学生方面。作者认为,在关于大学排名的辩论中,最关键的是,高等教育是否应该被视为具有内在价值,还是被狭隘地定义为工具主义和消费主义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The mismeasure of higher education? The corrosive effect of university rankings
This paper examines the limitations and biases of world university rankings and asks what drivers explain their ongoing proliferation and popularity. It is argued that rankings are hav- ing a corrosive effect on higher education systems, institutions and staff by encouraging policy reforms at the governmental level and a reallocation of resources at the institutional level that may improve standings in the rankings but do not necessarily enhance quality research and teaching. Global rankings are linked to the rise of an international market in higher education, particularly with respect to international students. The author argues that what is at stake in the debate over university rankings is fundamentally whether higher education is to be thought of as having intrinsic value, or whether it is defined narrowly in instrumentalist and consumerist terms.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics
Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
期刊介绍: •provides a global stage for presenting, discussing and developing issues concerning ethics in science, environmental politics, and ecological and economic ethics •publishes accepted manuscripts rapidly •guarantees immediate world-wide visibility •is edited and produced by an experienced team
期刊最新文献
Justifying the Precautionary Principle as a political principle The Humanised Zoo: Decolonizing conservation education through a new narrative Ecotheology: environmental ethical view in water spring protection The role of 'Thoughtful Intelligence' in climate statesmanship Cognitive artifacts and human enhancement
×
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