League Tables as Policy Instruments: Uses and Misuses
By J. Salmi, Alenoush Saroyan. 2007
232 citations recorded by the source corpus.
This article examines the role and usefulness of league tables that are increasingly used to measure and compare the performance of tertiary education institutions. The article begins with a general overview and a typology of league tables. It continues with a discussion of the controversies they have generated, including the basis and the range of criticism they have invited, the merit of indicators they use as measures of quality, and the potential conditions that place universities at an advantage or a disadvantage in ranking exercises. The paper ends with a discussion of implications of league tables for national policies and institutional practices both in the developing world and in industrial countries.
Subfields: Political Science and International Relations
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6b568fe10faf0bb4bc03235cfccdbfadf841dc70
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Political Science and International Relations
Citations in the corpus
- Learning to Live with League Tables and Ranking: The Experience of Institutional Leaders (2008, background): “…higher education, research and commercial organizations, and the popular media, as a consumer information tool (for a comprehensive list, see Salmi and Saroyan, 2007, 63-64) – aimed primarily at undergraduate students and their parents – to satisfy a ‘public demand for transparency and…”
- Assessment of Learning Outcomes in Higher Education: A Comparative Review of Selected Practices. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 15. (2008, unknown): “1 For a review of the indicators and methodologies used by noteworthy international rankings, see for example Salmi and Saroyan, 2006; IHEP, 2007; Sadlak and Liu, 2007.”
- Anchoring effects in world university rankings: exploring biases in reputation scores (2011, background): “…(Cremonini et al. 2008; McDonough et al. 1998), inappropriateness of the instrument for external decision making (Dill and Soo 2005; Hazelkorn 2008; Salmi and Saroyan 2007) and substantial concerns about the validity and reliability of rankings (Bowden 2000; Kroth and Daniel 2008; Tight 2000;…”