• xmlui.mirage2.page-structure.header.title
    • français
    • English
  • Help
  • Login
  • Language 
    • Français
    • English
View Item 
  •   BIRD Home
  • LAMSADE (UMR CNRS 7243)
  • LAMSADE : Publications
  • View Item
  •   BIRD Home
  • LAMSADE (UMR CNRS 7243)
  • LAMSADE : Publications
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Browse

BIRDResearch centres & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesTypeThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesType

My Account

LoginRegister

Statistics

Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors
Thumbnail - No thumbnail

Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking? An MCDM view

Billaut, Jean-Charles; Bouyssou, Denis; Vincke, Philippe (2010), Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking? An MCDM view, Scientometrics, 84, 1, p. 237-263. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0115-x

Type
Article accepté pour publication ou publié
External document link
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00877050
Date
2010
Journal name
Scientometrics
Volume
84
Number
1
Publisher
Akadémiai Kiadó
Pages
237-263
Publication identifier
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0115-x
Metadata
Show full item record
Author(s)
Billaut, Jean-Charles

Bouyssou, Denis cc
Laboratoire d'analyse et modélisation de systèmes pour l'aide à la décision [LAMSADE]
Vincke, Philippe
Abstract (EN)
This paper proposes a critical analysis of the “Academic Ranking of World Universities”, published every year by the Institute of Higher Education of the JiaoTong University in Shanghai and more commonly known as the Shanghai ranking.After having recalled how the ranking is built, we first discuss the relevance ofthe criteria and then analyze the proposed aggregation method. Our analysis usestools and concepts from Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM). Our mainconclusions are that the criteria that are used are not relevant, that the aggrega-tion methodology is plagued by a number of major problems and that the wholeexercise suffers from an insufficient attention paid to fundamental structuring is-sues. Hence, our view is that the Shanghai ranking, in spite of the media coverageit receives, does not qualify as a useful and pertinent tool to discuss the “quality”of academic institutions, let alone to guide the choice of students and family or topromote reforms of higher education systems. We outline the type of work thatshould be undertaken to offer sound alternatives to the Shanghai ranking.
Subjects / Keywords
Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis; Shanghai Ranking; Higher Education; Evaluation Models
JEL
I23 - Higher Education; Research Institutions

Related items

Showing items related by title and author.

  • Thumbnail
    Faut-il croire le classement de Shangaï ? Une approche fondée sur l’aide multicritère à la décision 
    Billaut, Jean-Charles; Bouyssou, Denis; Vincke, Philippe (2010) Article accepté pour publication ou publié
  • Thumbnail
    An axiomatic approach to noncompensatory sorting methods in MCDM, I: The case of two categories 
    Bouyssou, Denis; Marchant, Thierry (2007) Article accepté pour publication ou publié
  • Thumbnail
    An axiomatic approach to noncompensatory sorting methods in MCDM, II: More than two categories 
    Bouyssou, Denis; Marchant, Thierry (2007) Article accepté pour publication ou publié
  • Thumbnail
    When activism may prove counterproductive: An exploratory study of anti-brand spoof advertising effects in the tobacco industry 
    Parguel, Béatrice; Lunardo, Renaud; Chebat, Jean-Charles (2010-11) Communication / Conférence
  • Thumbnail
    Evaluation and decision models with multiple criteria: Stepping stones for the analyst 
    Bouyssou, Denis; Marchant, Thierry; Pirlot, Marc; Tsoukiàs, Alexis; Vincke, Philippe (2006) Ouvrage
Dauphine PSL Bibliothèque logo
Place du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny 75775 Paris Cedex 16
Phone: 01 44 05 40 94
Contact
Dauphine PSL logoEQUIS logoCreative Commons logo