:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:A Comparison of Three Major Academic Rankings for World Universities: From a Research Evaluation Perspective
書刊名:圖書資訊學刊
作者:黃慕萱 引用關係
作者(外文):Huang, Mu-hsuan
出版日期:2011
卷期:9:1
頁次:頁1-25
主題關鍵詞:World universitiesPerformance rankingScientific papersResearch evaluation
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(3) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:3
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:43
This paper introduces three current major university ranking systems. The Performance Ranking of Scientific Papers for World Universities by Higher Education Evaluation and Accreditation Council of Taiwan (HEEACT Ranking) emphasizes both the quality and quantity of research and current research performance. The Academic Ranking of World Universities by Shanghai Jiao Tung University (ARWU) focuses on outstanding performance of universities with indicators such as Nobel Prize winners. The QS World University Ranking (2004-2009) by Times Higher Education (THE-QS) emphasizes on peer review with high weighting in evaluation. This paper compares the 2009 ranking results from the three ranking systems. Differences exist in the top 20 universities in three ranking systems except the Harvard University, which scored top one in all of the three rankings. Comparisons also revealed that the THE-QS favored UK universities. Further, obvious differences can be observed between THE-QS and the other two rankings when ranking results of some European countries (Germany, UK, Netherlands, & Switzerland) and Chinese speaking regions were compared.
期刊論文
1.Aksnes, D. W.、Taxt, R. E.(2004)。Peer reviews and bibliometric indicators: A comparative study at a Norwegian university。Research Evaluation,13(1),33-41。  new window
2.Makino, J.(1998)。Productivity of Research Groups: Relation between Citation Analysis and Reputation within Research Communities。Scientometrics,43(1),87-93。  new window
3.Meho, L. I.、Sonnenwald, D. H.(2000)。Citation Ranking versus Peer Evaluation of Senior Faculty Research Performance: A Case Study of Kurdish Scholarship。Journal of the American Society for Information Science,51(2),123-138。  new window
4.Norris, Michael、Oppenheim, Charles(2003)。Citation counts and the Research Assessment Exercise V: Archaeology and the 2001 RAE。Journal of Documentation,59(6),709-730。  new window
5.Thomas, P. R.、Watkins, D. S.(1998)。Institutional Research Rankings via Bibliometric Analysis and Direct Peer Review: A Comparative Case Study with Policy Implications。Scientometrics,41(3),335-355。  new window
6.van Raan, A. F. J.(1996)。Advanced Bibliometric Methods as Quantitative Core of Peer Review Based Evaluation and Foresight Exercises。Scientometrics,36(3),397-420。  new window
7.Bookstein, F.、Seidler, H.、Fieder, M.、Winckler, G.(2010)。Too much noise in the Times Higher Education rankings。Scientometrics,85(1),295-299。  new window
8.van Raan, A. F. J.(2005)。Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods。Scientometrics,62(1),133-143。  new window
9.Kokko, Hanna、Sutherland, William J.(1999)。What Do Impact Factors Tell Us?。Trends in Ecology & Evolution,14(10),382-384。  new window
10.Rinia, E. J.、Van Leeuwen, Theo、Van Vuren, H. G.、Van Raan, A. F. J.(1998)。Comparative analysis of a set of bibliometric indicators and central peer review criteria: Evaluation of condensed matter physics in the Netherlands。Research Policy,27(1),95-107。  new window
11.Huang, M. H.(2005)。Research evaluation of research-oriented universities in Taiwan。Bulletin of Library and Information Science,55,9-23。  new window
12.Huang, Z. J.(2003)。Controversial issues o f acad emic evaluation。Teacher Welfare,438。  new window
13.Liu, Y.(1998)。Problem pedigree comparison method of peer review: A new approach of peer review。Studies in Dialectics of Nature,14(10),32-36。  new window
14.Wong, B. B. M.、Kokko, H.(2005)。Is science as global as we think?。Trends in Ecology & Evolution,20(9),475-476。  new window
15.So, C. Y. K.(1998)。Citation ranking versus expert judgment in evaluating communication scholars: Effects of research specialty size and individual prominence。Scientometrics,41(3),325-333。  new window
16.Staropoli, A.(1987)。The comite national d' evaluation: Preliminary results of a French experiment。European Journal of Education,22(2),123-131。  new window
17.Aguillo, I.、Bar-Ilan, J.、Levene, M.、Ortega, J.(2010)。Comparing university rankings。Scientometrics,85(1),243-256。  new window
18.Daniel, H. D.、Fisch, R.(1990)。Research performance evaluation in the German university sector。Scientometrics,19(5/6),349-361。  new window
19.Liu, N. C.、Cheng, Y.、Liu, L.(2005)。Academic ranking of world universities using scientometrics-A comment to the 'Fatal Attraction'。Scientometrics,64(1),101-109。  new window
20.Buela-Casal, G.、Gutiérrez-Martínez, O.、Bermúdez-Sánchez, M.、Vadillo-Muñoz, O.(2007)。Comparative study of international academic rankings of universities。Scientometrics,71(3),349-365。  new window
21.Hong, D. R.(2009)。A critical study on the university and academic assessment system in Korea。Inter-Asia Cultural Studies,10(2),292-302。  new window
22.Leimu, R.、Koricheva, J.(2005)。What determines the citation frequency of ecological papers?。Trends in Ecology & Evolution,20(1),28-32。  new window
23.van Leeuwen, T. N.、Moed, H. F.、Reedijk, J.(1999)。Critical comments on institute for scientific information impact factors: A sample of inorganic molecular chemistry journals。Journal of Information Science,25(6),489-498。  new window
24.Weingart, P.(2005)。Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences?。Scientometrics,62(1),117-131。  new window
其他
1.Campbell, D. F. J.(2002)。Conceptual Framework for the Evaluation of University Research in Europe,http://www.gwu.edu/~cistp/PAGES/campbell_2002.pdf, 2008/05/26。  new window
2.Shanghai Ranking Consultancy(2009)。Academic ranking of world universities-2009,http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2009.jsp, 20100905。  new window
3.Higher Education Evaluation & Accreditation Council of Taiwan(2008)。Performance ranking of scientific papers for world universities 2008,http://ranking.heeact.edu.tw/en-us/2008%20by%20field/page/methodology。  new window
4.Higher Education Evaluation & Accreditation Council of Taiwan(2009)。Performance ranking of scientific papers for world universities 2009,http://ranking.heeact.edu.tw/zh-tw/2009/Page/Methodology, 20100902。  new window
5.Higher Education Evaluation & Accreditation Council of Taiwan(2009)。Performance ranking of scientific papers for world universities 2009,http://ranking.heeact.edu.tw/en-us/2009/TOP/100, 20100902。  new window
6.Shanghai Ranking Consultancy(2009)。Ranking methodology,http://www.arwu.org/ARWUMethodology2009.jsp, 20100904。  new window
7.Shanghai Ranking Consultancy(2009)。Ranking methodology,http://www.arwu.org/ARWUFieldMethodology2009.jsp, 20100904。  new window
8.Shanghai Ranking Consultancy(2009)。Ranking methodology,http://www.arwu.org/ARWUSubjectMethodology2009.jsp, 20100904。  new window
9.Times Higher Education(2009)。Top 200 world universities,http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/hybrid.asp?typeCode=438, 20100826。  new window
10.Times Higher Education(2010)。Robust, transparent and sophisticated,http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/worlduniversity-rankings/2010-2011/analysismethodology.html, 20101104。  new window
圖書論文
1.Kruytbosch, C. E.(1989)。The role and effectiveness of peer review。The evaluation of scientific research。Chichester, N. Y.:J. Wiley。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top