Jahon universitetlarining akademik reytingi (ARWU)

Vikipediya, ochiq ensiklopediya


Shanxay reytingi sifatida ham tanilgan Jahon universitetlarining akademik reytingi (Academic Ranking of World Universities - ARWU) jahon universitetlari reytingining yillik nashrlaridan biridir. Reyting jadvali dastlab Shanxay Jiao Tong universiteti tomonidan 2003-yilda tuzilgan va chiqarilgan bo'lib, u ko'p qirrali ko'rsatkichlarga ega bo'lgan birinchi global universitet reytingiga aylandi.[1][2]

2009-yildan beri ARWU har yili Shanghai Ranking Consultancy tomonidan nashr etiladi va mualliflik huquqi hech qanday universitet yoki davlat idoralariga qonuniy ravishda bo'ysunmagan oliy ta'limga qaratilgan tashkilotdir.[3] 2011-yilda takliflar berish uchun olimlar va siyosat tadqiqotchilaridan iborat xalqaro maslahat kengashi tashkil etildi.[4][5] Nashr hozirda mustaqil mintaqaviy Buyuk Xitoy reytingi va Makedoniya oliy o'quv yurtlari reytingi bilan bir qatorda, umuman muassasalar va alohida fanlar tanlovi uchun global reyting jadvallarini o'z ichiga oladi.

ARWU QS World University Rankings va Times Higher Education World University Rankings bilan bir qatorda eng nufuzli va keng tarqalgan uchta universitet reytingidan biri hisoblanadi.[6][7][8][9][10][11][12] Reyting o'zining ob'ektivligi va metodologiyasi uchun ijobiy fikr-mulohazalarni oldi,[10][11][12], lekin u muassasa hajmiga moslasha olmagani uchun keng tanqidlarga duchor bo'ldi va shuning uchun reytingda kattaroq muassasalar kichikroqlardan yuqori o'rinni egallaydi.[9][13][14]

Global reytinglar[tahrir | manbasini tahrirlash]

Qabul[tahrir | manbasini tahrirlash]

2005-yilda The Economist tomonidan chop etilgan oliy ta'lim bo'yicha so'rovda ARWU "dunyo tadqiqot universitetlarining eng ko'p qo'llaniladigan yillik reytingi" sifatida izohlangan.[15] 2010-yilda The Chronicle of Higher Education ARWUni "universitetlarning eng mashhur va eng ta'sirli global reytingi" deb atadi.[16] EU Research Headlines 2003-yil 31-dekabrda ARWU ishini eʼlon qildi: “Universitetlar tadqiqot samaradorligining bir qancha koʻrsatkichlari yordamida sinchkovlik bilan baholandi”.[17] Oksford universiteti kansleri Kris Pattenning ta'kidlashicha, "metodologiya ancha mustahkam ko'rinadi... adolatli taqqoslashda bu juda yaxshi zarbaga o'xshaydi".[18] Filipp G. Altbax ARWUning “muvofiqligi, maqsadning aniqligi va shaffofligi”ni muhim kuchli tomonlar deb atadi.[19] ARWU Xitoyda paydo bo'lgan bo'lsa-da, reyting Osiyo institutlariga, xususan, Xitoy institutlariga nisbatan xolis bo'lgani uchun maqtovga sazovor bo'ldi.[20]

Tanqid[tahrir | manbasini tahrirlash]

Reyting "mukofot omillariga haddan tashqari tayanganligi" uchun tanqid qilindi, bu esa ta'lim sifati va gumanitar fanlarning ahamiyatiga putur etkazadi.[9][21][22][23] 2007-yilda Scientometrics jurnalida chop etilgan maqolada, Shanxay reytingi natijalarini Liu va Cheng tomonidan tasvirlangan usul yordamida xom ma'lumotlardan ko'paytirish mumkin emasligi aniqlandi.[24] Xuddi shu jurnaldagi 2013-yilgi maqola, nihoyat, Shanxay reytingi natijalarini qanday ko'paytirish mumkinligini ko'rsatdi.[25] 2009-yil aprel oyidagi hisobotda JC. Billaut, D. Bouyssou va Ph. Vincke ARWU qanday ishlashini tahlil qiladi, ular bir nechta mezonli qarorlar qabul qilish (MCDM) bo'yicha mutaxassislar sifatida o'z tushunchalaridan foydalanadilar. Ularning asosiy xulosalari shundan iboratki, foydalanilgan mezonlar tegishli emas; agregatsiya metodologiyasining bir qator asosiy muammolari borligi; va asosiy mezonlarni tanlashga yetarlicha e'tibor berilmaganligi.[26] ARWU tadqiqotchilarining o'zlari, NC Liu va Y. Chengning fikricha, universitetlar sifatini aniq raqamlar bilan o'lchab bo'lmaydi va har qanday reyting bahsli bo'lishi kerak. Ular universitet va kollej reytinglaridan ehtiyotkorlik bilan foydalanishni va natijalarni hisobot berish yoki ishlatishdan oldin ularning metodologiyasini aniq tushunish kerakligini taklif qilishadi. ARWU Yevropa Komissiyasi hamda baʼzi Yevropa Ittifoqiga aʼzo davlatlar tomonidan “anglo-sakson oliy taʼlim muassasalariga yordam berish” uchun tanqid qilindi. Misol uchun, ARWU Fransiyada qayta-qayta tanqid qilinadi, u erda har yili bahs-munozaralarga sabab bo'ladi, bu uning fransuz akademik tizimiga noto'g'ri moslashgan xarakteriga[27][28] va ko'pincha o'n yillar oldin olib borilgan tadqiqotlarga berilgan asossiz vaznga e'tibor qaratadi.[29] Bundan tashqari, Fransiyada universitetlarni yirikroq universitetlarga birlashtirish uchun motivatsiya sifatida foydalanish uchun tanqid qilinadi.[30] Darhaqiqat, yana bir tanqid - qo'llaniladigan ko'rsatkichlar universitet hajmidan mustaqil emas, masalan, nashrlar soni yoki mukofot g'oliblari universitetlar tadqiqot (yoki o'qitish) sifatiga bog'liq bo'lmagan holda guruhlanganda mexanik ravishda qo'shiladi; Shunday qilib, bir xil reytingdagi ikkita institutning qo'shilishi birlashgan muassasalar reytingini sezilarli darajada oshiradi va sifat jihatidan hech qanday o'zgarishsiz yuqori reytingni beradi.[14]

Jahon universitetlarining akademik reytingi, 2003–2018, Birinchi oʻntalik

Mavzu[tahrir | manbasini tahrirlash]

ARWU intizomiy reytingida ikkita toifa mavjud: keng fan sohalari va maxsus fanlar. Metodologiya umumiy jadvalda qabul qilinganga o'xshaydi, shu jumladan mukofot omillari, qog'oz iqtiboslari va yuqori baholangan olimlar soni.[31]

  • Tabii fanlar
    • Atmosfera fani
    • Kimyo
    • Yer haqidagi fanlar
    • Ekologiya
    • Geografiya
    • Matematika
    • Okeanografiya
    • Fizika
  • Muhandislik
    • Aerokosmik muhandislik
    • Avtomatlashtirish va boshqarish
    • Biotibbiyot muhandisligi
    • Biotexnologiya
    • Kimyoviy muhandislik
    • Qurilish ishi
    • Informatika va muhandislik
    • Elektrotexnika va elektron muhandislik
    • Energetika fani va muhandislik
    • Atrof-muhit fani va muhandislik
    • Qizi-ovqat fani va texnologiya
    • Asboblar fan va texnologiya
    • Dengiz/ocean muhandisligi
    • Materialshunoslik va muhandislik
    • Mashinasozlik
    • Metallurgiya muhandisligi
    • Tog'-kon va mineral muhandislik
    • Nanofan va nanotexnologiya
    • Masofadan zondlash
    • Telekommunikatsiya muhandisligi
    • Transport fani va texnologiya
    • Suv resurslari
  • Hayot haqidagi fanlar
    • Qishloq xo'jaligi fanlari
    • Biologiya fanlari
    • Inson biologik fanlari
    • Veterinariya fanlari
  • Tibbiyot fanlari
    • Tibbiyot klinikasi
    • Stomatologiya va og'zaki fanlar
    • Tibbiy texnologiya
    • Hamshiralik
    • Farmatsevtika va farmatsevtika fanlari
    • Jamoat raqobat
  • Ijtimoiy fanlar
    • Biznes boshqaruvi
    • Aloqa
    • Iqtisodiyot
    • Ta'lim
    • Moliya
    • Mehmonxona va turizmni boshqarish
    • Quunun
    • Kutubxona va axborot fani
    • Boshqaruv
    • Siyosiy fanlar
    • Psixologiya
    • Davlat boshkaruvi
    • Sotsiologiya
    • Statistika

Mintaqaviy reytinglar[tahrir | manbasini tahrirlash]

Muayyan sohalarni rivojlantirishni hisobga olgan holda, turli metodologiyalarga ega ikkita mustaqil mintaqaviy liga jadvallari ishga tushirildi - Buyuk Xitoydagi eng yaxshi universitetlar reytingi va Xitoyning eng yaxshi universitetlari reytingi.

Materik Xitoy[tahrir | manbasini tahrirlash]

Xitoyning eng yaxshi universitetlari reytingi ilk bor 2015-yilda chop etilgan.[32]

Buyuk Xitoy[tahrir | manbasini tahrirlash]

Buyuk Xitoydagi eng yaxshi universitetlar reytingi birinchi marta 2011-yilda chop etilgan.[33]

Metodologiya[tahrir | manbasini tahrirlash]

Katta Xitoy reytinglari metodologiyasi[33] [Note 2]
Mezon Ko'rsatkich Ulushi
Ta'lim Bitiruvchilarning ulushi 5%
Mahalliy bo'lmagan talabalar ulushi 5%
Akademik xodimlarning talabalarga nisbati 5%
Doktorlik darajalari berilgan 10%
Bitiruvchilar Nobel mukofoti sovrindorlari va Fields medali sovrindorlari sifatida 10%
Tadqiqot Yillik tadqiqot daromadi 5%
Tabiat va fan bo'yicha maqolalar 10%
SCIE & SSCI hujjatlari 10%
Xalqaro patentlar 10%
Fakultet Doktorlik darajasiga ega ilmiy xodimlarning ulushi 5%
Nobel mukofoti laureatlari va Fields medali sohiblari sifatida 10%
Yuqori iqtibos keltirgan tadqiqotchilar 10%
Resurslar Yillik byudjet 5%

Manbalar[tahrir | manbasini tahrirlash]

  1. Pavel, Adina-Petruta (2015). „Global university rankings – a comparative analysis“. Procedia Economics and Finance. 26-jild. 54–63-bet. doi:10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00838-2.
  2. „World university rankings: how much influence do they really have?“. The Guardian (2013). Qaraldi: 27-yanvar 2015-yil. „The first international rankings, the Academic Ranking of World Universities or Shanghai Rankings“.
  3. „About Academic Ranking of World Universities“. Shanghai Ranking Consultancy (2014). — „Since 2009 the Academic Ranking of World Universities has been published and copyrighted by ShanghaiRanking Consultancy.“. 2021-yil 28-fevralda asl nusxadan arxivlangan. Qaraldi: 2014-yil 26-sentyabr.
  4. „Shanghai rankings rattle European universities“. ABS-CBN Interactive (2010-yil 8-dekabr). — „France's higher education minister travelled to Jiaotong University's suburban campus last month to discuss the rankings, the Norwegian education minister came last year and the Danish minister is due to visit next month.; The idea for the rankings was born in 1998, when Beijing decreed China needed several world-leading universities.“. Qaraldi: 2015-yil 27-yanvar.
  5. „ARWU International Advisory Board“. Shanghai Ranking Consultancy (2014). 2015-yil 11-fevralda asl nusxadan arxivlangan. Qaraldi: 2015-yil 27-yanvar.
  6. Network, QS Asia News. „The history and development of higher education ranking systems – QS WOWNEWS“. QS WOWNEWS (2018-yil 2-mart). 2018-yil 21-avgustda asl nusxadan arxivlangan. Qaraldi: 2018-yil 29-mart.
  7. „About Academic Ranking of World Universities | About ARWU“. www.shanghairanking.com. 2021-yil 28-fevralda asl nusxadan arxivlangan. Qaraldi: 2018-yil 29-mart.
  8. Ariel Zirulnick (2010-09-16). „New world university ranking puts Harvard back on top“. Christian Science Monitor. „Those two, as well as Shanghai Jiao Tong University, produce the most influential international university rankings out there“
  9. 9,0 9,1 9,2 Indira Samarasekera & Carl Amrhein. „Top schools don't always get top marks“. The Edmonton Journal. 3-oktabr 2010-yilda asl nusxadan arxivlangan. „There are currently three major international rankings that receive widespread commentary: The Academic World Ranking of Universities, the QS World University Rankings and the Times Higher Education Rankings.“.
  10. 10,0 10,1 Philip G. Altbach. „The State of the Rankings“. Inside Higher Ed (2010-yil 11-noyabr). — „The major international rankings have appeared in recent months — the Academic Ranking of World Universities, the QS World University Rankings, and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE).“. 2014-yil 19-dekabrda asl nusxadan arxivlangan. Qaraldi: 2022-yil 7-iyun.
  11. 11,0 11,1 „Strength and weakness of varsity rankings“. NST Online (2016-yil 14-sentyabr). Qaraldi: 2018-yil 29-mart.
  12. 12,0 12,1 Marszal, Andrew. „University rankings: which world university rankings should we trust?“. Daily Telegraph (2012-yil 4-oktyabr). Qaraldi: 2018-yil 29-mart.
  13. „"Shanghai Academic Ranking: a French Controversy" by Marc Goetzmann, for La Jeune Politique. Lajeunepolitique.com (2013-yil 29-avgust). 2015-yil 9-yanvarda asl nusxadan arxivlangan. Qaraldi: 2014-yil 9-iyun.
  14. 14,0 14,1 Bahram Bekhradnia. „International university rankings: For good or ill?“. Higher Education Policy Institute (2016-yil 15-dekabr). — „ARWU presents a further data issue. Whereas in the case of the other rankings the results are adjusted to take account of the size of institutions, hardly any such adjustment is made by ARWU. So there is a distortion in favour of large institutions. If two institutions were to merge, the very fact of merger would mean that the merged institution would do nearly twice as well as either of the individual institutions prior to merger, although nothing else had changed.“. Qaraldi: 2017-yil 10-iyun.
  15. „A world of opportunity“. The Economics (2005-yil 8-sentyabr). — „It is no accident that the most widely used annual ranking of the world's research universities, the Shanghai index, is produced by a Chinese university.“. 2012-yil 18-iyulda asl nusxadan arxivlangan. Qaraldi: 2015-yil 30-yanvar.
  16. „International Group Announces Audit of University Rankings“. The Chronicle of Higher Education. 10–oktabr 2010–yil. Qaraldi: 30–yanvar 2015–yil. „Shanghai Jiao Tong University, which produces the best-known and most influential global ranking of universities...“{{cite magazine}}: CS1 maint: date format ()
  17. „Chinese study ranks world's top 500 universities“. European Research Headlines (2003). 2015-yil 9-yanvarda asl nusxadan arxivlangan. Qaraldi: 2015-yil 4-fevral.
  18. Rankings and Accountability in Higher Education: Uses and Misuses. United Nations Educational, 2013 — 26 bet. ISBN 9789230011567. 30-yanvar 2015-yilda qaraldi. 
  19. Philip G. Altbach. „The State of the Rankings“. INSIDE HIGHER ED (2010-yil 11-sentyabr). — „Nonetheless, AWRU's consistency, clarity of purpose, and transparency are significant advantages.“. 2014-yil 19-dekabrda asl nusxadan arxivlangan. Qaraldi: 2022-yil 7-iyun.
  20. „Academic Ranking of World Universities 2013 released“. Times Higher Education (THE) (2013-yil 15-avgust). Qaraldi: 2016-yil 20-yanvar.
  21. Marszal, Andrew. „University rankings: which world university rankings should we trust?“. The Telegraph (2015). Qaraldi: 27-yanvar 2015-yil. „It is a remarkably stable list, relying on long-term factors such as the number of Nobel Prize-winners a university has produced, and number of articles published in Nature and Science journals. But with this narrow focus comes drawbacks. China's priority was for its universities to 'catch up' on hard scientific research. So if you're looking for raw research power, it's the list for you. If you're a humanities student, or more interested in teaching quality? Not so much.“.
  22. J. Scott Armstrong and Tad Sperry (1994). „Business School Prestige: Research versus Teaching“ (PDF). Energy & Environment. 18-jild, № 2. 13–43-bet. 2010-06-20da asl nusxadan (PDF) arxivlandi.
  23. „1741-7015-5-30.fm“. Qaraldi: 2014-yil 9-iyun.
  24. Răzvan V. Florian (17–iyun 2007–yil). „Irreproducibility of the results of the Shanghai academic ranking of world universities“. Scientometrics. 72-jild, № 1. 25–32-bet. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1712-1.{{cite magazine}}: CS1 maint: date format ()
  25. Domingo Docampo (1–iyul 2012–yil). „Reproducibility of the results of the Shanghai academic ranking of world universities“. Scientometrics. 94-jild, № 2. 567–587-bet. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0801-y.{{cite magazine}}: CS1 maint: date format ()
  26. Jean-Charles Billaut, Denis Bouyssou & Philippe Vincke. „Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking?“. CCSD. Qaraldi: 2015-yil 30-yanvar.
  27. „"Shanghai Academic Ranking: a French Controversy" by Marc Goetzmann, for La Jeune Politique. Lajeunepolitique.com (2013-yil 29-avgust). Qaraldi: 2014-yil 9-iyun.
  28. Spongenberg. „EUobserver / EU to test new university ranking in 2010“. Euobserver.com (2014-yil 5-iyun). Qaraldi: 2014-yil 9-iyun.
  29. Dagorn, Gary. „Universités : pourquoi le classement de Shanghaï n'est pas un exercice sérieux“ (fr). Le Monde.fr. lemonde.fr (16-avgust 2016-yil). Qaraldi: 17-avgust 2016-yil.
  30. Gérand. „Aix-Marseille, laboratoire de la fusion des universités“ (fr). www.monde-diplomatique.fr (2016-yil sentyabr). Qaraldi: 2016-yil 8-sentyabr.
  31. „Global Rankings of Academic Subjects 2020“. Shanghai Ranking Consultancy (2020). 2020-yil 6-aprelda asl nusxadan arxivlangan. Qaraldi: 2020-yil 27-dekabr.
  32. „2022 中国最好大学排名 (Best Chinese Universities Rankings)“. Shanghai Ranking Consultancy. Qaraldi: 2022-yil 19-aprel.
  33. 33,0 33,1 „Greater China Ranking – Methodology“. Shanghai Ranking Consultancy (2014). 2021-yil 22-mayda asl nusxadan arxivlangan. Qaraldi: 2015-yil 31-yanvar.

Havolalar[tahrir | manbasini tahrirlash]