Varsity rankings inaccurate, but are looked at as gospel truth

THE QS World University Rankings have just been released. Again, we fall back on the pattern of edifying these rankings and celebrating Malaysian public institutions’ placements in them.

There is in fact no value to such rankings. The question is, how is the QS Ranking, or any other university ranking, an accurate measure of quality?

It is akin to assessing the quality of a fruit by the colour of its skin.

There is a bias to it, which is why Western institutions always rank highly, because 40 per cent of the assessment is “academic reputation” (for the QS Ranking), which leaves most institutions in the shadows.

It’s a sorry state of affairs, but the reality is that there is influence in these rankings. Most local newspapers and local universities publish these rankings on their websites and social media sites.

This perpetuates the myth of accuracy in assessment, where there is none.

The reason for this inaccuracy, is that most university rankings use faculty-student ratio and, peer review teaching, which would lead to the conclusion that it is a myopic viewpoint of what real education is.

These rankings, for the most part, are glamorised. They are an easy-to-refer basis of education quality.

For students seeking the best standards, however, these rankings are limited in their assessment, as they are based on research output.

This means that all institutions, which want to have a higher place in the rankings, would churn out research, much like factories producing goods.

The aim of education, which is to educate and learn, is lost. Yet these rankings are trusted and looked at as the gospel truth.