Endre søk
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
On the performativity of university ranking lists: commodity aesthetics and looping
Högskolan i Borås, Institutionen för Pedagogik.
2012 (engelsk)Inngår i: A keynote given at the symposium “Use and Abuse of International University Rankings ”. Barcelona July 2012: The university: an institution of Society, 2012, s. 77-79Konferansepaper, Publicerat paper (Fagfellevurdert)
Abstract [en]

In focus of this keynote is the performativity of university rankings. I will present and discuss how different kinds of university rankings are constructed and their specific ways of understanding and presenting higher education and research. Here I will focus on their one-dimensionality and potential bias in ambitions to capture the academia in terms of ranking as presented by the Shanghai ranking list ”Academic Ranking of World Universities, and the World University Ranking lists – presented by Times Higher Education (THE) and Quaquarelli Symonds (QS) respectively. I will also put forwards some features of the Webometrics list. In relation to this I will also deal with the multidimensional ranking of higher education institutions the so called U-multirank that now is under construction with the support of the European Commission. A first point to be made is that university ranking is a way to transform the multitude of university qualities in education and research, as well as engagement in social activities, into a political economy of easily visible ranking positions (jfr Marginson, 2009) presenting the higher education institutions as comparable units in one or more dimensions. Academic activities are translated into a set of comparable indictors who in turn are conceived of as presenting the exchange-value of specific HEIs. A second point is that this political economy is biased – standards are set by a number of indicators favoring certain kinds of higher education activities predominant in certain Anglo-Saxon universities. These two points concern how ranking lists represent higher education and research institutions. A third point concerns if such a representation matter? An explicit idea of ranking lists is that they should have an impact on higher education institutions for university clients as well as for university governance. I will discuss such potential performative qualities with looping implications (Hacking, 2004) for higher education research. Here I will be informed by a current study in Sweden by Sundén (in process) inspired by Espeland & Sauder, (2007) and Hazelkorn (2009) of how Swedish Vice-chancellors are acting upon international university ranking lists.

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
2012. s. 77-79
HSV kategori
Forskningsprogram
Lärarutbildning och pedagogisk yrkesverksamhet
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-6918Lokal ID: 2320/11808ISBN: 978-84-9921-300-2 (tryckt)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hb-6918DiVA, id: diva2:887625
Konferanse
CIDU conference in Barcelona, July 2012
Tilgjengelig fra: 2015-12-22 Laget: 2015-12-22 Sist oppdatert: 2017-10-15bibliografisk kontrollert

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltekst mangler i DiVA

Personposter BETA

Lindblad, Sverker

Søk i DiVA

Av forfatter/redaktør
Lindblad, Sverker
Av organisasjonen

Søk utenfor DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric

isbn
urn-nbn
Totalt: 81 treff
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf