Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
www.webometrics.info
THE RANKING WEBNEW INDICATORS FOR NEWNEEDS
Isidro F. AguilloCybermetrics Lab. [email protected]
2nd International Workshop on University Web RankingsCCHS-CSIC, Madrid (Spain). April 21st 2009
www.webometrics.info
2
AGENDA
Why Ranking? Why Web?
Comparison with other Rankings
Ranking Web
Future Developments
The Floor is Open
www.webometrics.info
Spanish Research Council
Largest public
research body in Spain
130 institutes (mostly basic
science)
20% of the Spanish scientific output
2 Nobel Prizes
3
ABOUT US
Cybermetrics Lab Research
group at the Center of
Humanities and Social Sciences
Editors of ejournal
CybermetricsEU Projects
involvedStaff: 4
researchers, 1 technician
www.webometrics.info
4
TO RANK OR NOT TO RANK
•Explosive international student mobility•Growing demand of information•Prior to 2003 there were no World Universities
RankingsGlobal market
•Trend towards increasing complexity•Not obvious results, multiple classifications,
confusing figures•Student oriented
Demise of national rankings
•Web publication reached World audiences•League tables are easy to understand•Unexpected results, rectors & politicians unaware
of the actual situation
Impact of Shanghai’s
ARWU
•Methodological problems•Mostly research based•Promoting ranking-improvement tactics
But …
www.webometrics.info
5
STUDENT MOBILITY
Growth in internationalization of tertiary education (1975-2006)Source: Education at a Glance 2008: OECD
USA UK Australia Japan Germany Canada France TotalTotal from Asia 372173 152020 145338 122538 95829 75441 45780 1416263 of which, from Eastern Asia 204593 70809 62189 109594 36567 41049 21866 666024 of which, from South-central Asia 100842 35684 31548 3840 13729 19629 3462 351929 of which, from South-eastern Asia 36495 23681 43851 8691 7749 4392 6925 169195 of which, from Western Asia 30244 21846 3864 412 35532 7278 12741 215249Total from all countries, 2006 584817 330078 184710 130124 261363 148164 247510 2924679Total from all countries, 2000 475169 222936 105764 66607 187033 94401 137085 1894792
Countries of destinationCountries of origin
www.webometrics.info
6
Indi
cato
rsa1. faculty/studenta2. fundinga3. papers publisheda4. citations receiveda5. degrees offereda6. prizesa7. external reviewsa8. web sizea9. intl. facultya10. foreign students…………a999. computers ratio
Wei
ghts Rank=w1*a1+w2*a2+w3*a3+…..+w999*a999
0≤wi≤1 ∑wi=1
A methodologically sound approachConsidering many indicators, not only outputs but also inputs basedApplied a multivariate non parametric analysis to estimate wi
HOW TO RANK?
www.webometrics.info
7
FEASIBILITY PROBLEMS
Bibliometric biasesBiomedicine
Social & Humanities, TechnologyNorth America, Europe
Rest of the WorldEnglish
Other languages
Poor ability to discriminateRatios with low numbers Nobel Prizes
(few universities with 2 or more)
Data not comparable due to the lack of standardsProfessor/researcher/student/international student
No data available for most of the countriesEspecially in developing ones in Africa, Asia and Latin America
www.webometrics.info
8
WHY THE WEB?The Web is already
the main tool for scholarly
communication
The Web could reflect all the missions of the
universities•Research•Teaching
•Third mission
Web visibility has proved its ranking
capabilities•Google PageRank
The Web provides easy access to
relevant indicators
The Web reaches and it is accessed
from every country of the World
www.webometrics.info
9
THE RANKING WEBOriginal aim• Promote Open Access Initiatives• Target: “Web Publish or Perish”
“Political agenda”• Reaching developing countries• Including all the missions, not only research
Methodology• Search engines as intermediaries: Easy way to collect data• Link (quantitative) analysis as a proxy of quality assessment• Impact Factor based composite indicator
Consequences• Webometrics Rank as an indicator: High correlation with other
Rankings• Academic Digital Divide• Web (naming) bad practices: Taking the Web seriously
www.webometrics.info
10
Activity (50%)
Virtual referendum
Size
Number of Webpages
20%
Impact (50%)
Rich files
Number of documents
15%
Scholar
Number of papers15%
Visibility
Number of external inlinks
AN ACADEMIC MODEL
www.webometrics.info
WEBOMETRICS RANKINGS
11
Published since 2004, inspired by the Shanghai Ranking
Top 6,000 universities from a Directory with 17,000 entries
Top 2,000 research centers from a Directory with 7,000 entries
Two editions (January & July) per year
Only organizations worldwide with their own web domain or subdomain
Based on web indicators (activity and impact)
www.webometrics.info
12
www.webometrics.info
13
SUMMARYREGION / countries Top100 Top200 Top500 Top1000 Total
NORTH AMERICA 7 78 121 206 392 3552 USA 70 104 179 354 3343EUROPE 54 16 60 223 412 4531 United Kingdom 6 12 35 68 235 Germany 1 17 49 67 384 Italy 1 1 13 35 200 France 1 16 47 603 Spain 4 27 42 218ASIA 33 3 10 40 118 4303 Japan 2 3 10 38 670 China & HK 3 10 22 1156 Taiwan 1 2 10 23 158 Korea 1 4 12 402LATIN AMERICA 35 2 3 13 36 2891 Brazil 1 2 9 16 1529 Mexico 1 1 2 6 354OCEANIA 12 1 6 15 35 131 Australia 1 6 13 29 79ARAB WORLD 22 2 2 496AFRICA 37 1 5 321WORLD 200 16225
www.webometrics.info
• MIT (1st region & world), Stanford (2nd) and Harvard (3rd) Universities• University of Toronto (24th world)
North America
• Cambridge (1st region), ETH Zurich (2nd) and Oxford (3rd) UniversitiesEurope
• Tokyo (52nd), Taiwan National (55th) and Peking (117th) UniversitiesAsia
• National University of Australia (48th)Oceania
• Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (44th)• Universidade de Sao Paulo (87th)Latin America
• University of Cape City (359th) Africa
WR (Enero 2009)
EXPECTED RESULTS
14
www.webometrics.info
MORE RESULTS
15
• Universities of Catalonia (.es, .edu., .net, .cat)• Old and new domains (Imperial, Illinois, Victoria, Northwestern, Case Western, Pontificia de Chile, …)
Bad naming practices
• Jussieu campus (Paris 6, Paris 7, CNRS)• Strasbourg Universities (3 under common domain)• University of Helsinki (shared with the City Hall)
Common domain
• Johns Hopkins University • Universidad de la República (Uruguay)• University of Zagreb• Warsaw University
Splitteddomain
• Websites mostly in local language• (Few pages in English)
Japanese, French, Italian
• Against Biomedical small size organizations• Favoring Technology oriented and Distance Learning based universities
Biases
www.webometrics.info
COMPARING WORLD RANKINGS
16
Univs analysedUnivs rankedTeaching Alumni Nobel 10% Students/Staff 20%
% Foreign Students 5%% Foreign Professors 5%
Size Webpages 20% University 10%Documents 15% Nature&Science 20%Papers GS 15% Papers S&SSCI 20%
Highly Cited ResCit High IF JournalsCitations S&SSCI 30%
Academic Survey 40%Employers Survey 10%
Citations Scopus 20%
Prestige Faculty Nobel 20%
Internatio- nalisation
Research Papers S&SSCI 20%
Impact Links 50%Highly CitedResearchers
20%50%
17000 3000 3500 20006000 500 500 500+
CRITERIAWEBOMETRICS ARWU HEEACT QS-THES
Spain (research lab) China (university) Taiwan (gov agency) United Kingdom (firm)
www.webometrics.info
17
ADVANTAGES & DISADVANTAGES
ARWU
•Focus on excellence
•Historical achievements
•Estability
•Only research
•Bibliometric biases
•Discriminatory capability
•Prizes assignation
•University Hospitals
QS-THES
•Perceived prestige
•Long term performance
•Internationalization
•Representation bias of the survey
•Size related
•Not stable
•Ties (beyond rank 200)
•Private company
HEEACT
•Recent performance
•Only research
•Normalization problems
•Size related problems
•No crown indicator
WEBOMETRICS
•Developing countries
•Other missions than research
•Easy to build
•Sensible to URL bad practices
•Google Scholar data quality
•Technology biased
•Impact of Open Access initiatives
www.webometrics.info
Country WEBR09 ARWU08 HEEACT08 QSTHES08
USA 104 90 91 58United Kingdom 12 22 19 30Germany 17 14* 18 11Canada 17 6 9 12Netherlands 6 9 9 10Japan 3 9 9 10Australia 6 6 6 9Switzerland 3 6 7 7France 1 7 4 4Sweden 4 4 4 4Italy 1 5 7 1Israel 1 4 3 3Belgium 1 4 2 5Denmark 1 3 2 3China & HK 3 0 3 10Korea 1 1 1 3Singapore 1 1 1 2Taiwan 2 1 1 1India 0 0 0 2Thailand 0 0 0 1
COMPARING WORLD RANKINGS (TOP 200)
18
www.webometrics.info
19
ACADEMIC DIGITAL DIVIDE
www.webometrics.info
20
MOSTLY NATIONAL LINKS
www.webometrics.info
21
IMPROVING THE RANK (WEB)
Size
Unique Domain
More Research
Distance Learning
Visibility
English
UniversitiesBacklinks
Regional!
Rich Files & Scholar
Personal Pages
Repository
Hosting Third Parties
www.webometrics.info
22
IMPROVING THE RANK (MISSIONS)
Teaching
More Technology
Web 2.0
Distance Learning
Research
International Papers
International Journals
Transfer
Community Engagement
Local culture, society, economy
www.webometrics.info
23
FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
Reinforcing Ranking Mission
Facing bad practices
•Deleting entries•Combining
domains•Excluding super-
sites
New visibility indicator
•Adapted G-factor
Cooperation with Scimago
World Ranking
More info New regions
Historical data
Discipline Rankings
By Department
JULY 2009
2010..2012
www.webometrics.info
24
LESSONS
The Web is a more universal, democratic, cheaper and powerful communication tool and Web indicators could be
used for wider, fairer and feasible evaluation purposes
The Web Ranking provides useful information for developed and developing countries universities that it is not Web
specific, measuring overall performance and global impact
University web sites should reflect the full set of activities and all the results produced by the institution and help to
their dissemination to improve visibility, prestige and attracting new students, excellent scholars and big funding
Research based Rankings are measuring excellence, but not every University in the World is research intensive and focusing on these results could drive to scientific and
cultural colonialism
www.webometrics.info
25
THANK YOU!QUESTIONS?
ISIDRO F. AGUILLOCYBERMETRICS LABCCHS-CSICALBASANZ, 26-2828037 MADRIDSPAINE-MAIL: [email protected]
WWW.WEBOMETRICS.INFO