Internationalisation through the rankings looking glass IREG-8 Conference Markus Laitinen, University of Helsinki, EAIE 5.5.2016
Content On Manchester City v. Real Madrid Internationalisation from the point of view of European IHE practitioners Internationalisation indicators in major international rankings and rankings Playing devil s advocate (or how to maximise success) Some views on rankings and internationalisation Final words, or things to consider
May 9, 2016 Slide 3
May 9, 2016 Slide 4
Internationalisation indicators: URAP International co-authorships (15%)
Internationalisation indicators: Leiden International research collaboration
Internationalisation indicators: THE/THE international International-to-domestic-student ratio (2,5%) International-to-domestic-staff ratio (2,5%) International research collaboration (2,5%) [Teaching and Research reputation surveys 15+18%]
Internationalisation indicators: US News: Best Global International research collaboration (10%) [Global research reputation (12,5%)]
Internationalisation indicators: QS International faculty (5%) International students (5%) [Peer review (40%)/employer review (10%)]
Shanghai Nothing on international Except in GRUP Percentage of International Students Percentage of International Undergraduate Students Percentage of International Graduate Students Percentage of International Master s Students Percentage of International Doctoral Students Percentage of International Academic Staff (Teaching Related) Percentage of International Academic Staff (Research Only)
Internationalisation indicators: RUR International academic staff 2% International students 2% International co-authored papers 2% International teaching reputation 2% International bachelors 2% (sic)
Internationalisation indicators: Umultirank Educational programmes (BA, MA, long first degree) in foreign language International orientation of degree programmes (BA + MA) Opportunities to study abroad (via student survey) Student mobility (incoming, outgoing, joint degree students) Percentage of international academic staff Percentage of PhDs awarded to foreign students International joint research publications (bibliometric & patent indicators) International research grants
So, let s play devil s advocate Enrolling no domestic students would be good Having no domestic staff would be good It does not really matter whether teaching or services are any good (Apart from UMR), there is no point in student exchange/study abroad It does not really matter, if co-authors have never met, just as long they publish together No reason for internationalising the curriculum Integrating international students or staff MOOCs engaging in Global Social Responsibility etc Just worry about numbers: quality of international activities not really relevant
This is not exactly breaking news, but: Internationalisation perceived very narrowly in rankings Internationalisation perceived very mechanistically in rankings Selection of indicators driven by available data, at best Internationalisation indicators are proxies, at best There is no holy grail among internationalisation indicators For all the hype, internationalisation does not seem that important (Internationalisation) rankings are used in unintended ways Scholarship programmes, recognition etc..
Food for thought? The more international a university is, the better it is? The better a univeristy is, the more international it is? Or both? Or neither? THE most international: MIT #90 Harvard #134 Stanford #141 Cambridge behind Aston?
Finally Internationalisation is a means, not an end Internationalisation is complex, more than mobility or co-authorship Internationalisation is constantly evolving Internationalisation is context-sensitive This should be reflected in how (or if) to measure it, and which indicators to choose Because now it really isn t! The challenge is to find a balance between simple/clear and relativistic What constitutes goal, game or championship in university internationalisation?