May 1st 2012 at 8:42am, By Dave Guerin
Check out Stuart McCutcheon’s piece on uni rankings and let me know what you think. Do we need higher ranked unis?
Policy, Management & People
Research & Innovation
Public Issues
Students
Stakeholders
Teaching & Learning
5 Responses to News 1/5 – Uni Rankings. Dr Bogan. Eels.
Darel
May 1st, 2012 at 10:27 am
Stuart’s article is interesting for the issues it raises.
The rankings systems vary and include different emphases on science and tech, size, scope of the institution, etc. It would be a very interesting exercise to work through what Auckland would have to do to maximize its ranking with its current resources. I wonder if it has done that work and how different the university would look.
That NZ institutions are ranked lower is not a surprise; what is a surprise is that there are not more BRIC country institutions in the top 50 (I count Hong Kong as China for this purpose which does well but less well than I expected).
The countries Stuart cites are all much wealthier than NZ. They are a third or more richer per capita. Australia is over 40% richer p/cap.
Assuming wealth explains everything I calculated Auckland University is $169m (18%) underfunded compared to UNSW (I didn’t bother doing a currency conversion so add a few percent for that).
Someone in NZ must have done some serious work on this issue. Could someone provide a link to that work?
Dave Guerin
May 1st, 2012 at 10:37 am
The MOE did some work back in 2010 on this, looking at rankings by share of the world’s economy (we came first!).
http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/tertiary_education/81244/key-findings
Jim Doyle
May 1st, 2012 at 11:00 am
If we reduced the number of universities in NZ to one and then reduced the number of students in that university to say 10,000 and put all of the money we currently put into the entire NZ system, it’s a pretty good bet the ranking of that university would rise significantly in time.
University rankings are elisits tosh.
Darel
May 1st, 2012 at 12:47 pm
The rankings broadly speaking are OK in that they represent their methodology well, don’t they? I guess it’s like all ranking schemes. They get used to describe things they’re not designed to describe – PBRF rankings for example.
Some people might perceive that Stuart is making the unusual argument that universities should get more money and the even more unusual argument that a smaller number of universities, quite possibly including Auckland, should get the most.
Amongst the many things I think about when these kinds of discussions are put up is that there appears to be no relationship between numbers of students put through NZ tertiary education/ university spending and economic performance. Of course there are other things a well-educated society should deliver, but one them is that we should be richer because we’re smarter.
Lindsay
May 4th, 2012 at 10:38 pm
Closing the Gap – It is of interest to note that NZUSA conveniently overlooked the fact that all Australian Fee Help loans attract an immediate and upfront government administration fee of 20% of the loan.
Something the NZ government should perhaps look at?