- Title
- A Ranking Framework for Higher Education Institutions in South Africa
- Creator
- Kanyutu, Teresia Watiri
- Subject
- Education, Higher -- South Africa
- Date Issued
- 2020
- Date
- 2020
- Type
- Thesis
- Type
- Doctoral
- Type
- DBA
- Identifier
- http://hdl.handle.net/10948/48246
- Identifier
- vital:40746
- Description
- In the past 16 years, the use of League Tables and Rankings (LTRs) as a tool to rank or measure the performance of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) has grown in popularity. As a global practice, LTR outcomes are influencing how policies are developed and implemented within the Higher Education (HE) sector. Studies indicate that based on individual information requirements, HE stakeholders are using LTRs to compare HEIs with each other and make informed comparisons and decisions. University directors use LTRs as a basis for institutional strategic planning, reputation building and policy making, while students use LTRs to compare HEIs and make university of choice decisions. Further studies confirm that governments use LTRs for national higher education policy making, university funding, foreign partnerships and resource allocation. Globally and at a national level, the higher education sector has witnessed policy and structural changes, many of which are due to the increase in the use of international rankings and league tables. Despite the opportunities presented by participating in the production of and using LTRs, the ranking practice is contentious. Amongst the issues disputed by the HE stakeholders are the methodologies and criteria used in the production and publication of LTRs. Higher education experts argue that LTRs tend to favour institutional research output and ignore the teaching and learning function of HEIs. As a result, the ranking criteria differ across the higher education ranking institutions and their publication outcomes, which causes skepticism across the HE sector. Research indicates that these ranking criteria are often discussed from the standpoint of governments, the higher education management and the ranking institutions producing these LTR publications. The opinions of the students on the suitable ranking criteria used by ranking institutions lack. This study aims to address that gap. This study investigates the applicable criteria for ranking HEIs in South Africa, from the perspective of students. Building on the existing ranking criteria for three global and popular ranking institutions namely, Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), Times Higher Education World University Ranking (THEWUR) and Quacquarelli Symonds World University Ranking (QSWUR), the study poses the question; “What framework can be used to rank HEIs in South Africa, from a student’s perspective?” The study argues that although some HEIs in South Africa have in the past and most recently appeared in the global LTRs, the current choice of ranking criteria fails to consider the perspectives of the students, who are major consumers of LTRs and important stakeholders in the HE sector. A positivistic research method was used, based on a review of literature on the current ranking criteria for the selected global ranking institutions. An empirical study was conducted amongst students in a South African Comprehensive University. An online survey was distributed through convenient and snowball sampling, where the students were requested to participate in the survey and share the questionnaire link with others. Eight hundred and eighty six (886) responses were received and used for the data analyses of this study.
- Format
- xxix, 418 leaves
- Format
- Publisher
- Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
- Publisher
- Faculty of Business and Economic Sciences
- Language
- English
- Rights
- Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
- Hits: 1965
- Visitors: 1954
- Downloads: 190
Collections
NMU School of Management Sciences
| Thumbnail | File | Description | Size | Format | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| View Details Download | SOURCE1 | Kanyutu, TW 214238229 Thesis April 2020.pdf | 5 MB | Adobe Acrobat PDF | View Details Download |