Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ranking Iranian universities: an interpretative structural modeling approach

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ranking is widely considered to be an important tool for evaluating the performance, competitiveness, and success of academic institutions. An appropriate ranking system should evaluate the key missions of the higher education system in a way that helps to improve the leadership goals and activities carried out by the universities. Based on the concepts derived from the Iranian Higher Education Upstream Documents and Measures used internationally for university ranking, this study identifies 21 key measures that can be used in the ranking of Iranian universities. The measures are grouped into five categories: scientific infrastructure, scientific effectiveness, socio-cultural effectiveness, international interactions, and sustainability. Then, using the Interpretative Structural Modeling approach, the researchers develop a coherent rubric for establishing the ranking. The proposed conceptual model focuses primarily on the universities’ contribution to technological and scientific infrastructure, then secondarily on their contribution to scientific advancement and international interactions, and finally at a tertiary level on their socio-cultural effectiveness and sustainability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Almgren, E. (2009). Ranking of universities and higher education institutions for student information purposes?. Stockholm: Högskoleverket.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altbach, P. G. (1998). Comparative higher education: Knowledge, the university, and development. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ansell, B. W. (2008). University challenges: Explaining institutional change in higher education. World Politics, 60(2), 189–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banadkoki, M. Z., Vahdatzad, M. A., Owlia, M. S., & Lotfi, M. (2015). The survey of university rankings: A critical approach. Majallah-i Amuzih-i Muhandisi-i Iran, 17(65), 95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barve, A., Kanda, A., & Shankar, R. (2008). Making 3PL effective in agile supply chains. International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, 4(1), 40–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Çakır, M. P., Acartürk, C., Alaşehir, O., & Çilingir, C. (2015). A comparative analysis of global and national university ranking systems. Scientometrics, 103(3), 813–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, L. K., & Wu, M. L. (2002). Quality function deployment: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 143(3), 463–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daraio, C., Bonaccorsi, A., & Simar, L. (2015). Rankings and university performance: A conditional multidimensional approach. European Journal of Operational Research, 244, 918–930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dill, D. D., & Soo, M. (2005). Academic quality, league tables, and public policy: A cross-national analysis of university ranking systems. Higher Education, 49(4), 495–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drewes, T., & Michael, C. (2006). How do students choose a university? An analysis of applications to universities in Ontario, Canada. Research in Higher Education, 47(7), 781–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Global University Rankings (RatER, Rating of Educational Resources) [Russia]. (2012). http://www.globaluniversitiesranking.org/.

  • Huang, M. H. (2011). A comparison of three major academic rankings for world universities: From a research evaluation perspective. Journal of Library and Information Studies, 9(1), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, C. (2001). The uses of the university. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kezar, A. (2014). Higher education change and social networks: A review of research. The Journal of Higher Education, 85(1), 91–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lukman, R., Krajnc, D., & Glavič, P. (2010). University ranking using research, educational and environmental measures. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(7), 619–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moed, H. F. (2017). A critical comparative analysis of five world university rankings. Scientometrics, 110(2), 967–990.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Performance Ranking of Scientific Papers for Research Universities (Higher Education Evaluation and Assessment Council of Taiwan, (HEEACT) [Taiwan]. (2017). http://nturanking.lis.ntu.edu.tw/.

  • Porzionato, M., & De Marco, F. (2015). Excellence and diversification of higher education institutions’ missions. In The European higher education area (pp. 285–292). Springer.

  • QS World University Rankings. (2017). https://www.topuniversities.com/.

  • Ranking of Islamic Countries Universities and Research Institutions ISC. (2016). http://iur.isc.gov.ir/.

  • Ravi, V., Shankar, R., & Tiwari, M. K. (2005). Production improvement of a computer hardware supply chain. International Journal of Productivity Performance Management, 54(4), 239–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmi, J., & Saroyan, A. (2007). League tables as policy instruments. Higher Education Management and Policy, 19(2), 1–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SCImago Institutions Rankings. (2015). http://www.scimagoir.com.

  • Shanghai Jiao Tong University. (2017). Academic ranking of world universities (ARWU). http://www.shanghairanking.com.

  • Shin, J. C., Toutkoushian, R. K., & Teichler, U. (Eds.). (2011). University rankings: Theoretical basis, methodology and impacts on global higher education (Vol. 3). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, M. D., & Kant, R. (2008). Knowledge management barriers: An interpretive structural modeling approach. International Journal of Management Science and Engineering Management, 3(2), 141–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stromquist, N. P. (2007). Internationalization as a response to globalization: Radical shifts in university environments. Higher Education, 53(1), 81–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Times Higher Education Thompson Reuters World University Ranking (THE-TR) [UK]. (2016) http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/.

  • URAP-TR University Ranking by Academic Performance. (2015). http://tr.urapcenter.org/2015/.

  • URAP-University Ranking by Academic Performance. (2014). http://www.urapcenter.org/2014.

  • Universiteit Leiden. (2015). Leiden university rankings. http://www.leidenranking.com/ranking/2015.

  • Usher, A., & Savino, M. (2007). A global survey of university ranking and league tables. Higher Education in Europe, 32(1), 5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Raan, A. F. (2005). Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics, 62(1), 133–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warfield, J. W. (1974). Developing interconnected matrices in structural modeling. IEEE Transcript on Systems, Men and Cybertics, 4(1), 51–81.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zare, B. M. R., Vahdatzad, M. A., Owlia, M. S., & Lotfi, M. M. (2016). The study of effective measures for Iranian university rankings from upstream documents. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 8(3), 55–70.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Engineering, Meybod University, Yazd, Iran

    Mohammad Reza Zare Banadkouki

  2. Department of Industrial Engineering, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran

    Mohammad Ali Vahdatzad, Mohammad Saleh Owlia & Mohammad Mahdi Lotfi

Authors
  1. Mohammad Reza Zare Banadkouki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohammad Ali Vahdatzad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mohammad Saleh Owlia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mohammad Mahdi Lotfi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammad Ali Vahdatzad.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zare Banadkouki, M.R., Vahdatzad, M.A., Owlia, M.S. et al. Ranking Iranian universities: an interpretative structural modeling approach. Scientometrics 117, 1493–1512 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2946-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2946-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation