Does the Asian catch-up model of world-class universities work? Revisiting the zero-sum game of global university rankin
- PDF / 596,335 Bytes
- 25 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 6 Downloads / 195 Views
Does the Asian catch-up model of world-class universities work? Revisiting the zero-sum game of global university rankings and government policies Jaekyung Lee1 · Keqiao Liu2 · Yin Wu3 Received: 31 October 2019 / Accepted: 6 March 2020 © Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020
Abstract This study examines international brain race for world-class universities as measured by the QS World University Rankings (QS) and the Academic Ranking of World Universities, particularly in the context of Asian nations’ institutional competition and benchmarking against American counterparts. Applying mixed methods with statistical analysis of timeseries data from 59 nations and case study of four selected nations, the study examines the cross-national trends of global university rankings and the roles of government policies during the era of performance-driven accountability in higher education. Tracking the zerosum game of global university rankings over the past decade, the study accounts for key driving factors that produced divergent trajectories among the nations: how and why the USA as established leader and Japan as early catch-up leader become losers, whereas China and Korea as fast followers become winners? Although the Asian catch-up model of world-class university development, high-stakes institutional competitions and targeted funding with STEM priorities contributed to their rapid growth of research productivity and rankings, it reveals major limitations and problems. Drawing cross-national lessons and implications, we discuss new directions of higher education policies and global university ranking measures. Keywords Higher education · University rankings · World-class universities · Accountability · Research productivity Growing competition in the new global knowledge-based economy is accompanied by an international brain race in higher education, particularly in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields. In the midst of an international brain race, global university rankings became more visible and affected government policies in higher education (Hazelkorn 2015). Particularly, policymakers in China, Japan, and South Korea (Korea in short hereafter), where
B
Jaekyung Lee [email protected]
1
Graduate School of Education, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260, USA
2
School of Public Finance and Public Administration, Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics, Nanchang, China
3
Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
123
J. Lee et al.
their research universities were viewed as key driving forces of economic development, focused on improving the performance of their higher education systems as measured by international university rankings such as the Times Higher Education (THE), the QS World University Rankings (QS), and the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU). Using American or other Western top-tier research universities as benchmarks, those Asian countries made strategic investment in higher education with STEM priorities toward the goal of building or
Data Loading...
