1 / 23

Ranking Web of Universities Visualization of the European academic web space

International colloquium "Ranking and Research Assessment in Higher Education“. 12-13 December 2007. Ranking Web of Universities Visualization of the European academic web space. Isidro F. Aguillo Cybermetrics Lab (CSIC), Madrid, Spain. About Us. CSIC, Spanish National Research Council

kare
Download Presentation

Ranking Web of Universities Visualization of the European academic web space

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. International colloquium "Ranking and Research Assessment in Higher Education“. 12-13 December 2007 Ranking Web of UniversitiesVisualization of the European academic web space Isidro F. Aguillo Cybermetrics Lab (CSIC), Madrid, Spain

  2. About Us • CSIC, Spanish National Research Council • The largest public research body in Spain • 126 institutes devoted mainly to basic science • 20% of the total annual Spanish scientific output • 2 Nobel Prizes • Cybermetrics Lab • Research group at Center of Scientific Information and Documentation • Editors of e-journal Cybermetrics • EU projects EICSTESandWISER • MAVIRnetwork • Consulting services to universities • Staff: Coordinator, 4 PhD, 1 technician

  3. “POLITICAL” Agenda Extended coverage Ranking Higher Education Institutions Worldwide Not only Universities from developing countries But also Universities in the Third World Covering all missions Not focusing only on Research Only a core of 200 (Van Raan) But also on Teaching and “Third Mission” Larger and more diverse audiences Increasing knowledge dissemination Web Publish or Perish Promoting Open Access initiatives

  4. DESIDERATA Complete scenario Many indicators Not only outputs but also inputs based Methodologically sound Multivariate non-parametric analysis Feasibility Problems with the data Availability (a few countries in EU & US, a few hundreds of universities) Comparability (lack of standards) Costs Single 7th FP project over 1.5 MEURO

  5. Web Presence • Web is the new scholarly communication tool • For formal results • Electronic journals, repositories (institutional, thematic, personal) • For informal activities • Teaching, community links, economic impact, institutional visibility • Reflecting intangibles • Web is the best showcase for University • Favoring mobility of professors and alumni • Reaching larger audiences at lower costs • Allowing better position for international competition for human resources and funding • Getting prestige and visibility in the digital world • At cheaper costs

  6. About the WEB Ranking Primary aim is not the League Table But promoting Open Access initiatives SensulatoUniversities as producers of all kind of knowledge It is intended a similar movement to the 80’s & 90’s Publish or Perish Current situation Webometrics ranking is offering larger coverage than other similar Rankings Including developing countries’ institutions Not focusing only on research results Overall activity, visibility, impact, prestige, and quality is better reflected in the Web presence Showing interesting results Web Bad Practices Academic Digital Divide

  7. bUILDING THE MODEL Existing methods Google PageRank (link visibility based) Impact Factor, ratio 1:1 between impact and activity Indicator WR Search engines as universal web intermediaries Institution with independent web domain as unit Activity accounted by volume of web pages, number of documents in in rich files formats and papers in Scholar database Impact measured by the number of external inlinks Combining the 4 components with weights according the model Ranking the results

  8. World Rankings • Webometrics Rank • First published in 2004. From 2006, two editions (January and July) • Higher education Institutions (mostly universities): +15,000 (Jan’08) • R&D related institutions (mostly research centers): +4,800 (Jan’08)

  9. Expected Results • North America • Stanford University (1st region & world), MIT (2nd), University of California, Berkeley (3th) and Harvard University (4th) • University of Toronto (28th world) • Europe • Cambridge (1st region), Oxford (2nd), ETH Zurich (3rd) • Asia/Pacific • Tokyo (59th world), National Taiwan (96th), Kyoto (116th) and Beijing (120th) universities • Australian National (60th), New South Wales (112th) • Latin America • Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (68th world) • Universidade de Sao Paulo (128th world)

  10. Unexpected Results • Up • Pennsylvania State University (5th world) • CiteSeer, index of computer and information science papers • University of Wisconsin, Madison (8th world) • Internet Scout Project • Linkoping University (8th Europe, 62nd world) • Lysator, the Academic Computer Society • Universitat Trier (9th Europe, 64th world) • DBLP, Computer Science Bibliography • Down • Cornell University (7th world) • Arxiv (www.arxiv.org, not under cornell.edu) • Yale University (35th world) • Princeton University (38th world) • California Institute of Technology (42th world) • Jet Propulsion Laboratory (jpl.nasa.gov, not under caltech.edu) • Johns Hopkins University (72th world) • School of Medicine (hopkinsmedicine.org, not under jhu.edu)

  11. ComparATIVE ANALYSIS (I)

  12. ComparATIVE ANALYSIS (II)

  13. MAJOR DISCREPANCIES Bad practices in web domain naming Universities with two (or three) domains Recent domain change or not fully completed Significant parts of the web contents under different domain or shared with external ones Biomedicine bias Linguistic bias Academic Digital Divide

  14. Bad practices

  15. BIOMEDICINE BIAS

  16. LANGUAGE BIAS

  17. UNIVERSITIES BY COUNTRY Top 200 universities in the Webometrics Ranking (July 2007)

  18. Academic Digital divide

  19. eUROPEAN ACADEMIC WEBSPACE

  20. MOSTLY NATIONAL LINKS

  21. Lessons Webometrics is the only academic ranking that provides indicators for universities worldwide and not only the World- Class ones Information provided could be useful to increase the commitment to electronic publication, guiding the Web policies and therefore improving Web presence and visibility Web rank is probably highly related to the global level of activities, prestige and overall performance of the university Web indicators are not able to discriminate relative contributions but they are a reliable and feasible way to describe the full picture Results shown that there is an unexpected academic digital divide as top European and Japanese universities appear in delayed positions when comparing with their North American counterparts EU advantage is not showed in the link analysis as the academic webspace consists of mainly national groups

  22. Thank You!¿Questions?Isidro F. Aguillo, José L. Ortega, Mario FernándezCybermetrics LabCINDOC-CSICJoaquín Costa, 2228002 MadridSpain www.webometrics.infoE-Mail: isidro@cindoc.csic.es

More Related