Universities shouldn’t run schools too much around the rankings

　　According to media reports, the world higher education research institution QS (Quacquarelli Symonds) recently released the latest world university rankings, with a total of 1,300 colleges and universities on the list. For the first time, a Chinese university ranked among the top 20.

This is regarded by some as a new milestone in the construction of Chinese universities.

However, public opinion did not show excessive excitement about the rankings.

Under the long-term bombardment and impact of various university rankings, the society has been able to treat China's university rankings more rationally and objectively. In contrast, many domestic universities have always maintained a high degree of interest and attention.

　　In recent years, Chinese universities have improved their rankings in the world university rankings, and their performance is relatively eye-catching. This has a certain relationship with the index system adopted by the rankings themselves.

Take the QS university rankings as an example, there are 6 main indicators, of which academic indicators account for 60%, and other indicators on teachers and students are also quantitative indicators.

Obviously, if a university pays close attention to academic research and uses the number of published international papers as an important indicator for assessing teachers, it will naturally quickly push up its ranking on the rankings.

The problem is that an increase in rankings does not mean an increase in the strength of running a school, and even one-sided pursuit of rankings will affect the effectiveness of the school.

On the one hand, this will lead to the problem of over-emphasizing academic research and ignoring talent training. Teachers spend more energy on academic research that can improve evaluation indicators, and are unwilling to invest in teaching that is not related to indicators.

The education department has repeatedly asked colleges and universities to attach importance to undergraduate education and set up a system for professors to teach undergraduates, but so far, it is hard to say that this system has actually been established.

This will seriously affect the quality of talent training, and it will be difficult to attract high-quality students.

　　On the other hand, academic research is eager for quick success, and teachers' energy is directed to the pursuit of high-impact papers.

The problem of emphasizing the publication of papers and neglecting the paper itself, that is, the importance of the publication grade of the paper exceeds the attention to the innovative value of the paper itself, which is common in domestic universities.

Due to the over-emphasis on paper data, including paper citation rate data, it has spawned academic misconducts such as writing papers, buying and selling papers, academic fraud, false citations, and forged peer reviews.

Last year, in a ranking of world universities, the ranking of mathematics majors of a local university in China unexpectedly surpassed that of a prestigious university. This caused an uproar in the public, which also made more people recognize the "rules of the game" in university rankings.

　　Although many university administrators have publicly stated that they should not place too much emphasis on the rankings, let alone run schools around university rankings.

However, the fact is that, in view of the obvious benefits such as the appreciation of school reputation brought by the rankings, some schools choose to directly copy the rankings indicators and assign them to teachers level by level, and use them as assessment teachers. index.

At present, the theories of "thesis only", "only awards", and "only hats" existing in the running of universities in our country all originate from this, and pay too much attention to explicit indicators and quantitative evaluation.

　　To advance the reform of education evaluation that eliminates "thesis-only" and so on, so that colleges and universities can get rid of the tendency of running schools for quick success and quick benefits, steadily do first-class research, and steadily cultivate first-class talents, it is necessary to look down on the university rankings and speed up their disenchantment.

The ranking is nothing more than a ranking obtained by some institutions based on their own perceptions of the university by setting indicators and performing quantitative evaluations. It has its own limitations.

Moreover, it is difficult to reflect the unquantifiable but very important university traditions, cultural connotations, and spiritual temperament.

Therefore, even if the ranking is a reference for universities, its role is very limited.

　　Universities should not be built as "universities in the rankings", but should pay attention to the construction of their connotations.

This is especially true for building a first-class university. It is necessary to devote itself to developing the characteristics of Chinese universities, focusing on cultivating first-class talents, and making the latter a top priority.

(Author: Xiong Bingqi, Dean of the 21st Century Education Research Institute)