Global Rankings and the Geopolitics in Education Markets

• In Event: 46.017 - University Rankings and the Politics of Higher Education

Abstract

This paper considers two dimensions of geo-political competition in educational markets as it relates to global rankings. Competition in higher education has been heightened because of recent policy emphasis given to higher education as a source national prosperity. For example, higher education is considered to be an important policy lever for economic growth and competiveness in developing countries (World Bank, 2000), the European Union (European Parliament, 2000), and United States (Augustine, 2005). In each case, a high performing higher education system is considered to be an important ingredient for economic competitiveness.
Global rankings facilitated credible comparison of universities on a global basis. The advent of global rankings kicked off/reinforced global level competition in educational markets and helped to cement the place of higher education in national economic and political strategies. Hosting a world class university is considered a near-essential element for competitiveness among modern nation states and a wide range of countries have enacted policies to develop “world class” institutions (Salmi, 2009). Despite what have been in some cases significant investments, Anglo-American, and especially U.S., universities dominate the rankings. For many countries inroads into world class status vis-à-vis rankings has been mixed at best.
Through scholarly analysis in the tradition of critical political economy (Frieden and Lake, 2000), this paper will critically analyse the implications for equity and justice that follow global rankings competition along two dimensions. The first dimension is direct rankings competition. Countries such as Russia and China, have invested heavy in world-class university initiatives as a means of competing in the global higher education market. Such efforts have not disrupted the basic global hierarchy but have raised questions about increased inequality in the sector and the extent to which world-class initiatives benefit the citizens of those countries. In other words, competition for world class status between systems may increase within-system stratification, with implications for equity and the common good.
The second dimension of competition is related to the well-known complaints about the methods used to determine ranking positions. Put in more critical terms, rankings present questions about whose languages, knowledge, and academic traditions count as contributing to world-class status (Deem, Lucas, and Mok, 2009). These questions have been considered at length in the scholarly literature but have had only limited effect in terms of policy and ranking efforts. One exception is the European Commission supported U-Multirank, which is an attempt to create a multi-dimension ranking alternative to unipolar rankings, and, presumably, to improve the perceived position of European universities relative to their North American rivals. Yet such efforts are largely at the margins of the rankings game and have been taken up primarily in Europe and not in developing countries who are most disadvantaged by the current ranking system. This dimension highlights asymmetries in power not only to perform in existing ranking systems but also suggests that the ability to challenge existing rankings is out of reach for most states.

Background: Brendan Cantwell is an assistant professor of higher, adult, and lifelong education at Michigan State University.

Author

• Brendan Cantwell, Michigan State University