Brazil leads Times Higher Education’s debut ranking of the top universities in Latin America
——————————————————————————–
Brazil is the top performer in a new pilot Times Higher Education ranking of the best universities in Latin America.
The country claims half the top 10 places – with the University of São Paulo and the State University of Campinas in first and second place, respectively – and a total of 23 positions in the 50-strong list, more than any other country.
Chile is the second most-represented nation;led by the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile(in third position) and the University of Chile (fourth), it takes more than a fifth of places (a total of 11). Mexico also has two representatives in the top 10 – the Monterrey Institute of Technology and Higher Education (eighth) and the National Autonomous University of Mexico (ninth) – and eight altogether.
The top 10 is completed by the University of the Andes, Colombia.
The ranking reveals a more diverse higher education playing field in the region than is visible at the worldwide level, with seven countries featuring in the list.
– Rankings data collection depends on institutions’ cooperation
– Chance for Latin American higher education to shine
Carolina Guzmán-Valenzuela, researcher at the Centre for Advanced Research in Education at the University of Chile, said that Brazil’s success in the ranking reflects its high research outputs, high production of patents, and high research and development spending as a proportion of gross domestic product (1.15 per cent) compared with its regional neighbours, such as Mexico (0.426 per cent) and Chile (0.363 per cent).
Javier Botero Álvarez, who leads the World Bank’s tertiary education portfolio for Latin America, added that Brazil’s public universities have two attributes that enable them to excel within the region: large amounts of funding from the state and selective student recruitment.
However, he said, growing student numbers without an equivalent rise in funding has been “an issue” for universities across the region “for some years”.
– Universities in Latin America must join the global current
– Latin America should make a virtue of its diversity
“The amount of money universities receive per student is still low” compared with countries in other parts of the world, he said.
But despite this challenge, he predicted that institutions in Brazil, Chile, Mexico and Colombia will get “better and better” and claim more places in world rankings in the coming years.
The THE Latin America University Rankings use the same 13 performance indicators as the World University Rankings. However, there is less weight placed on citations as the research output threshold for eligible institutions was lowered from 1,000 to 500 papers over a five-year period to reflect lower publication volumes in the region.
Claim a free copy of the Latin America University Rankings digital supplement
Latin America University Rankings 2016: top 10
2016 Latin America rank | World University Rank 2015-16 | Institution | Country |
1 | 201–250 | University of São Paulo | Brazil |
2 | 351–400 | State University of Campinas | Brazil |
3 | 401–500 | Pontifical Catholic University of Chile | Chile |
4 | 501–600 | University of Chile | Chile |
5 | 501–600 | Federal University of Rio de Janeiro | Brazil |
6 | 501–600 | Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio) | Brazil |
7 | 601–800 | Federal University of Minas Gerais | Brazil |
8 | 501–600 | Monterrey Institute of Technology and Higher Education | Mexico |
9 | 401–500 | National Autonomous University of Mexico | Mexico |
10 | 501–600 | University of the Andes, Colombia | Colombia |
Browse the full list of the top 50 institutions in this year’s rankings
What Latin America needs for rankings and development success
Jack Grove assesses the challenges posed by the region’s burgeoning student population and rapidly expanding higher education sector
With Latin America’s population set to rise by a quarter to 780 million people by 2050, higher education remains a priority for many of the region’s states.
Keen to maximise the potential of their youthful, ambitious and increasingly urbanised citizens, governments are driving forward with bold plans to expand university access, improve research quality and build links between industry and academia.
But what are the major challenges faced by Latin America as it seeks to build on 30 years of dizzying growth in student numbers and unprecedented sector change?
Meeting burgeoning demand for higher education in the face of economic instability – caused by the slump in gas and oil prices – is arguably the most pressing issue, says J. Salvador Peralta, associate professor and chair at the University of West Georgia’s department of political science, who researches Latin America’s higher education policies.
Venezuela’s extreme dependence on oil revenues – about half of state funds come from natural resources – makes it the most glaring example of this bind, says Peralta.
Some 80 per cent of eligible young people were enrolled in tertiary education in the leftist state until recently, up from about 30 per cent in 2000, the latest Unesco figures suggest.
“Given Venezuela’s constitutional commitment to provide free higher education for all, its current economic crisis is having a very detrimental impact on its ability to maintain that commitment,” Peralta says.
Brazil’s oil-led economic woes have also led to dramatic declines in higher education spending, with the region’s largest economy set to contract at least for the next few years, economists believe. That compares with the trebling of education funding to 94 billion reais (£18.5 billion) between 2003 and 2012, with higher education cash doubling to 28 billion reais (£5.5 billion) over the same period, he says.
“The country’s budget deficits will ensure that higher education funding declines, with more private providers entering the market to supply an increase in demand,” says Peralta.
Other oil-rich states, such as Mexico, and mineral-dependent economies, such as Chile, have also suffered since the collapse in price of natural resources since mid-2014, and may emulate Brazil’s austerity measures, he adds.
However, the rise of for-profit providers has been one of the region’s big success stories, opening up higher education to millions of poorer students, many believe. Three-quarters of the 16,000 higher education institutions in Latin America are private, educating more than 50 per cent of its 24 million or so students – the highest proportion of any region in the world. In Brazil, there are roughly eight private providers for every one public provider (2,100 private, 287 public in 2012) compared with a 3:1 ratio back in the 1990s.
Keeping course quality and standards high with so many smaller private providers is a major challenge for the sector, particularly in the case of technical and vocational training, Peralta believes.
Others point to the need to ensure that Latin America’s elite universities keep pace with the excellence found elsewhere in the world, with just one institution – the University of São Paulo – making the top 300 of the Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2015‑16, in the 201-250 band.
As such, São Paulo tops our inaugural Latin America University Ranking, followed by Brazil’sState University of Campinas and Chile’s Pontifical Catholic University of Chile.
Almost half the top 50 is taken up by Brazilian universities (which claim a total of 23 places), with Chile filling 11 places and Mexico eight. Institutions from Colombia, Costa Rica, Peru and Venezuela also feature in the inaugural list, released at THE’s first Latin America Universities Summit, in Bogotá, Colombia, on 6-8 July.
So how does Latin America seek to raise the standing of its universities on the global stage?
Latin America University Rankings 2016: Publication rates across the continent
The University of São Paulo stands out for its publication record, while the rest of the continent’s universities form a long tail when publication rate is looked at in Scopus
Beyond the obvious point of funding, some believe that the problems with Latin America’s universities relate to the foundation of those institutions in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries.
With the continent of South America, as well as Mexico, importing a Spanish model – highly influenced by the French – many elite universities have developed their courses along the “Napoleonic” tradition of higher education, based on training professionals rather than fostering broader scientific and scholarly enquiry, says Andrea Detmer, a former policy adviser at thePontifical Catholic University of Chile specialising in university-industry collaboration.
“In Latin America, we inherited from Spaniards and Portuguese the Napoleonic model, which is oriented to training professionals, and universities are state-controlled,” says Detmer, who is now a doctoral researcher at the UCL Institute of Education’s Centre for Global Higher Education. “In the Humboldtian model [found in Germany, the UK and the US], universities are oriented to science creation and, although they are state-dependent, an important value is academic autonomy,” she adds.
With little change to the Napoleonic model over the years, “long degree programmes based on traditional disciplines are still dominant”, meaning that higher education is expensive to fund for students, families and the state, Detmer explains.
In short, it means that the high cost of higher education is borne by the state or by the individual, she says.
“Some countries are strongly state-funded; others, like Chile, have an extremely privatised system, where some of the higher fees in the world are charged in state and privately owned institutions,” explains Detmer, who says that this has sparked a revival in the student movement in protest against exorbitant tuition fees.
Various governments need to increase the “extremely low level of research and development” spending in the region, Detmer adds, because this is “fundamental for the region’s long-term economic progress”.
“Industrial fabrics require more complexity and added value, through innovation, to counter-balance potentially reduced national incomes of natural resources-based economies,” she says.
“Universities can play an important role in boosting technological innovation, but research and development seems to be forgotten in the political agendas, with stagnated budgets and a private sector quite averse to innovation,” she explains.
Many commentators might add that Latin America’s universities also need to raise their research game, with less than 2 per cent of its 4,000 or so universities (two-thirds of which are private) publishing any research in internationally recognised journals between 2006 and 2010, according to an Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development working paper, “The rationale for higher education investment in Ibero-America”, released in August 2013.
As such, most higher education institutions are teaching-only, while others produce an “incipient or very low” level of research, the OECD paper says.
With university leaders, policymakers and higher education experts gathering at the THE summit in Bogotá, attention turns to the issue of rankings – in particular how to assess the merits of institutions in both a global and a regional context.
Thus the release of THE’s assessment of the region’s top institutions will start a consultation on how a future bespoke rankings for Latin America might be compiled.
This, in Detmer’s eyes, remains a key challenge for the region, which lacks good information that could help to inform policy across the entire continent and help to strengthen the area’s higher education system as a whole.
“We don’t have a Latin American Union and…only a couple of countries are OECD members, while some few others participate in their main studies,” Detmer says.
“Certainly not all are receptive to collaborations with the World Bank or the Inter-American Development Bank,” she says, adding that this “deficient comparable information limits research and policymaking with a regional view”.
With a free and frank exchange on what data should be used and how, the Latin America summit promises to provide an invaluable forum to hammer out just how policies and rankings to improve the region’s higher education sector might be achieved.
Latin America University Rankings 2016 methodology
This pilot ranking is calculated with the same performance indicators used for the World University Rankings, with data adjusted to reflect the region’s priorities
The Times Higher Education World University Rankings are the only global performance tables that judge research-intensive universities across all their core missions: teaching, research, knowledge transfer and international outlook. The pilot Latin America University Ranking uses the same 13 carefully calibrated performance indicators to provide the most comprehensive and balanced comparisons, trusted by students, academics, university leaders, industry and governments – but the weightings have been specially recalibrated, based on feedback, to reflect the priorities of Latin American institutions.
The performance indicators are grouped into five areas:
- Teaching (the learning environment)
- Research (volume, income and reputation)
- Citations (research influence)
- International outlook (staff, students and research)
- Industry income (knowledge transfer)
Exclusions
Universities are excluded from the Latin America University Rankings if they do not teach undergraduates or if their research output amounted to fewer than 500 papers in total between 2010 and 2014.
Data collection
Institutions provide and sign off their institutional data for use in the rankings. On the rare occasions when a particular data point is not provided – which affects only low-weighted indicators such as industrial income – we enter a low estimate between the average value of the indicators and the lowest value reported: the 25th percentile of the other indicators. By doing this, we avoid penalising an institution too harshly with a “zero” value for data that it overlooks or does not provide but we do not reward it for withholding them.
Getting to the final result
Moving from a series of specific data points to indicators, and finally to a total score for an institution, requires us to match values that represent fundamentally different data. To do this, we use a standardisation approach for each indicator and then combine the indicators in the proportions indicated to the right.
The standardisation approach we use is based on the distribution of data within a particular indicator, where we calculate a cumulative probability function and evaluate where a particular institution’s indicator sits within that function. A cumulative probability score of X, in essence, tells us that a university with random values for that indicator would fall below that score X per cent of the time.
For all indicators, except for the Academic Reputation Survey, we calculate the cumulative probability function using a version of Z-scoring. The Academic Reputation Survey was treated as a rank-size distribution.
Teaching (the learning environment): 36%
- Reputation survey: 15%
The Academic Reputation Survey (run annually) that underpins this category was carried out between January and March 2016. It examined the perceived prestige of institutions in teaching. The responses were statistically representative of the global academy’s geographical and subject mix. - Staff-to-student ratio: 5%
- Doctorate-to-bachelor’s ratio: 5%
- Doctorates awarded to academic staff ratio: 5%
As well as giving a sense of how committed an institution is to nurturing the next generation of academics, a high proportion of postgraduate research students also suggests the provision of teaching at the highest level that is thus attractive to graduates and effective at developing them. This indicator is normalised to take account of a university’s unique subject mix, reflecting that the volume of doctoral awards varies by discipline. - Institutional income: 6%
This measure of income is scaled against staff numbers and normalised for purchasing-power parity. It indicates an institution’s general status and gives a broad sense of the infrastructure and facilities available to students and staff.
Research (volume, income and reputation): 34%
- Reputation survey: 18%
The most prominent indicator in this category looks at a university’s reputation for research excellence among its peers, based on the responses to our annual Academic Reputation Survey (see above). - Research income: 6%
Research income is scaled against staff numbers and adjusted for purchasing-power parity. This is a controversial indicator because it can be influenced by national policy and economic circumstances. But income is crucial to the development of world-class research, and because much of it is subject to competition and judged by peer review, our experts suggested that it was a valid measure. This indicator is fully normalised to take account of each university’s distinct subject profile, reflecting the fact that research grants in science subjects are often bigger than those awarded for the highest-quality social science, arts and humanities research. - Research productivity: 10%
We count the number of papers published in the academic journals indexed by Elsevier’s Scopus database per scholar, scaled for institutional size and normalised for subject. This gives a sense of the university’s ability to get papers published in quality peer-reviewed journals.
Citations (research influence): 20%
Our research influence indicator looks at universities’ role in spreading new knowledge and ideas.
We examine research influence by capturing the number of times a university’s published work is cited by scholars globally. This year, our bibliometric data supplier Elsevier examined more than 51 million citations to 11.3 million journal articles, published over five years. The data are drawn from the 23,000 academic journals indexed by Elsevier’s Scopus database and include all indexed journals published between 2010 and 2014. Citations to these papers made in the six years from 2010 to 2015 are also collected.
The citations help to show us how much each university is contributing to the sum of human knowledge: they tell us whose research has stood out, has been picked up and built on by other scholars and, most importantly, has been shared around the global scholarly community to expand the boundaries of our understanding, irrespective of discipline.
The data are fully normalised to reflect variations in citation volume between different subject areas. This means that institutions with high levels of research activity in subjects with traditionally high citation counts do not gain an unfair advantage.
This year we have removed the very small number of papers (649) with more than 1,000 authors from the citations indicator.
In previous years we have further normalised citation data within countries, with the aim of reducing the impact of measuring citations of English language publications. The change to Scopus as a data source has allowed us to reduce the level to which we do this. This year, we have blended equal measures of a country-adjusted and non-country-adjusted raw measure of citations scores. This reflects a more rigorous approach to international comparison of research publications.
International outlook (staff, students, research): 7.5%
- International-to-domestic-student ratio: 2.5%
- International-to-domestic-staff ratio: 2.5%
The ability of a university to attract undergraduates, postgraduates and faculty from all over the planet is key to its success on the world stage. - International collaboration: 2.5%
In the third international indicator, we calculate the proportion of a university’s total research journal publications that have at least one international co-author and reward higher volumes. This indicator is normalised to account for a university’s subject mix and uses the same five-year window as the “Citations: research influence” category.
Industry income (knowledge transfer): 2.5%
A university’s ability to help industry with innovations, inventions and consultancy has become a core mission of the contemporary global academy. This category seeks to capture such knowledge-transfer activity by looking at how much research income an institution earns from industry (adjusted for purchasing-power parity), scaled against the number of academic staff it employs.
The category suggests the extent to which businesses are willing to pay for research and a university’s ability to attract funding in the commercial marketplace – useful indicators of institutional
0 Comments