Reflection And Optimization On The Process Of University Ranking

The university ranking is a kind of social phenomenon that attracted extensive attention of the society. However, people pay more attention on the results or structure of university ranking, rather than ranking process. It is unreasonable, because ranking result depends on the structure of the ranking, and the ranking structure comes from ranking process. Therefore, we must strengthen the research on ranking process.To clarify the concept of university ranking is vital in the research of university ranking process. The reason is that the design of university ranking is always based on the designers’understanding of the concept itself. From philosophical perspective, university ranking is a relative university evaluation. As an evaluation, the object of university ranking is not university itself, but the value of the university, which means the universities, as value object, whether meet the higher education needs of value subject. As a relative evaluation, task of university ranking is to compare the value of different universities.As an evaluation activity, there is an inherent logic in university ranking. In this logic, it is crucial to definite the value subject and their higher education needs. However, due to different reasons, the ranking is often difficult to accurately reflect the higher education needs of value subject. Furthermore, it is also difficult to correctly handle the relationship between the variety needs of value subject in higher education. This is the problem in the university ranking inherent logic.As an evaluation activity, the process of university ranking should involve two tasks:inquiring the higher education needs of the target groups and clarifying the unreasonable demands of target user groups for higher education. In the context of diversification of higher education values, the conductors should coordinate the demands of different target groups or sub-groups. However, in real process of university ranking, the conductors did not do it, which is contrary to the nature of university ranking itself and inconsistent with the ranking’s social background. In addition, the actual impact of university ranking is diverse cnce university ranking is released, the target groups and non-target groups will utilize it as a reference standard. According to this feature, the demands for higher education of target groups and non-target groups should be taken into account, when the conductors design the university ranking. But in the real process of ranking, designers have not try to inquire, clarify and coordinate higher education needs of these groups, which has resulted in conflicting phenomenon between the ranking process and its actual impact.Dialogue is a realistic choice to solve so many problems in the process of university ranking. First, as an unrestricted communication process, dialogue have a lot of functions, such as reducing bounded rationality, revealing private information, educating and self-educating and resolving conflicts and differences. These functions of dialogue make the problems, emerging in the process of university ranking, be solved pertinently. Second, Theory of communicative action and deliberative democracy theory, social issues-oriented evaluation theory and higher education product theory provides a theoretical basis for the introduction of the dialogue in the design process of university rankings respectively from the perspective of philosophy, political science, evaluation, and education economics. Third, the establishment and the development of market economy, the emergence and spread of the Internet, and cultural tradition provide premise condition, technology support and culture foundation.Therefore, what is the process of university ranking should be like after introducing the method of dialogue? From the experience of deliberative democracy practice, the fourth generation evaluation process and the European multi-dimensional global university ranking practice, the basic process of university ranking should be like this:to determine the ranking purposes-to decide participants in the dialogue-to select evaluation perspective-to select the evaluation horizon-to construct the ranking index system-to distribute index weight-to establish evaluation criteria. In the process, first, the dialogue, as the basic mechanism, is included from the beginning of selecting evaluation perspective. Second, each step of discussions is a bargaining process and trying divergence to consensus. At each step, the extensive discussions are carried out by all higher education stakeholders through the unity of the Internet and other means, and then transit to a deep face-to-face communication on behalf of the various stakeholder groups. Thirdly, in the process of dialogue, the designers should follow seven principles, that are inclusiveness, fair and honest, equality and respect, excitation, ability, feasibility, and openness. And the stakeholders of higher education should comply with five rules, that are equality, obligations, rationality, intelligibility and authenticity.