Ukraine’s Ostroh and Kyiv-Mohyla Academies refuse to take part in Top 200 Project
For three years running experts at UNESCO’s Chair in Technical Higher Education, Applied Systems Analysis and Informatics [established in 1999 at the National Technical University of Ukraine “Kyiv Polytechnic Institute” (NTUU “KPI”)] have been maintaining the “Top 200 Ukraine” list of this country’s most prestigious universities, whose updated rankings can regularly be found in the weekly Dzerkalo tyzhnia. Their findings have caused strong emotions in Ukrainian academic quarters, not because of the rank that certain universities are accorded but rather because of the ranking methodology and the competence of the experts involved.
Interestingly, this year Kyiv-Mohyla Academy (NaUKMA) has lashed out at the Project Top 200 (although it has been traditionally at the top of the list). The Day recently received a letter from NaUKMA President Serhii Kvit, which emphasizes the closed-door assessment procedures, and the fact that quantity appears to be the predominant assessment criterion: “Kyiv-Mohyla Academy is concerned with the deliberate simplification of assessment procedures of Ukrainian universities which are directly based on quantitative factors. This approach cannot be regarded as comprehensive; it provides no information regarding the most salient issues for Ukrainian society, namely about the level of academic institutions. Consequently, we request that those in charge of the Top 200 Project leave Kyiv-Mohyla Academy out of their rankings.”
The Day asked Serhii Kvit to elaborate, and also asked the rector of Ostroh Academy for comment (due to its repeated refusals to have anything to do with Top 200).
Serhii KVIT, president, National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy (NaUKMA):
“The more university rankings, the better, as they stimulate improvements in terms of university management, force the administration to revise their indices, and point out shortcomings. Towards the end of 2009, we tried to get in touch with the Top 200 leadership to ascertain their methods. Considering the way individual universities have moved up and down their list, it is only natural to ask why. How can a university be moved down or up by ten points within a year? They failed to clarify this point. In other words, their ranking procedures are closed to the public eye. They appear unable to explain the reason. There is no website that elucidates their methods. Instead, they refer to the ‘Berlin principles.’ These, incidentally, envisage transparent assessment procedures. In fact, openness is one of the underpinning principles of university performance in Western Europe. Top 200 organizers, in contrast, keep their procedures secret. This is something I can’t understand.
“We received their questionnaire with 15 questions. All of them focused on quantity: the number of PhD students, lecturers, doctorates written and adopted, and other academic achievements. This, of course, can be used to assess a university’s performance, but it is the quality which is of principal importance. This includes research and publications (even if biased to a degree), without which an overall assessment is impossible. Since they do not disclose their methodology, we are left with the impression that these rankings rely on the bigger-the-better principle. There are universities in Ukraine with 80,000 students. If I identified a single such university, you’d realize that it doesn’t meet the top quality academic requirements. However, the Top 200 ranking logic implies that this university would be at the top of the list. But such a number of students requires an adequate teaching staff, classrooms, computers, and so on.
“Therefore, we decided not to take part in this project, lest somebody who is incapable of giving straight answers to simple questions disparage our academy’s name. We can’t be involved in a project we don’t understand. There are other projects that employ transparent methods.”
Ihor PASICHNYK, rector, Ostroh Academy National University:
“We responded to this notorious ranking after it was first published by Dzerkalo tyzhnia in 2007. We sent a letter to the [Top 200] organizers and asked the DT editors to publish the letter. Not surprisingly, our letter never appeared in print. However, Den later carried OANU Vice Rector Petro Kraliuk’s substantial article about the Ukrainian higher schools’ ranking where he made it absolutely clear that the Top 200 methods didn’t correspond to Ukrainian realities. Nevertheless, the Top 200 list was published the following year. We forwarded a formal letter to the organizers, demanding that Ostroh Academy be left out of the list, yet we found ourselves on the list in 2009. My impression is that Top 200 Ukraine is yet another political project camouflaged as an international intellectual endeavor. Frankly speaking, I doubt that all those international experts who are allegedly assessing our universities are aware of being involved in the project.
“I want make a statement through The Day, that the Ostroh Academy refuses to take part in the Project Top 200 Ukraine. If we are listed again, we will have to sue the organizers.
“The ranking method uses only three post-secondary training criteria. How can you possibly assess the level of education using so few indicators? Academic level is the most important factor for Ukrainian institutions. I would also like to point out that our Ministry of Education and Science has come up with adequate ranking lists. I believe that they should keep up the good work.
“I agree with Dr. Kvit that over the years we have never met a single expert, consultant, or organizer from the Top 200 project. None have visited Ostroh Academy or contacted us to inquire about our statistics. All this leads me to believe that the whole thing is a political campaign project, and that it is easy to figure out who is paying for it.
“I admire the NaUKMA President’s principled stand, considering the fact that the Top 200 List has always placed Kyiv-Mohyla Academy near the top. Dr. Kvit, nevertheless, has critically assessed this ranking method and expressed his opinion. Ostroh Academy National University endorses it completely.”
