qocsuing: Shanghai Ranking 2023

qocsuing

Shanghai Ranking 2023

Like all rankings, the so-called "Shanghai Ranking", which compares universities around the world, provokes contradictory reactions. When the French champions do badly, it is seen as a sign of downgrading; when they do well, the ranking itself is criticised. The return of the French university of Paris-Saclay to the top 15 of the world's 1,000 institutions in this year's edition, drawn up by a Chinese consultancy and published on 15 August, is no exception. On the face of it, it's good news for French higher education, as Paris-Saclay is now the world's leading non-US or UK university, behind Harvard in the US and Cambridge in the UK.To get more shanghai news, you can visit citynewsservice.cn official website.
But this apparent success raises more questions than it answers about the real state of French higher education. Admittedly, the rise of the Chinese list, created in 2003, has contributed to a much-needed awareness of the French system's place in a competitive international environment. But the annual hit parade focuses solely on the number of Nobel prizes and publications in the 'hard' sciences, and curiously ignores the quality of teaching, student success rates and career prospects. Under the pretext of "excellence", the six criteria that determine the ranking have reinforced a restrictive standard that doesn't take into account the respect for academic freedom that Chinese policy dictates.

It's not surprising that over the last 20 years, French politicians have been seduced by the Shanghai ranking, to the point of making it the key to reorganising higher education. The principle of "getting bigger in order to be seen" (in international rankings) has served as a watchword, with some success, to be sure. In 2003, there were no French institutions in the top 50; today there are three. Paris-Saclay is the result of the merger of one university, four grandes écoles and seven research organisations, representing 13% of French research.

But this deliberate policy of forced mergers, backed by substantial financial support, has only made the operation of the new institutions more cumbersome. Above all, the need to achieve critical mass at all costs and to promote excellence has only served to obscure the unresolved questions that plague French higher education. How can we improve the quality of teaching and the chances of success for as many people as possible? What about the dualism between universities and grandes écoles? What sources of funding are needed to prevent universities from becoming impoverished? How can we prevent researchers, whose working conditions are becoming increasingly difficult, from leaving the sector? And above all, what role should universities play in the creation of knowledge in a changing country and world?

The obsession with the Shanghai ranking list, whose role in promoting Chinese standards is becoming more and more obvious, certainly cannot answer these serious questions. Of course, higher education in France, as in other countries, must be seen as an important instrument of soft power. But the objective of international competitiveness cannot be a substitute for a higher education policy that is absent from debates and decisions when it should be a priority.