Search

Algeria has paid attention to the higher education and scientific research sector through the five-year scientific research and technological development programs (1998-2002, 2008-2012, and 2014-2019). The study aims to evaluate the scientific research activities in Algerian universities within the framework of scientific research programs, to study the relationship of scientific activities by researchers in Algerian research laboratories with Webometrics ranking of Algerian universities. It is eluted what are the scientific activities of Algerian researchers which have the most impact on the ranking of Algerian universities in the Webometrics ranking. We adopted the experimental, exploratory approach by collecting, exploring, and analyzing the correlation between of data from the Algerian university rankings according to the number of researchers in the research laboratories, the number of citations, the number of patents, published papers, and the ranking of each Algerian university in Webometrics ranking, by Spearman’s correlation coefficient to test the strength and signification of the correlation between these rankings. The results showed development in the various components of scientific, material, human and financial research, but it is not enough. Also, despite many research laboratories, researchers at these laboratories, and the improvement in the number of internationally published research in each Algerian university, this did not contribute to improving its global Webometrics ranking due to the weakness of the relationship with activities of researchers in Algerian research laboratories. The result showed that the Algerian university is not interested in its virtual presence on the web, which negatively affected its Webometrics ranking. The researchers conclude that to improve the ranks of Algerian universities in various aspects, they must improve their global ranking according to the number of citations. Accordingly, to improve the ranking, international visibility of Algerian universities, decision-makers must adopt indicators of ‘research quality’ (number of citations), ‘research production’ (publications) in financing and accrediting research laboratories.

This paper critically analyses the effects of predatory publishing as a major contributor to misinformation and disinformation amongst academicians and learners in developing countries. The paper notes that predatory publishing poses a major hindrance in the struggles to enhance academic excellence. This paper established that predatory publishing has great consequences in the spread of misinformation and disinformation amongst academicians and Learners in Developing Countries. Some of the reasons that necessitate the increase in predatory publishing in developing countries are; the lack of proper policies or guidance on where research articles should or should not be published, the failure to embrace open access initiatives for visibility and dissemination of research outputs so as to discourage academic malpractice and unethical behaviors, lack of funds, poor or limited information literacy among other factors. The paper is unique in that it comprehensively analyses the concept of predatory journals with misinformation and disinformation in academic circles in the developing world, putting into consideration that most academic staff or researchers assume that whatever is on the web is genuine and absolute true information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ranking of universities regarding their web-based activities plays a pivotal role in promoting scientific advancement since it motivates the open access accessibility to scientific results. In this study, a new ranking system based on the website quality factors and traffic evaluation was proposed. Since top-ranked universities are usually considered as the standard models for lower ranked ones, the focus of this study was on top-ranked universities. The proposed ranking was compared with well-known Webometrics ranking system. The website traffic and quality assessment were acquired for websites of top-ranked world universities and the correlation between these indices and the Webometrics ranking was evaluated. The summation of the weighted value of obtained measures according to an optimal weight vector obtained by a genetic algorithm framework was used for ranking purposes. The results showed that the website total traffic size was correlated with Webometrics rank (R ≈ - 0.6, p < 0.01). Also, using the weighted value of website quality and traffic measures, the proposed ranking system could predict Webometrics ranking by the accuracy of up to 69%. Even though the method was proposed for universities, it could be applied for ranking other types of centers or companies, provided that the suitable cost function for the genetics algorithm framework was defined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Being a “window on the world”, the official website of an educational institution is among the most important means of promoting its activities, thus increasing its competitive advantage in the market for educational services. Providing a framework for efficient marketing, the functioning of the official website of a higher educational establishment represents a format of public relations, the outcomes of which depend heavily upon numerous factors. Presenting unbiased assessment of a university’s image formalised in terms of officially approved procedures is crucial for winning a respective market share. The Webometrics Ranking of World Universities (also known as Ranking Web of Universities) represents validated data that must not be overlooked by both website administrators and those interested in evaluating a university’s image. Though taken with a great deal of scepticism by some universities, webometrics ranking nevertheless can make the difference when it goes about sprucing up a university’s image and successful appealing to its target audience. The research work considers the issue of representing global rankings of educational institutions on their official websites as an element of marketing policies devised with the view of gaining a competitive advantage in the global educational space. It is highlighted that university ranks are based on applying diverse criteria and indicators as well as measuring respective values. Criticised are dishonest practices of providing false information aimed at increasing ranks of some educational establishments. The measuring indicators (availability, visibility, transparency (or openness), and excellence (or scientific character)) are analysed based on cybermetric data of research findings obtained by bibliometric methods. The authors elaborated a set of recommendations as for increasing the efficiency of university website functioning. The key point is to comprehensively select, verify, present and expand contents of a website. It is highlighted that information on the official website of a higher educational establishment should reflect the whole range of educational, scientific research and administrative activities carried out by the academic staff and students. Blended together, they represent the business reputation of the university, which includes its reputation, prestige, partnering relationships, business contacts etc. The authors share their experience in implementing the above measures at Vinnytsia Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi State Pedagogical University.

The aim of this study is to assess the current ranking of Kuwait University in the ranking of international universities compared to Arab and international universities. We can summarize the problem of the study in the following key question: How Kuwait University can achieve the criteria for international rankings of universities? To answer this question, first we discuss the international rankings of universities, and then we analyze the status of Kuwait University in these rankings -and its ranking compared to Arab universities- while discussing its strengths and weaknesses. The results of the study show that the ranking of Kuwait University is low and sometimes it was not included in these global rankings. Accordingly, the study recommends adopting practical mechanisms to enhance the ranking of Kuwait University by working on the implementation of international ranking standards, which will require dedicated funding and strong determination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Indexes in scientometrics are based on citations. However, in contrast to the journal impact factor, which gives only the ranking of the scientific journals, ordered by impact factor, indexes in scientometrics are suitable for ranking of scientists, scientific journals and countries. In this paper the h-index, h5-index, the World ranking the top of 25 Highly Cited Researchers (h > 100) and the ranking of 25 scientists in Hungarian Institutions according to their Google Scholar Citations public profiles are considered. These indexes (h5-index) are applied for making of the list of top 20 publications (journals and proceedings) in the field of Robotics. The World ranking is done of the best 50 countries according to h-index in year 2014. Data are obtained from the portal Scimago.

Indexes in scientometrics are based on citations. However, in contrast to the journal impact factor, which gives only the ranking of the scientific journals, ordered by impact factor, indexes in scientometrics are suitable for ranking of scientists, scientific journals and countries. In this paper the h-index, h5-index, the World ranking the top of 25 Highly Cited Researchers (h > 100) and the ranking of 25 scientists in Hungarian Institutions according to their Google Scholar Citations public profiles are considered. These indexes (h5-index) are applied for making of the list of top 20 publications (journals and proceedings) in the field of Robotics. The World ranking is done of the best 50 countries according to h-index in year 2014. Data are obtained from the portal Scimago. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are a variety of ranking systems for universities throughout the different continents of the world. The majority of the world ranking systems have paid special attention toward evaluation of universities and higher education institutions at the national and international level This paper tries to study the similarities and status of top Asian universities in the list of top 200 universities by these world ranking systems. Findings show that there are some parallelisms among these international rankings. For example it was found some correlations between QS-Webometrics rankings (R= 0.78); QS-THE rankings (R= 0.53); and Shanghai-HEEACT rankings (R= 0.58). The highest correlation rate belongs to QS-Webometrics (R=0.78). The findings show no evidence to prove that the origin country of ranking system has any bias toward the rank of universities of its own country among other countries. For instance QS ranking of the United States classifies many universities of China and Japan as top Asian universities. HEEACT Ranking System of Taiwan includes just one university of Taiwan in the high ranking category (as other rankings do). Shanghai Ranking of China assigns a lower grade to universities of China and Hong Kong in comparison with QS ranking of the USA. Finally, some suggestions are made to improve the benefits of the ranking systems in order to promote the situation of higher education in the world, and recommendations for combining the indicators of these ranking systems to have a more comprehensive one for the world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recently there is increasing interest in university rankings. Annual rankings of world universities are published by QS for the Times Higher Education Supplement, the Shanghai Jiao Tong University, the Higher Education and Accreditation Council of Taiwan and rankings based on Web visibility by the Cybermetrics Lab at CSIC. In this paper we compare the rankings using a set of similarity measures. For the rankings that are being published for a number of years we also examine longitudinal patterns. The rankings limited to European universities are compared to the ranking of the Centre for Science and Technology Studies at Leiden University. The findings show that there are reasonable similarities between the rankings, even though each applies a different methodology. The biggest differences are between the rankings provided by the QS-Times Higher Education Supplement and the Ranking Web of the CSIC Cybermetrics Lab. The highest similarities were observed between the Taiwanese and the Leiden rankings from European universities. Overall the similarities are increased when the comparison is limited to the European universities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]