Almost two-thirds of higher level institutions say they have taken strategic or academic decisions in response to the results of so-called "league tables", new research indicates.
This is despite concerns about the methodology employed in compiling national and international rankings of institutions, which the study finds are also having an increasing influence on government, industry and research funding.
The data, compiled in association with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), shows about half of the institutions surveyed said they use a favourable position in league tables in their marketing material. There was a strong perception that benefits flow from a "high" ranking in tables such as those compiled by the Times Higher Educationsupplement, the Financial Timesand the US News and World Report.
But the study notes that the basis upon which these rankings are compiled and the response to them can have significant implications for diversity within institutions, as they often compare institutions which have very different goals. Another problem is that they often favour research-intensive institutions and the sciences over humanities.
This in turn is contributing to a growing gap between "elite" and "mass" education, as some institutions become less likely to seek to cater to students from "non traditional" backgrounds, the report argues. As a result, it says such tables should be developed by independent research organisations rather than media and commercial organisations.
The research, to be presented at an international conference on the future of higher education hosted by the Dublin Institute of Technology which opened last night, surveyed 202 higher education institutions in 41 countries. Five Irish universities or institutes of technology were included in the survey.
It found that 63 per cent of institutions said they had taken strategic, organisational, managerial or academic decisions in response to league table results. A large majority, 83 per cent, also felt such rankings favour established universities as against newer institutions.
Fifty six per cent said they have a formal mechanism for reviewing their performance in rankings, usually led by the vice- chancellor, president or rector of the institution in question.
Interestingly, 57 per cent said the impact of rankings has been positive on their institution's reputation, although 58 per cent said they were not happy with their current institutional ranking.
Almost 75 per cent said league tables provide useful comparative information. But the measures utilised should include teaching quality, employment of graduates and research, respondents noted.
The research was conducted by Dr Ellen Hazelkorn of Dublin Institute of Technology. It is due to be published in an OECD journal and will be presented to the conference on Wednesday.