International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 8, Issue 5 (May 2021), Pages: 130-134

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

 Title: Deducing dimensions of quality education among the world’s top universities

 Author(s): Helen B. Boholano 1, *, Lelani C. Dapat 1, Monique E. Cordova 2

 Affiliation(s):

 1Institute for Research in Innovative Instructional Delivery, Cebu Normal University, Cebu, Philippines
 2College of Teacher Education, Cebu Normal University, Cebu, Philippines

  Full Text - PDF          XML

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4365-3370

 Digital Object Identifier: 

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2021.05.014

 Abstract:

Higher education institutions invasions to deliver quality education at all levels at all times. World ranking universities are good in research, publication, and international partnership. This study aims to deduced dimensions of quality education among the world’s top-ranking universities. Findings revealed that top-ranking universities are good in research and provide quality teaching performance. Quality education is the pursuit of building an academic reputation, research influence, and industry reputation. Research-based teaching and learning increased academic performance. Thus, there are different dimensions of quality education in the universities. 

 © 2021 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords: World ranking universities, Principal component, Research influence, Academic reputation, Industry-academe partnership

 Article History: Received 20 September 2020, Received in revised form 27 December 2020, Accepted 6 February 2021

 Acknowledgment 

The authors wish to extend their gratitude to the Center for Research and Development, Institute for Research in Innovative Instructional Delivery of Cebu Normal University, and Dr. Roberto N. Padua for giving the training on advanced methodology in research that paved the way for the conception and completion of this paper.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

  Boholano HB, Dapat LC, and Cordova ME (2021). Deducing dimensions of quality education among the world’s top universities. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 8(5): 130-134

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 Fig. 1 Fig. 2

 Tables

 Table 1 

----------------------------------------------

 References (14)

  1. Aguillo I, Bar-Ilan J, Levene M, and Ortega J (2010). Comparing university rankings. Scientometrics, 85(1): 243-256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0190-z   [Google Scholar]
  2. Buela-Casal G, Gutiérrez-Martínez O, Bermúdez-Sánchez MP, and Vadillo-Muñoz O (2007). Comparative study of international academic rankings of universities. Scientometrics, 71(3): 349-365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-007-1653-8   [Google Scholar]
  3. Geuna A and Martin BR (2003). University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison. Minerva, 41(4): 277-304. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:MINE.0000005155.70870.bd   [Google Scholar]
  4. Kokko H and Sutherland WJ (1999). What do impact factors tell us? Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 14(10): 382-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(99)01711-5   [Google Scholar]
  5. Leimu R and Koricheva J (2005). Does scientific collaboration increase the impact of ecological articles? BioScience, 55(5): 438-443. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0438:DSCITI]2.0.CO;2   [Google Scholar]
  6. Merisotis J and Sadlak J (2005). Higher education rankings: Evolution, acceptance, and dialogue. Higher Education in Europe, 30(2): 97-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/03797720500260124   [Google Scholar]
  7. Murtagh F and Heck A (1987). Multivariate data analysis. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3789-5   [Google Scholar]
  8. Nederhof AJ and Van Raan AF (1993). A bibliometric analysis of six economics research groups: A comparison with peer review. Research Policy, 22(4): 353-368. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(93)90005-3   [Google Scholar]
  9. Steiner JE (2006). World university rankings - A principal component analysis. arXiv:physics/0605252. Available online at: https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0605252
  10. Tokuhama-Espinosa T, Rivera M, Tobar C, Solano I, Tirira MP, and Merino I (2013). International indicators of quality education: How economic status, units of analysis and culture can influence country choices of key quality indicators in education. In the World Education Research Association (WERA) Focal Meeting and 12th National Conference of Education Research, Guanajuato, Mexico: 18-22.   [Google Scholar]
  11. Van Raan AF (2005). Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics, 62(1): 133-143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-0008-6   [Google Scholar]
  12. Var I (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Vectors, 8(2): 125-136.   [Google Scholar]
  13. Virgo JA (1977). A statistical procedure for evaluating the importance of scientific papers. The Library Quarterly, 47(4): 415-430. https://doi.org/10.1086/620723   [Google Scholar]
  14. Wong BB and Kokko H (2005). Is science as global as we think? Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 20(9): 475-476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2005.07.003   [Google Scholar] PMid:16701421