'Ranking Universiti: Kita terlalu percaya kepada Barat'

Saya terkejut apabila mendapat tahu bahawa kedudukan Universiti Sains Malaysia tidak berubah di kalangan universiti terbaik di Asia dalam sistem penarafan universiti oleh majalah Time Higher Education (THE). Tahun lepas USM di tangga 69, dan kedudukan itu kekal pada kedudukan 69 di belakang Universiti Malaya n Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. Agak ganjil sekiranya kedudukan ini dinilai. Bukan berniat mahu mengatakan bahawa USM lebih baik daripada kedua2 universiti tersebut, namun secara lahiriahnya, bermacam program y telah dilaksanakan untuk menaiktarafkan akademik di USM terutamanya melalui Accelerated Program for Excellent (APEX). Bermacam penyelidikan serta penerbitan-penerbitan ilmiah telah dilaksanakan, namun USM seperti tidak mampu bersaing dengan universiti-universiti penyelidikan terkemuka di negara ini. Rupa2nya, penarafan oleh THE itu adalah tidak sah kerana data y dikutip oleh THE untuk menarafkan universiti2 di seluruh dunia tidak tepat. Ini di akui sendiri oleh Phil Baty, Editor Times Higher Education World University Rankings dan Timbalan Editor Majalah Times Higher Education seperti y ditulis oleh Prof. Dr. Arndt Graf, Pengerusi Jabatan Pengajian Asia Tenggara, Universiti Frankfurt, Jerman di dalam Utusan Malaysia bertarikh 25 Mei 2010 (baca sini).

Berikut saya lampirkan di bawah, kenyataan y dibuat oleh Phil Baty untuk penilaian kita bersama.

Flawed rankings

By PHIL BATY

I must make a confession: the rankings of the world’s top universities that my magazine has been publishing for the past six years, and which have attracted enormous global attention, are not fit for purpose.

Those who have used our rankings to cast judgment on the state of Malaysian higher education (and many, in very senior positions have done so) must be told that the annual tables had some serious flaws — flaws which I have a responsibility to put right.

Of course we always knew that rankings had their limitations. No ranking can be definitive. No list of the strongest universities can capture all the intangible, life-changing and paradigm-shifting work that universities undertake.

But we do believe that rankings have some real uses. Rankings help students select courses, help university staff make career choices and forge research partnerships, and they help university managers set strategic priorities.

As nations around the world, like Malaysia, reshape their economies through investment in higher education for a knowledge- and innovation-driven future, worldwide rankings are playing an ever more influential role in government too.

Love them or hate them, rankings are here to stay.

So those of us who rank universities have a responsibility to make them as rigorous, balanced and as transparent as possible, and that includes admitting to past mistakes.

Our annual world university rankings were first published in 2004 – when Times Higher Education magazine not only had a different editor, but a different name (the Times Higher Education Supplement) and a different owner.

Last year we took the first opportunity for a full review of the rankings. We did not like what we found, and we took the chance to act.

In November 2009, we ended our partnership with the company QS, which supplied and owned all the data for the rankings between 2004 and 2009. We are now working with the world-leading research data specialists Thomson Reuters, which will collect and analyse all the data for our rankings for 2010 and beyond.

So what was so bad about the old world rankings? Of most concern was the so-called “peer review”. Some 40% of a university’s overall ranking score was based on this “peer review” – in fact a simple opinion survey, asking university staff which institutions they rated most highly.

QS achieved only a tiny number of respondents to this survey. In 2009, around 3,500 people provided their responses – a fraction of the many millions of scholars throughout the world. Figures for individual countries are even more shocking. In 2008, just 563 responses from the UK were used, and, I am ashamed to say, a mere 180 responses came from Malaysia. It was barely better for Indonesia, with just 228 responses, or the Philippines with 201.

Most shockingly, only 116 responses were collected from China’s many, many thousands of scholars, in 2008.

Is it any wonder that with such a high weighting for such a flimsy measure, we have seen dramatic volatility in the tables?

Although I had no involvement with the rankings until 2009, I am personally ashamed of the terrible case which saw Universiti Malaya plummet from 89th place in the 2004 ranking to joint 169th in 2005, before dropping out of the top 200 altogether later on.

The headlines were alarming, with one newspaper asking whether there was a “crisis in Malaysia’s public universities”.

Of course, there was no crisis. It was simply a stark and shocking example of the weakness of the ranking data.

The 2010 reputation survey will be a massive improvement. For 2010, Thomson Reuters has hired professional polling company Ipsos MediaCT to carry out the work, and it has committed to gathering a much higher number from a respondent pool that truly represents the international university community.

The views of Malaysian scholars are being collected in far greater number, and their responses will be properly weighted when we compile the final tables. While QS issued its 2008 survey in only two languages – English and Spanish – I am pleased to say that our new poll was released in seven languages.

But increased volume and better regional representation are not the only improvements. The questions have been carefully prepared to elicit more meaningful responses and to make clear what is being judged, people will be questioned in their narrow academic field, and the opinion poll will go only to invited participants – we will not allow people to volunteer to take part in the poll – so we can be sure of gathering only informed opinions. We are also asking questions about both teaching quality and research quality for the first time ever.

The rest of the rankings methodology is also open for a complete review, and we are seeking informed opinion.

We have already responded to criticisms and declared that we will change the way research excellence is measured, to end the clear bias against the arts, humanities and social sciences. From 2010, when we collect data on the number of times a department’s published work is cited by other scholars – a measure of research impact – we will take into account the dramatically different citation habits between disciplines, which was not done by QS.

But we want more input, and we welcome views from Malaysia. Is a staff-to-student ratio a suitable proxy for teaching quality? Is it fair to give credit for the proportion of international students on a campus when there’s no way of judging the quality of those students? What other indicators should we avoid; what should we include?

So much rests on the results of our rankings: individual university reputations, student recruitment, vice chancellors’ and presidents’ jobs in some cases, and even major government investment decisions.

We have a duty to overhaul the rankings to make them fit for such purposes.

'Phil Baty is editor of the Times Higher Education World University Rankings, and deputy editor of Times Higher Education magazine.'
www.timeshighereducation.co.uk.

'Judi World Cup 2010'

Berita n keputusan ini pasti menggembirakan kaki-kaki (taik-taik) judi y ingin kaya cepat. Kerajaan kita sekali lagi tidak cuba untuk mencegah kemungkaran apabila ingin memberi lesen kepada sebuah entiti korporat y terkenal di negara kita ini. Saya terkejut apabila perkara ini didedahkan. Y menariknya, kenyataan ini dikeluarkan oleh seorang Timbalan Menteri y beragama Islam.

Di dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan, agama Islam adalah agama rasmi. Walaupun negara ini tidak mengamalkan Islam di dalam sistem perundangannya, tetapi sebagai agama rasmi, Islam perlu dihormati serta diletakkan di tempat y sewajarnya. Islam bukan meliputi ritual keagamaan sahaja, tetapi perlu dinobatkan sebagai agama y mencegah perbuatan keji n mungkar. Saya tidak pasti, namun saya rasa, di dalam agama mana sekali pun, judi merupakan satu larangan. Menghormati agama Islam sebenarnya akan lebih memberi kesan positif kepada keseluruhan rakyat termasuk kaum Melayu secara khusus. Ini akan menjadikan ketuanan Melayu lebih dihormati serta Islam akan menjadi agama y menganjurkan keamanan n kesejahteraan di negara ini.

Tidak tahu samada keputusan y sebegini merupakan satu tindakan y ingin memenuhkan poket siapa. Adakah pak-pak menteri turut mempunyai saham di dalamnya. Seperti y semua orang maklum, di dalam dunia bola sepak, perjudian y dijalankan bukan melibatkan pertaruhan seringgit dua, tetapi melibatkan pertaruhan ribuan ringgit, malah ada y mencecah jutaan ringgit. Jadi, pendapatan y diperolehi hasil perniagaan sebegini bukan sahaja menguntungkan ahli-ahli perniagaan y terlibat, malah turut menguntungkan kerajaan melalui cukai y mereka perolehi. Jadi, untuk membangunkan negara dengan menggunakan wang hasil perjudian, bukanlah satu pelaburan y akan menyebabkan negara ini mendapat rahmat n kasih sayang Allah SWT, malah menjauhkan kita semua dari hidayahNya.

Wang hasil daripada sumber y haram di takuti akan menjadi darah daging setiap individu. Pemimpin ibarat bapa kepada rakyatnya. Apabila memberi makan kepada anak2 dengan duit berasaskan sumber y haram, maka ditakuti, masa depan generasi ini akan terlindung daripada mendapat pertolongan daripada Allah. Al-Quran jelas menerangkan secara mutlak tentang pengharaman judi. Tidak kiralah kerajaan samada akan melarang umat Islam atau tidak untuk berjudi melalui syarat y dikemukakan kepada penerima lesen tersebut, ia merupakan selapis kulit nipis y cuba menghalalkan tindakan kerajaan. Kerajaan perlu mengambil kira sensitiviti masyarakat keseluruhannya terutamannya masyarakat Islam. Negara ini diperintah oleh seorang y beragama Islam. Adakah kerajaan bersikap tutup sebelah mata terhadap perkara sebegini. Apa y akan dijawab kepada Allah SWT apabila dihadapkan kehadapanNya kelak. Tidak malukah apabila berada di hadapan Tuhan Semesta Alam itu, kita sebagai umat Islam dengan tanpa rasa bersalah melanggar larangan Allah melalui kitab n rasulNya.

Di dalam al-Quran, Allah sering menyebut 'Afala taqqilun' y maksudnya 'Adakah kamu pernah terfikir'. Walau apa pun kemahuan kita, pertama sekali kita perlu berfikir sebelum membuat apa2 keputusan. Sesungguhnya apabila kita tidak melampaui batas, ia merupakan nikmat y tidak terhingga kepada kita. Saya berharap, para mufti serta menteri y bertanggungjawab terhadap agama Islam (y sangat bijak berkata2 serta faham tentang hukum hakam Islam) untuk memperlihatkan bantahan terhadap keputusan ini. Jangan mengambil sikap berdiam diri, kelak rakyat akan semakin hilang kepercayaan kepada tokoh2 agama di negara ini.

p/s: Tidak perlulah untuk mengadakan demonstrasi untuk isu ini n apa2 isu. Berbincang dengan cara y baik. Ambil iktibar dengan apa y terjadi di Bangkok..