Pakistan Journal of Information Management & Libraries (Feb 2021)
Ranking Web of Universities: Is Webometrics a Reliable Academic Ranking?
Abstract
Global university rankings continue to gain growing interest and have high visibility from all stakeholders. Of these, Webometrics Ranking (WR) faces many criticisms about its function. Some people believe WR evaluates only the websites of universities but not their global performance and impact as mentioned by WR authors. This stimulates us to examine the idea of using WR as a reliable academic ranking for the world universities. To test this hypothesis, we apply the WR results with two widely accepted indexes, i.e., the global university rankings and the bibliometrics. Therefore, the WR ranking of the Top 100 institutions are correlated with the corresponding values of six world ranking systems’ 2015 edition (ARWU, USNWR, QS, THE, NTU and URAP) that commonly accepted to evaluate the academic performance of the university, as well as with the objectively bibliometric indicators gathered from the Web of Science (WOS) InCitesTM - Thomson Reuters. The findings revealed that the WR results provide a good correlation with both ranking systems’ results and with 12 bibliometric variables namely: WOS Documents, Times Cited, Citation Impact (CI), Citation Impact: Category Normalized (CNCI), Citation Impact: Journal Normalized (JNCI), Impact Relative to World, % of Top 1% Documents, % of Top 10% Documents, Highly Cited Papers, h-index, International Collaborations, and % Industry Collaborations. The consistency between WR and the studied six rankings increases with increasing the weight percent of the research or bibliometric indicators in these six global rankings. Moreover, the consistency between WR and survey-based rankings (USNWR, THE and QS) increases with decreasing the weight of the subjective reputation survey indicators. The North American, especially USA universities are characterized by the extremely high visibility in WR as well as in the studied seven global rankings. Thus, web-based indicators ranking (WR) offers results of comparable and similar quality to those of the six major global university rankings. Accordingly, they have the capability to rank institutional academic performance. Moreover, the reliability could be enhanced if each university has only one web-domain that accurately reflects its actual performance and activity. We recommend all institutions to apply all ranking systems together since their criteria and indicators complement each other and can form a comprehensive index for covering various HEIs activities/functions worldwide.
Keywords
