University ranking has a great deal of amount of influence on contemporary higher education. With nearly all universities under the influence of a ranking list compiled and published by US News & World Report and The Times, the general public usually keeps an eye on the league table. Although little change has been made in the list of top‐tier universities – although a new champion sometimes successfully makes its debut – the mass media are taking a lead in promoting it with sensational words, ordinary people are oddly responding as if the list is all about each and every university. Of the results unveiled, institutions of higher education are classified into one of two categories: a winner or a loser. The former will devise brand new strategies in desperate efforts to keep their position intact while the latter will attempt to pull itself out of a harsh reality. These realities clearly illustrate survival strategies of academies for obtaining funding and choice from more organizations and more consumers, a self‐portrait of the higher education community.
In his book, Mapping the Higher Education Landscape, van Vught (2009) presents an important contribution to the international discussion on higher education globalization and worldwide rankings of higher education institutions. Organized around ten chapters with contributions made by a myriad of international authors the volume criticizes the existing one‐dimensional and aggregated international ranking models and offers a European Classification of Higher Education as an alternative.
As is evident the fact that the first university in history originated in Europe, the continent has had countless academic community with rich traditions. Refusing to make any reforms and resting on their laurels, universities in Europe have finally come to take a shellacking in the competition with those in the USA, which according to the author have succeeded in developing by taking swift and aggressive steps against social changes. In response, European governments have made desperate efforts aimed at restoring glory in the past at the whole continental level and beyond national boundaries.
This book elaborates on comprehensive measures continuously carried out by education authorities to improve the quality of the higher education. Included are the “Lisbon strategy” for better achievement of institutions and “Bologna process” designed to increase mobility and employability, compatibility and comparability between higher education system in Europe. Raising its critical voice for the ranking system, which scores universities simply based on reputation and quantifiable data while putting aside the diversity, the authors suggest the classification of the European higher education as a tool to fully respect the diversity of academies and provide users with tailor‐made information.
Mapping the Higher Education Landscape defines the essence of university as diversity which transforms into mass education system from elitism and introduces some related matters. Higher education institutions, as open system, are increasingly interactive with its surroundings with participants calling for diversity in line with various demands in terms of mission and function. As government and related authorities attempt to supervise the quality of contents provided by increasingly behemoth higher education institutions involved in resource supply and financial support these universities are under great influence of the supply of resource from the outside world set up to evaluate them.
The book introduces the “Bologna process”. This process is designed to promote convergence within the European higher education in a systemic way with an ultimate goal of strengthening its competitiveness. European governments have created the Bologna process and other policies to build up a new pan‐European academic community. Although the “Bologna process” is intended to consolidate and evenly develop higher education institutions throughout the continent and improve the lives of students within the identical framework and regulation, universities are forced to blindly pursue prestige and status, leading to a worsening vertical stratification. This phenomenon is blamed on serious regional imbalance. Based on contributors work throughout the book the convergence and vertical diversity keeps stakeholders from having access to various information sources.
In respect to the systemic diversity – a merit of the European higher education institution – the authors offer a European Classification of Higher Education as a tool to inform a score of interested parties on a variety of type, mission, and character of institutions. Describing the process of a draft of classification of higher education by 32 indicators within 14 dimensions as well as Carnegie Classification in the USA, the authors conclude that a comprehensive data system is needed throughout Europe. All things considered, the classification system is remarkably distinguished from the ranking system based on hierarchy. It considers the Centre for Higher Education Development devised in Germany as a best alternative in that the system more appropriately represents the consumer's demand and provides a multi‐dimensional ranking information. Consequently, the author hints to individual officials in education institution and policy makers that a European Classification of Higher Education can serve as a fresh opportunity in dealing with comparison work at the international level.
In sum, a new paradigm for upgrading higher education is laid out in this book – a meaningful contribution from an academic perspective. Without regard to flawed data in the process of research, the traditional ranking system has flexed its muscles in the higher education field across the globe. Ruling out a colorful function and mission of universities, stereotypical standard has been taken in deciding the ranking against the original cause of providing consumers with what they really need – preventing schools from evenly and equitably developing. A European Classification of Higher Education is meaningful for both in Europe and the rest of the world. It is intended to place greater emphasis on genuine growth of all the universities in a horizontal manner rather than in a vertical manner.
Although the book provides some cutting edge strategies for rankings processes a disappointing feature in the book is found in its organization. For example, rather than identifying the issues with current rankings in the first couple of chapters and how to best address these issues it is not until the reader approaches chapter five before this is identified. A second issue that might have been addressed differently rests with the content of the cases of successful universities. Although clearly organized at times it appears that some content is improperly skimmed and thus stands in the way of readers understanding of the precise message intended by the authors. Finally, the merit of the European higher education system as compared to other countries could have been explained in a more specific manner that stressed the importance of classification.
Nevertheless, this volume is an important one. It ought to be of interest to leaders and policy makers in higher education at the supranational, national and sub‐national levels, and to leaders and managers of higher education institutions and associations. It is also highly relevant to staff members and advisors at different policy levels, to higher education researchers and students, and to all who are interested in the further development of higher education systems and institutions.
