The writer: Olesya Lynovitska (term of international expert group on definition of ratings of universities (IREG), chief of practical separation of faculty of UNESCO " a Maximum technical education, problem systems analysis and information science ")


Last years the tendency of growth(increase) of a role of a higher education all over the world is watched. In this connection bodily it is possible to explain large concern of a public and quoters of the market of activity to independent estimations of activity of higher educational institutions both in own country, and behind its(her) limits. More often activity on realization of monitoring of activity of high schools and definition of their ratings is executed(designed) by(with) independent public organizations, authoritative publishing houses and mass media.

Systems of definition of ratings very miscellaneous. The specificity of these ratings appreciably depends on features of a system of a higher education of each country, target audience, problems solved as a result of ranking of educational institutions, used technique and ... For example, have gained popularity national, regional and international ratings of miscellaneous types of universities.

Nevertheless any of them is not generalpurpose "standard" of scalene activity of modern educational institutions, and only resolves to compare their some parameters(indexes) on the basis of usage of this or that groups of yardsticks (quality of training, quality of scientific researches etc.). Using more broad base of yardsticks and parameters(indexes) of activity (indicators), it is possible to compare among themselves more slender groups of educational institutions (technical, agrarian, pedagogical etc.) and even the educational programs, in particular programs MBA and ... For example, the Ministry of education and sciences of Ukraine annually analyzes(analyses) many-sided activity of high schools behind separate groups, using for this purpose a great many (some tens) yardsticks and indicators. The purpose such rating of estimation - manufacturing of the administrative solutions for improvement of further activity of educational institutions.

And on the contrary, if put problems to compare among themselves miscellaneous universities, for this purpose there can be utilised only rather slender group very generalpurpose, objective and general(common) for all their yardsticks and indicators.

Under modern conditions the concern to world-wide ratings of universities increases. Known from them is:

- The academic rating of universities of a world, which one is determined since 2003 by Institute of a higher education of the Shanghai university (Institute of Higher Education, Shanghai Jiao Tong University);

- The rating of universities of a world, which one is annually determined by expert group of the newspaper "Times" and is published in the special Appendix from a higher education in this newspaper.

The yardsticks and indicators, which one will be used in ratings, are characterized by maximum objectivity, they can be applied to educational institutions, which one differ behind the specialization, national features, fitting to miscellaneous geographic locales of a world and .... Certainly, quantity of yardsticks and indicators in called Shanghai systems minor. For example, in a rating of the Shanghai university " a Mainmast head 500 " four yardsticks (quality of training, quality of a scientific and pedagogical potential, outcomes of scientific researches and scale of university) and six indicators (quantity of the Nobel winners among the graduates of university, quantity of the Nobel winners among the professors of university, highest scientific achievements of the professors of university for 21 by an established category, quantity published by the professors of university of the articles in the log-book Nature and Science, quantity of the quoted articles of the professors of university in Science Citation Index, academic characteristics will be used only, which one scale university).

As the shocking on the Berlin occurring of a commission of experts of university ratings IREG (May 19-20, 2006) was done(made), after affixture of Ukraine to Bologn of educational space it is very important to international community to understand a system of a higher education of Ukraine from the point of view å ¸ of recognition(identification) both association with european and world(global) systems. And, on the contrary, for a university public of Ukraine more useful would be the full information on processes, which one take place in this orb in miscellaneous locales of a world. Therefore creation of a system of university ratings in Ukraine, close by principles to widespread in a world, will be one of first steps in this direction.

By such purpose were guided during system development rating of estimation of universities of Ukraine " a Mainmast head 200 " within the framework of the project of UNESCO SEPES and IREG, which one by the principles very close to a system of definition of ratings of the best universities of a world " a Mainmast head 500 ", but was as much as possible adapted for a national system of a higher education. The yardsticks, trusted to in its(her) basis,(fundamentals,) and indicators were taken from such reasons:

- They should be so generalpurpose, that it was possible to compare activity of universities of miscellaneous types;

- Should have unequivocal(unambiguous) definition and unequivocal(unambiguous) quantitative expression;

- Should be easily accessible to public control;

- For increase of objectivity of a system rating of estimation the quantity indicators were used only, the conclusions(injections) of the experts at this stage(phase) leave outed;

- As in Ukraine still there are objective and independent WWW-sources with the items of information on activity of universities, a majority of parameters(indexes) took at universities and received only behind a personal subscript of the rector.

One more relevant condition pushed UNESCO SEPES and IREG to the Ukrainian group of definition of university ratings, was encompass byed volume, that she(it) (group) was independent from miscellaneous offices of state and organizations, corporate communities and .... Besides the terms of this group should own high professionalism in the field of system researches, information know-hows and activity with the data.

On thought of UNESCO SEPES as world(global) coordinator of the program of definition of university ratings, such requirements are responded by(with) its(her) faculties, which one form and obey to UNESCO. In Ukraine the selection has falled on faculty of UNESCO " a Maximum technical education, problem systems analysis and information science " at National technical university of Ukraine " the Kiev polytechnic institute ", with which one UNESCO SEPES has concluded the applicable agreement. For a safeguarding of independence of the Ukrainian group from definition of university ratings, the practical separation of this faculty was created, which one is endured for boundaries KPI, and the activity of this group bodily matched only with the International supervisory council created UNESCO SEPES and IREG.

After publication of a rating 200 best universities of Ukraine in a weekly journal " the Mirror of week " (#11, 2007) to edition of the newspaper and on separation of faculty of UNESCO has acted(arrived) a great many of responses with the remarks, wishes, guidelines. The terms of group express thanks by everyone, who is active participat in arguing this problem, which one, doubtlessly, will render assistance further advancing of a designed system.

The implementators pay attention the readers that the offered technique envisions usage not only "accumulated" data (achievement of high school for all period of his(its) operation), and and data, which one characterize dynamics(changes) of change of all parameters(indexes) for the previous, five years' period of activity. It resolves to observe nature of the off-the-shelf changes and to take into account absolute outcomes reached for continuous period of time.

Certainly, a subject of the special controversies became selection of yardsticks and indicators for definition of ratings of universities. At this yardstick of the Ukrainian system practically coincide the applicable yardsticks of the Shanghai university, except that in maiden follow-up will use yardstick " an international admission ". For Ukraine, which one is still gentle is integrated to european educational space, this yardstick is rather relevant. His(its) indicators (quantity of the foreign students and retention in a number(series) known european and Euroasian associations of universities) is rather objective image an admission of the Ukrainian universities in Europe and world. First of all to become a term anyone from four associations it is impossible only at the request of university and his(its) readiness to pay membership fees. The university is invited by(with) the associations after realization steep, independent and objective analysis of his(its) activity by the external experts and guidelines of other, authoritative terms of association. That to quantity of the foreign students, which one study at university, it is possible to tell, that it is the relevant parameter(index), but it(he) succumbs to other to four. First of all in connection with the relevant decrease of a level of insistence to this category of the students (outcomes of separate sociological research), very low prices of training for the foreign students in Ukraine and number(series) to other reasons, which one can not serve an admission of the Ukrainian higher education behind this parameter(index) in a developed world.

A number(series) of critical remarks concerned selection of factors in a technique of definition of ratings. At the maiden stage(phase) they were determined by a group of specialists of a high level in an orb of science and formation on the basis of usage of a method of expert estimations. And, unconditional&, installation of more adequate factors in further should be considered with a professional public with the purpose of their refinement. For example, it is necessary to discuss a problem, to that to the academicians NAS of Ukraine the rather high factor (27,5) compared with other categories of the workers of a higher school, specially by professors and senior lecturers is assigned. The selection of such ratio is conditioned by that not a significance of these categories of the teachers directly for educational process, and quality of scientific and pedagogical school was valued. In other words, capacity of this or that school to be educated of a scientific level of the term - correspondent or academician NAS of Ukraine by analogy, how in a rating of the Shanghai university is assessed the capability of universities to prepare the Nobel winners.

Debatable there was a problem concerning yardstick of quality of a scientific and pedagogical potential, the values which one ranged 0-50 %. Such high threshold (50 %) dictated of subjects, that the indicators, gobed up in this yardstick, break(fall) two major parameters(indexes) of activity of an educational institution - educational and scientific. We intentionally did not partition them on separate groups, as among the majority of universities of Ukraine is high-gravity to dedicate with an obvious image to a scientific component expressed, for example, quantity of the prepared academicians and terms - correspondents NAS or quantity of the winners of the State premiums in the field of science and engineering. Usage of such relevant indicator, as the index of quoting, has appeared anticipatory for Ukraine, as in recognized, independent sources of quoting, for example Science Citation Index, practically there are items of information on the publications of the quoters of the Ukrainian higher school. At the same time in Ukraine this the activity yet is not adjusted.

Very relevant both in rating to a system of the Shanghai university, and in the Ukrainian system " the Mainmast head 200 " is a scale of university. The educational institutions, which one own a powerful, highly qualified scientific and pedagogical potential, libraries with million-strong funds, developed laboratory base with the unique equipment, provide more high performance of a learning process and education of the students, post-graduate students, young scientists and teachers. This quality intrinsic of subjects to high schools, which one along many decades was possible to integrate educational, scientific, international and practical activity, in which one were kept and is harmonic the classic and new scientific and pedagogical schools, where developed sports, art, amateur performances, institutes of home rule and democratization develop. In opinion of the majority of the experts, only to such universities with steep historical traditions accessible maximum achievements in formation, science, education of talents.

The new indicator compared with a system of the Shanghai rating are the attitudes(relation) of quantity of the exhausted masters to general quantity of the prepared bachelors and specialists. This indicator relevant for countries, which one are on paths to Bolognas of model, and consequently it(he) has temporary nature. His(its) contents is encompass byed volume, that the opening-up of the master on Bolognas of model necessarily has to be grounded on applying of an advanced science. At the same time the model of opening-up of the bachelor (and in practice of Ukraine and opening-up of the specialist) does not require(demand) it and has educational, mass nature. Thus, the maximum this ratio, the greater measure the university applies science to training of personnel, which one renders assistance quality training. Certainly, not at all universities of Ukraine of the masters prepare on the basis of their engaging for science. And it already withdrawal from Bolognas of model of opening-up, that is by a system problem for country and on what our group influence can not.

All responses, remark and guideline, which one have acted (arrived) in our address, have design nature, which one will authorize(resolve) to perfect(improve) an offered system of definition of university ratings. Our group can not agree only with a material Boris Mokin, published in "WN" (¹ 15, 2007). In the publication the writer, is apparent on an error, operates with other items of information, compared with submitted him(it) behind a personal subscript in December, 2006, on the moment of definition of ratings of universities of Ukraine, in particular, and Vinnitsa national technical university (WNTU).

In particular in WNTU, condition for 2006, the number of the nominal scientific and pedagogical workers introduced not "close" 500 men (as it is underlined in the publication), and 685 (that B.Mokin officially has fastened by the subscript). Quantity of the students of a hospital in WNTU made 6001, and at Vinnitsa state pedagogical university (with which one B.Mokin does(makes) matching) - 5702, i.e. is not such.

At the same time the indicated parameters(indexes) significally influence outcomes of calculation of indicators " qualities of a scientific and pedagogical potential " and " qualities of training ", as they will be used as a denominator of the applicable design formulas. In other words, the called indicators calculate not in absolute values, and in reduced to number of a scientific - teaching structure and number of the students, which one B.Mokin in the publication has pointed inaccurately. "Errors," allowed in the publication, do not resolve to agree with conclusions(injections) B.Mokin about bias and rating of definition of a rating WNTU.

* * *

So, us publication the maiden stage(phase) in not prime and ungrateful(thankless) business of definition of ratings of universities of Ukraine. This activity is executed(made) objective&, irrespective of a conjuncture and stereotypes, which one were formed in country. Were used a technique, only matched to the international experts, and submitted items of information. In this "mirror" everyone has seen itself(himself). It was not pleasant mappings to many. The technique (as a measuring instrument) can be subjected a critic. And her(it) it is possible and to meliorate. It is possible and it is necessary to work above advancing of the university after the seen mapping. On it we also calculate in the future. We hope, that the outcomes rating of estimation of universities of Ukraine " a Mainmast head 200 " of following year will be more understandable, adequate and demanded by the society, market of activity and universities, and our long-term project step-by-step redirects a higher school of Ukraine on motion by to universities of the world(global) class.