Scholarlink

<p>Ranking of institutions of higher education has become a benchmark with the increasing globalization of higher education. This study critically evaluates India’s National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) by benchmarking its indicator design, normalization, and validation practices against two leading global systems (THE and QS). Using a mixed-methods approach, comparative methodological review, 5-year longitudinal trend analysis (2020–2024), and parameter sensitivity testing (regression/R<sup>2</sup>); we quantify where NIRF diverges from international practice and where its scoring design compresses meaningful differentiation. Results show sustained stability at the very top but substantial volatility across mid- and lower-tier ranks; peer-perception scores are highly dispersed with opaque methodology. Research metrics exhibit redundancy and integrity risks; and structurally heavy inputs (TLR, GO) dominate scores despite limited explanatory power for rank shifts. These patterns reduce NIRF’s global comparability and reward scale over substance. We therefore recommend targeted recalibration: robust normalization (z-score/log transforms), independent validation, transparent and diversified perception protocols, integrity safeguards for research outputs, and incorporation of internationally comparable metrics (internationalization, collaboration, mobility). Implementing these reforms would strengthen NIRF’s credibility and enable its evolution toward a context-sensitive yet globally interoperable benchmarking system capable of attracting international participation.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Evaluating the methodological robustness and global comparability of the national institutional ranking framework in Indian higher education

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月26日

查看全文
  • Ananya Kalita,
  • Ankur Pan Saikia,
  • Asim Dutta,
  • Pranveer Singh Satvat

摘要

Ranking of institutions of higher education has become a benchmark with the increasing globalization of higher education. This study critically evaluates India’s National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) by benchmarking its indicator design, normalization, and validation practices against two leading global systems (THE and QS). Using a mixed-methods approach, comparative methodological review, 5-year longitudinal trend analysis (2020–2024), and parameter sensitivity testing (regression/R2); we quantify where NIRF diverges from international practice and where its scoring design compresses meaningful differentiation. Results show sustained stability at the very top but substantial volatility across mid- and lower-tier ranks; peer-perception scores are highly dispersed with opaque methodology. Research metrics exhibit redundancy and integrity risks; and structurally heavy inputs (TLR, GO) dominate scores despite limited explanatory power for rank shifts. These patterns reduce NIRF’s global comparability and reward scale over substance. We therefore recommend targeted recalibration: robust normalization (z-score/log transforms), independent validation, transparent and diversified perception protocols, integrity safeguards for research outputs, and incorporation of internationally comparable metrics (internationalization, collaboration, mobility). Implementing these reforms would strengthen NIRF’s credibility and enable its evolution toward a context-sensitive yet globally interoperable benchmarking system capable of attracting international participation.