Abstract—This paper made a comprehensive and systematic overview to the Chinese universities evaluation released by RCCSE, and emphasized on developing universities of high quality, effectiveness and internationalized level. Based on the “Chinese Universities Ranking in 2010” released by RCCSE, the latest evaluation results of Chinese universities are displayed mainly from three aspects: regional education competitiveness, comprehensive competitiveness and R&D competitiveness. From these rankings and results, the present situation of Chinese universities and higher education can be illustrated quantitatively.

Keywords- universities evaluation; Chinese universities; Chinese higher education; education competitiveness

                                                                                                                                                                I.           Introduction

In China, undergraduate education is responsible for cultivating all kinds of specialized personnel. As the fundamental part of tertiary educational system, its quality is an important indicator of the overall competitiveness of China’s higher education. In order to keep government departments, colleges and universities, students and people from every walk of life fully informed of the competitiveness of China’s universities and disciplines in 2010, Research Center for Chinese Science Evaluation (RCCSE) based in Wuhan University has just issued 201 rankings regarding China’s universities and disciplines. Their work provides information of great value for reference, which is of great significance for improving higher education system as whole and encouraging universities to develop with orderly competition.

Since 2004, RCCSE has conducted Chinese universities evaluation every year and drew a series of ranking results and research conclusions. Until 2010 RCCSE has released “Chinese universities’ evaluation report” for 7 times. Now this serial report has a certain influence and authority both in domestic and overseas. The research team of RCCSE has accumulated plenty of experience from the long-term exploration and practice. This paper will make a comprehensive and systematic introduction to the methods and results of Chinese universities’ evaluation released by RCCSE, based on the “Chinese Universities Ranking in 2010”.

                                                                                                                                                               II.         Index systems

In 2004 RCCSE and China Youth Daily jointly carried out a nationwide survey which covered 2000 people, including the leaders of educational authorities, presidents and teachers of universities, senior high school students and their parents, experts and scholars in evaluation field, etc. Then we calculated and analyzed the questionnaire. Based on the results of this survey, we obtained the evaluation indicators and weights by the way of Fuzzy AHP. Then we invited some leading experts and scholars to have a full discussion on these indicators and weights. Finally we obtained the index systems of Chinese Universities Evaluation.

In the years that followed, we have continuously improved and reformed the index systems according to the development of higher education as well as the changes of social demands in China. On the premise of keeping the general system stable, we have explored a series of relevant evaluations and their corresponding index systems. Until now we have 5 index systems, including “Chinese Universities’ Natural Science and Engineering Technology R&D Competitiveness Evaluation” and “Chinese Universities’ Art, Humanities and Social Sciences R&D Competitiveness Evaluation”, “Chinese Key Universities’ Comprehensive Competitiveness Evaluation”, “Chinese Average Universities’ Comprehensive Competitiveness Evaluation” and “Chinese Private Colleges’ Comprehensive Competitiveness Evaluation”. At present, our “Chinese Universities Evaluation Index System” is the most comprehensive and systemic one in China. The Specific evaluation systems and indicators are listed as table 1～table 3.

A.    Chinese Universities’ Comprehensive Competitiveness Evaluation

Chinese higher education has the characteristics of multi-types and multi-levels. That means different universities have different size and objective and it is hard to find a unified index system to evaluate all of them. Thus according to the general official classification method, our evaluation divides Chinese universities into three types: key universities, average universities and private colleges. Generally speaking these three types have obvious difference about their size, objective, role, and competiveness. This is the basic category of our evaluation index system.

Table1  Index System of Chinese Key Universities Evaluation

Table2  Index System of Chinese Average Universities Evaluation

Table3  Index System of Chinese Private Colleges’ Evaluation

Table1 and table 2 are the index systems of key universities and average universities. As we can see from the table1, comprehensive competitiveness of one university represents its overall appearance integrated by quantity, quality, level and impact. We evaluate them from different aspects: resources, teaching, R&D and reputation. We can learn from the table1 that he index system of key universities has 4 first-grade indicators, 13 second-grade indicators and 50 third-grade indicators. The index system of average universities also has 3 first-grade indicators, 12 second-grade indicators and 48 third-grade indicators (Reputation is excluded). Key universities and average universities share the same indicators but with different weights.

To formulate their weights we generally follow the three principles below: (1) Key universities and average universities have different tasks. The primary task of the former is R&D while the average universities are mainly responsible for teaching. So for key universities, indicators about R&D have higher weights. For average universities, indicators about teaching have higher weights. (2) Some indicators represent quality while some indicators represent quantity. We grant the quality indicators with higher weight than quantity indicators. (3) Key universities are the focus in the education field. Social impact is a critical indicator to evaluate their competitiveness. Thus we establish the indicator of reputation in key universities’ evaluation index system. Academic reputation is derived from the survey covering 1000 experts and scholars in the relevant fields. And the web influence is derived from the statistic taken by five famous search engines, including Google Scholar and Yahoo! etc.

Table3 is the index system of Chinese private colleges’ comprehensive competitiveness. Private colleges have been existed for no longer 20 years in China. So no matter R&D or teaching, the competitiveness of private colleges falls behind far from key universities and average universities. Since most Chinese private colleges are at the primary stage and their main objective is infrastructure construction and special talents cultivation, we evaluate private colleges only from the aspects of facilities, teaching and reputation. We can see from the table above, the index system is much simpler than key universities and average universities. It only contains 3 second-grade indicators and 14 third-grade indicators.

                                                                                                                                                     III.        Evaluation Objects

All objects in our evaluation are undergraduate-level universities that licensed by the Education Ministry. Each year the Education Ministry will publish the latest “Chinese Universities List”. The names and numbers of our evaluation objects are subject to this official list. The final objects are divided into three levels: key universities, average universities and private universities. This is the general official classification standard. In China these three kinds of universities have different levels and tasks. We will use three different index systems to evaluate them. Both key universities and average universities are public schools which are established and funded by government. And key universities are granted by the Education Ministry and mainly consist of three parts: (1)The original key universities in the “Statistical Document of 2003” issued by the Education Ministry;(2) The ministry-run universities;(3) Members of the "211 project" and "985 project”. Private colleges are established by individuals or social organizations and their property right belongs to their founders. We divided all of these universities into 8 types according to their nature: (1) Synthetical; (2) Polytechnic; (3) Normal; (4) Medical; (5) Literature/ Economics / Politics / law; (6) Sports and Arts; (7) Ethnic; (8) Agricultural and Forest.

                                                                                                                        IV.        Data Sources and Processing Methods

During the whole evaluation process, since the number of our evaluation objects and indicators is very large and most original dada can be only collected artificially. The data acquisition work is very hard and complex. We spend a lot of time, funds and manpower on it. After several years’ exploration, we have established relative stable and reliable data acquisition channels. Most original data comes from the following four channels:

(1) The relevant official documents, including statistical reports, yearbooks and documents released by governments;

(2) The domestic and foreign databases, including SCI, SSCI, EI, CSSCI, etc;

(3) The websites of universities and governments;

(4) The relevant publications, including books, newspapers and Journals.

Upon the completion of original data acquisition, we firstly examine the original data comprehensively and deal with the abnormal data artificially. After the inspection and pretreatment of original data, we import the data into “Chinese Universities Evaluation Information Management System” which can automatically realize the functions of computing, statistics and sort. The system, which was designed and developed by RCCSE independently, can undertake most of data processing work and give us the final evaluation scores and rankings automatically.

                                                                       V.         Results Analysis----Based on the Chinese Universities Ranking in 2010

Our evaluation in 2010 contains 980 universities in Chinese mainland (excluding military universities), including 119 key universities, 599 average universities and 262 private universities.

A.    Regions Ranking of Chinese Higher Education

Regions competitiveness ranking of Chinese higher education contains 31 provinces in Chinese mainland (Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan are exclude). The total score of each province equals the sum of the comprehensive competitiveness scores of the universities located in this region. It means that the total score of each province depends on the quantity and quality of local universities. Thus the ranking and scores of regions competitiveness represent the strength and level of local universities and higher education both from quantity aspect and quality aspect. In order to illustrate the dynamic change of regional competitiveness, the ranks for the same 10 regions in 2009 are also listed for comparison.

Table4 Top 10 most competitive regions in higher education in 2010

We can see from the table above, though the total scores are normalized, the gap between them is still very obvious. For example, Beijing’s score is 100 while Tibet’s score is only 19.63. Thus to some extent we conclude that Chinese higher education presents the polarization phenomenon among different regions. We can also see that the ranking in 2010 is basically the same with that in 2009 with only slight changes: Zhejiang Province climes to tenth place, while Sichuan drops outside the list; besides, Liaoning and Hubei clime two and three places respectively to third and fifth, Hebei and Zhejiang both clime one place, Guangdong falls three places, Shandong and Shaanxi fall one place.

B.    Chinese Universities’ Evaluation Rankings

(1) Chinese Key Universities’ Comprehensive Competitiveness Ranking

The evaluation in 2010 contains 119 key universities which represent the highest level of Chinese higher education. They have the best educational resources and plenty of educational funds. And of course they also present the outstanding level both in R&D and teaching. Meanwhile they are the educational stars that draw attention mostly in China mainland. We provide the specific score and ranking for each key university. The top 20 universities and each one’s rank, total score, specific scores, location and type are listed in the following table:

Table5 Chinese Key Universities’ Ranking in 2010(Top 20)

These 20 universities listed above are the best ones in China and represent the top level of Chinese higher education. The overall rank in the first row represents comprehensive competitiveness, that is the overall strength and level composed if resources, teaching, R&D and reputation. The specific ranking computed and ranked by first-grade indicators, gives the resources ranks, teaching ranks, R&D ranks and reputation ranks respectively. The last two rows show each university’s location and type that can help people to learn more about each university’s basic situation.

(2) Chinese Average Universities’ Ranking

Generally speaking, in China average universities’ comprehensive competitiveness lag far behind key universities. However, average universities account for nearly 2/3 of the total number of Chinese universities. Comparing with key universities they undertake most of the undergraduates training mission. So the primary task of average universities is teaching instead of R&D. In 2010 there are 599 average universities entering our evaluation. The top 10 are listed in the following table.

Table6 Chinese Average Universities’ Ranking in 2010(Top 10)

Considering most average universities are not very famous. We get rid of the indicator of social reputation. Thus the index system of average universities’ comprehensive competitiveness evaluation has 3 indicators: educational resources, teaching and R&D. The specific ranking in the above table is ranked by the scores of the three first-grade indicators. And the ranking in the first row is ranked by the total scores summed by the first-grade indicators’ scores.

As we can learn from the specific rank in the table above, different universities have different advantages. Almost none of them performs well both in resources, teaching and R&D. That is some of them are good at teaching but have poor resources and R&D performance. While some of them have high R&D competitiveness but poor resources and R&D performance. And the others with advantageous resources may don’t have satisfying performance both in teaching and R&D. In a word few of average universities have a comprehensive development with the balance of resources, teaching and R&D.

(3)Chinese Private Colleges’ Competitiveness Ranking

Private colleges are the important constituent part of Chinese high education since they play an irreplaceable role in supplementing and balancing the allocation of high education resources. In recent years private universities have attracted increasingly concerns. In 2010 our evaluation includes 262 private universities. The top 10 are listed in the following table.

Table7 Chinese Private Colleges’ Ranking in 2010(Top 10)

During recent years, with the encouragement of Chinese government, private colleges’ quantity and size keep growing. However their comprehensive competitiveness is very weak and their public acceptance is somewhat low. In China private college is still something new and at the primary development phase. We evaluate them only by some basic indicators. In our evaluation report we only give private colleges’ total scores and ranking. To some extent the top10 colleges listed in the above table are the best ones among the 262 Chinese private universities. The common characteristic of them is that they have relative long history and large-size. We know that because of the largest population Chinese higher education is scarce which means only a small number of people can enter public universities. Private college can alleviate this tense situation and compensate the scarce of higher education. Thus we can say that private colleges are facing opportunity and challenge at the same time. That is on one hand they have bright future while on the other hand their development will be very hard presently.

C.    Chinese Universities’ R&D Rankings

R&D is one of the most important functions for universities, especially for key universities. So R&D Competitiveness is the essential content of our evaluation. We use two index systems to evaluate Chinese universities’ R&D Competitiveness respectively and obtained two rankings: “Chinese Universities’ Natural Science and Engineering Technology R&D Competitiveness Ranking” and “Chinese Universities’ Art, Humanity and Social Science R&D Competitiveness Ranking”. The top 10 universities are listed in the following two tables respectively.

Table8 Natural Science & Engineering Technology R&D Ranking (Top 10)

Table9 Art, Humanity and Social Science R&D Ranking (Top 10)

Generally speaking, key universities have the priority to apply education funds. Thus their funds are much more sufficient than average universities. Moreover key universities often have excellent talents and key disciplines to support their competitiveness. Thus no matter in the Natural Science and Engineering Technology R&D Competitiveness Ranking or Art, Humanity and Social Science R&D Competitiveness Ranking, key universities’ performances are much better than average universities. All of the 20 universities of the highest R&D competitiveness listed in the above two tables are key universities. It illustrates that the R&D competitiveness of average universities falls behind far from key universities.

Chinese universities has bright characteristic, especially key universities have remarkable superiority in different professional fields. We can see from the above two tables, Beijing University, Tsinghua University, Fudan University and Nanjing University are outstanding in both Natural Science and Engineering Technology R&D field and Art, Humanity and Social Science R&D field. Some polytechnic universities, such as Shanghai Jiaotong University, Huazhong University of S&T University, Harbin Institute of Technology and Xi'an Jiaotong University, have excellent R&D competitiveness in the field of Natural Science and Engineering Technology but perform ordinarily in the field of Art, Humanity and Social Science. Conversely others universities, such as Renmin University of China, Beijing Normal University and Wuhan University, have excellent Art, Humanity and Social Science R&D competitiveness but ordinary Natural Science and Engineering Technology R&D competitiveness.

                                                                                                                                   VI.        Conclusions & Enlightenments

Chinese universities evaluation released by RCCSE is much more comprehensive, systematic and profound, resulting in many important conclusions. Furthermore, combined with the results and data accumulated by RCCSE over years, we can draw the following conclusions and enlightenments.

(1) The distribution of universities is disequilibrium in different regions. Beijing has almost a quarter of Chinese key universities while some regions don’t have even one key university, such as Qinghai, Tibet, Hainan and Ningxia. Most universities, especially those key universities, centralize in the central part and the eastern part, such as in Beijing, Shanghai, Nanjing, Wuhan etc. These universities sustain the education competitiveness of these regions. In contrast, some provinces, such as Tibet, Ningxia, Qinghai etc, have few universities and the size and quality of these local universities are also very poor. This phenomenon has existed for a long time that is caused by historical and practical reasons. Historically early Chinese universities were mainly initially located in rich regions. These universities with long history gradually developed into the key universities to form the forceful support of these regions. From the practical aspect, universities in rich regions can get enough funds from local government, as well as appeal to excellent teachers and students. Thus to some extent the disequilibrium distribution of higher education resources is inevitable. However we should not ignore its harms. Some measures should be taken to change this situation. In recent years, Chinese government has increased the educational investment in these backward regions. In 2008 Chinese education ministry licensed five universities to enter “211 Project”. The five universities respectively come from Tibet, Ningxia, Qinghai, Xinjiang and Hainan. Through such a strategy we can see that Chinese government has taken great effort to fulfill the gap between different regions.

(2) The education competitiveness is equal with the economic strength of the region. For example, some rich regions, such as Beijing, Shanghai and Jiangsu, are listed at the top of “Regions Education Competitiveness Ranking”. Conversely poor regions also have poor education competitiveness, such as Tibet, Ningxia, Qinghai and so on. To further illustrate the impact of economic factor on the education competitiveness, we make a correlation analysis by the 31 provinces’ education competiveness ranking in 2010 and GDP ranking in 2009. The two factors represent education and economy respectively. We import the two sets of ranking data into SPSS V13.0. The data strictly obey the normal distribution, we conduct Pearson Correlation Analysis. The results are shown in Figure 1:

Figure 1 Correlation analysis result

From the results showed by the above figure, we can see that regional higher education competitiveness has a strong correlation with regional economic level. The coefficient between the higher education ranking and GDP ranking is 0.862, indicating the correlation is very significant. P<0.01, it means that the result has obvious significance.

（3）The ranking of key universities is stable while the ranking of average universities is fluctuated dramatically. For example, Peking University, Tsinghua University, Zhejiang University and Fudan University have been retaining its position as China’s top 4 for recent six years and their ranking order has never been changed. Generally speaking, key universities have the priority to get education funds. Thus their funds are much more sufficient than average universities. Moreover key universities often have excellent talents and key disciplines to support their competitiveness. Thus no matter in the comprehensive competitiveness ranking or R&D competitiveness ranking, key universities usually keep relative stable. For average universities, the competitiveness and development have direct relation with the local economic conditions since their funds mainly come from local governments. Besides, the distribution of Chinese key universities displays the “Gemini” phenomenon which means that two parallel brand-name universities ---- one S&T University and one H&S University, always locate in one city and they can compete with each other and learn from each other. Such as Peking University & Tsinghua University, Fudan University & Shanghai Jiaotong University, Nankai University & Tianjin University, Wuhan University & Huazhong University of Science and Technology.

（4）Key universities, average universities and private colleges lie in three levels and respectively have different targets and emphasizes. Key universities have enough funds, excellent talents and key disciplines to support their competitiveness. Thus no matter comprehensive competiveness ranking or R&D competitiveness, key universities usually have absolute advantage than average universities and private colleges. Thus they should set up the goal of internationalization and struggle for becoming the world’s top-grade universities. For average universities, they should make use of limited resources to reinforce some characteristics subjects instead of pursuing large-size and comprehensive subjects. Although during recent years private colleges have strived, there are many uncertain factors affect their development, resulting in low public acceptance and highly fluctuating ranking. For private colleges, favorable brand and characteristic subject are vital assets. Thus private colleges should set up the goal of servicing local economy and train specialized talents based on the demands of local specialized industry.

（5）The main directions of Chinese universities are quality, efficiency and internationalization. We deduce this enlightenment from the Chinese universities evaluation results in 2010 and the data accumulated by RCCSE over the years. The first direction is quality. There exists obvious unbalance between quantity and quality. Namely, the quantity of Chinese universities’ scientific output increases at a high speed while their quality has not obvious improvement. The total number of papers keeps rising, but the quantity of papers published on “SCIENCE”, “NATURE” and the top papers in ESI is still lower than foreign universities, as well as their citations. The second direction is efficiency. In Chinese universities evaluation index system, we set up the indicators of “research efficiency”, “research output per ￥10,000” and “research output per capital”. From the results of these three indicators, we can see that Chinese universities, including key universities generally have low research efficiency. Thus Chinese universities should pay more attention to improve their efficiency instead of concentrating on increasing input only. The third direction is internationalization. Our statistic results indicate that Chinese universities badly need to enhance their internationalization level. On one hand, Chinese universities achieve few prizes in the international scientific competitions. On the other hand, Chinese universities’ international cooperation is at low level. We believe that Chinese universities and researchers should communicate and cooperate with foreign professions and embrace the world with open arms. Above all, Chinese universities, especially key universities must adhere to the directions of “quality, efficiency and internationalization” to promote their competitiveness and to propel the development of China’ higher education.

References

[1]     Qiu,Jun-Ping etc. The Improvement and Perfection of Chinese Universities Evaluation----Chinese Universities and Majors Ranking in 2009 has released. Higher Education Development and Evaluation, 2009,25(3):19-28

[2]     Jiang,Guo-Hua.The Evaluation and Indicators of Science Research. Beijing: Red Flag Press, 2000

[3]     Wang,Zhan-Jun, Jiang,Guo-Hua. Science Research Evaluation and Universities Evaluation. Beijing: Red Flag Press, 2001

[4]     Qiu,Jun-Ping etc. The Methods, Results and Enlightenments of Chinese Universities and Majors Evaluation. Science & Technology Progress and Policy, 2009,26(1): 118-123

[5]     Bao,Yu-kun etc. The Enlightens of Foreign Science & Technology for China. Soft Science,2000(2):70-75

[6]     Ding,Fu-Hu.The Theory an Methods of R&D Performance. Science and Technology Management Study,2000(3):45-48

[7]     Qiu,Jun-Ping etc. The Report of Chinese Universities and Majors Evaluation(2009～2010).Beijing: Science Press, 2009

[8]     Wen,Ting-Xiao, Hou,Jing-Chuan.The Progress of Science Evaluation in China. Journal of Library and Information Science,2005(10):55-59

[9]     Qiu,Jun-Ping, Zhao, Rong-Ying. Universities Evaluation and R&D Evaluation. Beijing: Huaxia Press, 2005