The Higher Education Minister has released Setara, the first-ever local rating system for higher education institutions in Malaysia. University of Malaya (UM) is the only public higher education institution to obtain a five-star (out of six) rating.
Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Khaled Nordin said that “the purpose of Setara is to enable universities to measure their quality and see where they stand in relation to one another.” [Thestar]
Thing is, the comparison is meaningless if we don’t have any university that is on par with the world’s best universities. There is no point being the best among the worst.
The Setara ranking is obviously created to counteract the Times Higher Education Supplement (THES) World University Rankings which often undermined our local universities. I am not a big fan of THES either, as I think it’s very biased in favour of English based universities… but that doesn’t mean that it has no credibility at all.
Besides, we don’t need a ranking system to know how good or bad our universities are. I graduated from UM five years ago, and I know what level we were at; and to imagine that the quality has worsened since then… I don’t even want to think about it.
If our ministry wants to come out with a ranking system of our own, they should at least compare our universities with others and see how we ranked. Singapore has a couple of respectable universities to be compared with, and Thailand has one or two universities that ranked better than us in THES too.
Let’s compare our university with others using our own ranking system, i.e. NUS, NTU and Chulalongkorn University etc. and see how we fare… the Setara would be much more meaningful that way.
Regardless, it’s the follow-up steps and actions that matter. What is our ministry trying to do to improve the quality of our local universities?
Identifying an Apex university (or two) means nothing; we could again pick two relatively good apples among a basket of rotten fruits… it is meaningless.
One of the best ways to identify the universities’ qualities is assessments by employers and future employers… but heck, the criteria is not considered at all in our Setara ranking. Our ministry needs to start listening from the right people and stop hiding behind the desk.
Ow well, I feel sorry for you. You seems to know nothing about SETARA and yet claim to be champion of higher education especially internationally. You seems to be in the similar group with those who think that anything foreign and Singapore is much better than Malaysia. I wonder why you are still in Malaysia that you seems to despise so much.
In the first place SETARA is a rating and not a ranking instrument. It is an excercise to find the strengths and weaknesses of our local universities (IPTAs for the time being) for purpose of continous quality improvement. Never at any time that SETARA claim that the point represent anything but just an indication where they are.
For your information the instrument was develop after series of discussion with the stakeholders i.e the IPTAs, and several selected international universities. They have agreed and satisfied with the instrument that were being developed and used. You might be wondering which universities that participated and help us in developing the instruments… Suprise of the suprise National University of Singapore, University of Melbourne, Sedney University of Technology and Mahidol University (In case you don’t know it is in Thailand… the best university in Thailand in term of Reseach and Academic program.. beating Chulalongkorn University or Thammasart University based on the Thailand’s national ranking)
It was never claimed that the instrument is perfect and the best however its is in the infant stage and at least as a first step towards improving the local universities especially the IPTAs.
You seems to despise the local IPTAs, its ok for as I have said earlier that I pity you and your narrow mindedness.
I am just wondering how graduates from your so call no standard or no class Malaysian IPTAs were able to gain places in the world standard universities and were able to get their Master and PhD in various field of studies, ranging from economics, medical sciences and engineering. Most of those PhDs holders have graduated from your so call world standard universities and teaching in the IPTAs. I am very sure they have imparted their knowledge and experiences that they have acquired from those world standards universities. If as you claimed that the local IPTAs are hopeless then the knowledge that the local graduates got are indeed indirectly from your acclaimed world standard universities, and therefore they are also hopeless.
My advice to poor you is to open your eyes and heart. Make a lot of research and take the trouble to know more about the universities be it international or local. Be proud that you are Malaysian…
Zsenteri… you are quite imaginative ain’t so? When did I claim to be the champion of higher education in Malaysia? And when did I say that foreign universities are always better than Malaysia’s?
My major point is that if we are to have a rating or ranking system, we need to be have a respectable par setting to begin with… a rating among local universities is meaningless if we don’t know where we are compared to foreign universities.
There are many factors involved in lifting the IPTA standard, the quality of academicians is one thing, the politics and bureaucracy is another, and not forgot to mention the quality of the intake.
I am proud to be a Malaysian, but that doesn’t mean we need to content with what we have. With demands came improvements, as simple as that. And yes, I am not happy with our IPTAs standard at the moment… and if that makes me a narrowminded person, just be it.
http://tempinis.wordpress.com/…/half-baked-research-assessment-exercise/
Zsenteri is the one who doesn’t know what he is talking about. See my analysis above.
Is so pity you don’t even understand what I have explain. Obviously you refuse to understand.
for your benefit and information do read the following carefully and with an open mind………
For your information the instrument was develop after series of discussion with the stakeholders i.e the IPTAs, and several selected international universities. They have agreed and satisfied with the instrument that were being developed and used. You might be wondering which universities that participated and help us in developing the instruments… Suprise of the suprise National University of Singapore, University of Melbourne, Sedney University of Technology and Mahidol University (In case you don’t know it is in Thailand… the best university in Thailand in term of Reseach and Academic program.. beating Chulalongkorn University or Thammasart University based on the Thailand’s national ranking)
It was never claimed that the instrument is perfect and the best however its is in the infant stage and at least as a first step towards improving the local universities especially the IPTAs. by identifying the strength and weakness.
I am just wondering how graduates from your so call no standard or no class Malaysian IPTAs were able to gain places in the world standard universities and were able to get their Master and PhD in various field of studies, ranging from economics, medical sciences and engineering. Most of those PhDs holders have graduated from your so call world standard universities and teaching in the IPTAs. I am very sure they have imparted their knowledge and experiences that they have acquired from those world standards universities. If as you claimed that the local IPTAs are hopeless then the knowledge that the local graduates got are indeed indirectly from your acclaimed world standard universities, and therefore they are also hopeless.
Dude, it’s me or you that refuse to read with an open mind and didn’t bother to read my original article to understand what I’ve written?
It doesn’t matter who was helping to develop the instrument; at the end of the day it’s the implementation that matters. It reminds me of MUST which MIT helped to develop the system years ago, yet it failed miserably in the end.
Yes, NUS etc, have helped developing the instrument, so what? Do you seriously believe that UM with a five out of six rating is a proper par to kick off the rating with? Where should we put in NUS, Mahidol, Harvard or Cambridge etc.? What’s the point if we have a university with six out of six rating yet couldn’t match those reputable universities at all?
Even if we have PhDs holders from those so call world class universities teaching at our local universities, it means nothing if there are too many political issues involved within the varsity. Are bureaucracy, politics and racial issues taken into consideration for Setara ratings? I doubt.
Graduates from local universities still managed to gain places in world standard universities (and companies) because we have some intelligent students to begin with… I never denied the fact; and I never denied that some of our academicians are bright people. Read the above paragraph again if you can’t get my point.
Fact is, local universities are producing more low quality graduates that good quality graduates. In my original article I have mentioned that the best assessment is by employers and future employers… do you disagree on that? And is Setara taking that for consideration?