Cash for Gold
The most brazen attempt to use the increasing importance and prestige of global university rankings has been by QS World Rankings. Alongside its ostensibly objective list of what it considers the world’s top 800 universities, QS World Rankings offers a parallel rating-system; a paid for, opt-in gold-star service. Universities that pay for this service are evaluated against a set of 51 criteria, and awarding between one and five (and a five plus) stars in eight different categories. Alongside its published list of 800, the awarded number of gold stars appear next to the universities name. Universities that do not appear in the rankings can also utilise this gold-star service. Take for instance Karaganda Economic University, located in the fourth largest city in Kazakhstan. According to the criteria set out by QS for its World Rankings, this institution is not among the top 800 universities in the world. Yet according to the QS gold-star service, Karaganda Economic University is rated with three gold stars.
Similar universities around the world, either not included in the world rankings or which sit on the lower end of the league table, pay large amounts for this service, presumably to market themselves as a gold-star accredited university. According to Inside Higher Education in 2013, this service cost $9,850 as well as “an additional annual licensing fee of $6,850 for each of the three years the license is valid, allowing them [the universities] to use QS’s graphics and logos in their promotional materials. This brings the total cost to a participating university to $30,400 for three years.” The prestige of the QS name, along with the increasing use of business style marketing at universities, justifies universities paying such prices.
QS maintains that this gold-star service is separate to its world rankings and is simply intended to provide more in-depth information to students deciding upon their university. Dr Marginson is not convinced, claiming that “the use of client-orientated, paid for ‘stars’…conflicts with the rankings process, in that it adds a fake valuation – any valuation that you can purchase has no valid foundation, surely – alongside what is meant to be an objective ranking.” Currently, QS World Rankings is the only top global ranking to offer such a paid for service
