**Section 7**

**Public Knowledge: Transference and Dissemination** 

354 Social Sciences and Cultural Studies – Issues of Language, Public Opinion, Education and Welfare

Brophy, J. (1999). Toward a model of the value aspects of motivation in education:

Bresler, L. (2010). Integration of music into academic disciplines: A manifestation of

Burnard, P. (2007). Routes to understanding musical creativity. In: *International Handbook of* 

Elliott, D. J. (1995). *Music matters: A new philosophy of music education,* Oxford University

Hargreaves, D. J.; Miell, D. & MacDonald, R. A. R. (2009). What are musical identities, and

Harkema, S. J. M. & Schout, H. (2008). Incorporating Student-Centered Learning in

Maazel, L. (2009). Nogomet, violina in dirigentska paličica/Football, violin and conducting

Pintrich, P. R. & Schunk, D. H. (1996). *Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications.* Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-02-395621-6, New Jersey Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council 2006 http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:394:0010:0018:en:PDF

Rojko, U. (2009): Glasbena delavnica za otroke / Music Workshop for Children, In: *24.* 

http://www.ljubljanafestival.si/uploads/FL\_SGD\_programska\_knjizica\_web.pdf

Sawyer, R. K. (1997): *Creativity in Performance*, Ablex Publishing Corporation, ISBN 978-156-

Sawyer, R. K. (1999): The emergence of creativity. *Philosophical Psychology.* Vol.12, No. 4, pp.

*Slovenski glasbeni dnevi/ The 24th Slovenian Music Days,* Festival Ljubljana, 14. 3. 2009,

*psychologist.* Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 75 – 85, ISSN 0046-1520

9721

(accepted 6.5.2011)

Available from

7503-35-7, London

447-469, ISSN 0951-5089

(accepted 3.10.2011)

4020-4857-9, The Netherlands

Press, ISBN 0-19-509171-X, New York

Press, ISBN 978-0-19-850932-5, New York

No. 4, (December 2008), pp. 513 – 526, ISSN 1 465-3435

stick, In: (news)paper *Delo,* 21. November, pp. 20

Developing appreciation for particular learning domains and activities. *Educational* 

educational entrepreneurship. *Glasba v šoli in vrtcu*. Vol. XV, No. 1, 3-17, ISSN 1854-

*Research in Arts Education*, Liora Bresler (Ed.), pp. 1199 – 1214, Springer, ISBN 978-1-

why are they important? In: *Musical Identities (*2nd edition), Raymond A. R. MacDonald, David J. Hargreaves, Dorothy Miell (Ed.), pp. 1- 20, Oxford University

Innovation and Entrepreneurship Education, *European Journal of Education.* Vol. 43,

**19** 

*Spain* 

**International Higher Education Rankings** 

**in Social Sciences and Humanities?** 

*The University of Zaragoza & The Autonomous University of Madrid,* 

José M. Gómez-Sancho and Carmen Pérez-Esparrells

**at a Glance: How to Valorise the Research** 

As part of the international comparison of higher education, the last decade witnessed an explosion of rankings of higher education institutions (hereinafter HEIs) at both national and international level. Consequently, in almost all countries HEIs are compared in national rankings compiled by both the public and private sector; worldwide, furthermore, so-called global university rankings have been elaborated and most countries are concerned about their implications. This process is relentless, and despite being sharply criticised, such rankings or league tables are increasingly being used to compare HEIs. Their use is partly responsible for increased competition among universities at national level and, more

The international university rankings attempt "simplistically" to assess the "quality of higher education", a concept which is far from clear, particularly as an abstract term, and often misunderstood as to what it measures. Quality is not one-dimensional, but rather multidimensional: the quality of teaching, the quality of research, quality as a combination of activities (teaching and learning, research, development and innovation), quality as an institutional mission, etc. As a result of this multidimensionality there is no consensus on what constitutes "quality" or "excellence" in higher education. Furthermore, quality is not homogeneous within each HEI, as its schools, departments or programs vary. In general, although the majority of the more established rankings attempt to measure precisely academic and scientific quality in both teaching and research, experience has shown that the most popular global rankings (i.e. the rankings of world-class universities) in fact reflect many factors related to institutional reputation and prestige, and there is an acknowledged lack of an appropriate battery of performance indicators at international level to comprehensively measure the total quality of HEIs and to consider all the fields of knowledge in which they work. So far, the critical element is the management of knowledge and how to generate "good" rankings. The theory behind of rankings seems clear, it has a substantive meaning but it is not trouble-free the construction of indicators for all the areas

We examine the major global rankings (the ARWU, the QS World University rankings and the new THES World University Rankings) and other international rankings specialized in

importantly, among the most prestigious institutions at international level.

(European University Association, 2011).

**1. Introduction** 
