Purpose

This study evaluates the correlations between the universities' type of property (public, private associative and private corporate), institutional seniority (<20, 20–45 and >45 years) and the presence and position in national and international university rankings.

Design/methodology/approach

It considers 90 Peruvian universities certified by SUNEDU (public agency for the accreditation of universities in Peru). According to their presence in 20 university rankings (yes/no) and the position (tertiles) in two world rankings: Webometrics and SIR Iberoamericano, four universities participated in 10 or more rankings and only 16 (18%) in six or more.

Findings

The private corporate universities were the least old (p < 0.01). No association was found with the type of property both in the presence in rankings and in the positioning (p > 0.05), except in one where there was less participation of public institutions. Long-lived universities had higher participation and better positioning in rankings than those with less seniority (p < 0.01). The presence and better positioning in university rankings depend on institutional seniority and not on the type of ownership in Peruvian licensed universities.

Originality/value

This research highlights the lack of equity in several international rankings for the evaluation of the quality of universities, in the respect that most of them give priority to aspects related to institutional seniority and size. At the same time, the results of younger and smaller institutions are not put into perspective.

中文翻译：

---

机构资历和所有权类型对大学质量排名的影响：秘鲁大学的相关分析

目的

本研究评估了大学财产类型（公共、私营联合和私营企业）、机构资历（<20、20-45 和 >45 岁）与在国内和国际大学排名中的存在和位置之间的相关性。

设计/方法/方法

它考虑了经 SUNEDU（秘鲁大学认证公共机构）认证的 90 所秘鲁大学。根据它们在 20 个大学排名中的存在（是/否）和两个世界排名（Webometrics 和 SIR Iberoamericano）中的位置（三分位数），有四所大学参与了 10 个或更多的排名，只有 16 个 (18%) 参与了 6 个或更多的排名。

发现

私立企业大学的年龄最小（p  < 0.01）。 除了在公共机构参与较少的情况下，在排名和定位中都没有发现与财产类型的关联（p > 0.05）。与资历较低的大学相比，历史悠久的大学在排名中具有更高的参与度和更好的定位（p  < 0.01）。在大学排名中的存在和更好的定位取决于机构的资历，而不是秘鲁许可大学的所有权类型。

原创性/价值

本研究凸显了若干国际大学质量评估排名缺乏公平性，因为大多数排名优先考虑与机构资历和规模相关的方面。与此同时，年轻和规模较小的机构的结果没有得到考虑。