Are Universities Prioritising Rankings Over Student Learning?

As competition for global prestige intensifies, universities face a difficult question: are they measuring success by the quality of education students receive, or by the rankings, research indicators and reputation that make institutions more visible internationally?

By Rasim Abdurahman
Education Editor, Edunews.az

October 13, 2026

University rankings have become an influential part of higher education. Students consult them when choosing where to study, governments use them to assess institutional performance, and universities promote their positions to attract international students, academic talent and research partnerships.

But a university's position in a global ranking does not necessarily tell students everything they need to know about the quality of teaching, the support they will receive or the skills they will develop.

This tension is receiving renewed attention in international education policy. In May 2026, UNESCO published an analysis examining how funding pressures, performance indicators and competition for prestige can influence universities' priorities.

The discussion raises a fundamental question: when universities compete to improve their global standing, could student learning become a secondary priority?

Why University Rankings Matter

International university rankings have become an important reference point in higher education.

Systems such as the QS World University Rankings and Times Higher Education World University Rankings compare institutions using combinations of indicators related to research, academic reputation, citations, international engagement and other measures.

These comparisons can provide useful information. They help prospective students explore unfamiliar institutions, allow universities to benchmark their performance and draw attention to research achievements.

For universities seeking international partnerships, a strong ranking position may also improve visibility and credibility.

However, rankings are not comprehensive assessments of every aspect of the student experience.

An institution can perform strongly on research-related indicators without necessarily providing the same quality of teaching, academic support or learning opportunities across all its programmes.

The central challenge is not that rankings exist. It is whether universities and policymakers treat them as one source of information or as the principal definition of institutional success.

UNESCO Raises Concerns About Incentives and Funding

In its May 28, 2026, article, Rethinking Incentives, Metrics and Funding in Global Higher Education, UNESCO contributors Eszter Lukács and Zsolt Kohus examine the effects of financial pressure and prestige-driven competition on universities.

Their analysis argues that institutions operating under financial constraints may be encouraged to prioritise the activities rewarded by rankings and performance metrics.

This can create difficult choices.

Universities must fund teaching, laboratories, libraries, student services, research programmes and infrastructure. When financial resources are limited, the indicators that influence funding, reputation or international recruitment may affect which activities receive the greatest attention.

If research visibility is rewarded more strongly than improvements in classroom teaching, institutions may have incentives to invest disproportionately in research performance.

That does not mean every highly ranked university neglects its students. Rather, it highlights a structural risk: what institutions are rewarded for measuring can influence what they choose to prioritise.

UNESCO's discussion also raises concerns about inequalities between institutions. Universities that already possess substantial resources and international visibility may be better positioned to attract additional funding and talent, potentially widening the gap between globally prominent institutions and those serving different local or regional needs.

Research Excellence Is Not the Same as Teaching Excellence

Research and teaching are both essential university functions. In many cases, they reinforce each other: students benefit when lecturers bring new discoveries, practical expertise and current knowledge into the classroom.

The problem emerges when research performance becomes a substitute for assessing educational quality.

Consider two hypothetical universities.

University A has a strong international reputation, extensive research output and a high position in global rankings. However, its students report limited access to lecturers, slow feedback and insufficient academic guidance.

University B has a more modest international profile but offers smaller classes, regular feedback, strong academic advising and opportunities to apply knowledge through practical projects.

Which university provides the better education?

The answer depends on the student's needs, subject and career goals. But rankings alone may not provide enough information to make that decision.

A more complete assessment would examine whether students develop subject knowledge, critical thinking, communication skills and the ability to apply what they have learned.

It would also consider whether students can complete their studies successfully and access meaningful opportunities after graduation.

What Should Universities Measure Instead?

Rankings are unlikely to disappear, and they do not need to. The more important question is how to complement them with evidence that directly reflects student learning and educational outcomes.

Universities and policymakers could give greater attention to several indicators.

1. Learning outcomes

Do students demonstrate measurable progress in knowledge, reasoning and subject-specific competencies? Assessments should examine what students understand and can do, rather than relying only on grades or course completion.

2. Teaching quality

Students need access to effective teaching, clear explanations, constructive feedback and appropriate academic support. Institutions should evaluate these areas through multiple sources of evidence rather than relying on a single satisfaction survey.

3. Student progression and completion

Enrolment figures do not tell the whole story. Universities should also examine retention, graduation rates, delays in completing degrees and the reasons students leave their programmes.

4. Graduate outcomes

Employment rates, career progression and the relevance of graduates' skills can help show whether programmes prepare students for work and further learning. These measures should be interpreted carefully because outcomes also depend on economic conditions, geography and students' circumstances.

5. Equity and access

A high-performing university should also consider whether students from disadvantaged backgrounds can enter, participate in and complete their studies. Educational quality is not only about excellence; it is also about who benefits from it.

UNESCO's work on quality assurance in higher education similarly emphasises the importance of maintaining academic standards, improving educational provision and responding to changing labour-market and societal needs.

The Global Inequality Behind University Rankings

Competition for international prestige can have consequences beyond individual campuses.

Well-funded universities often have greater capacity to recruit leading researchers, maintain advanced laboratories, develop international partnerships and support large research teams.

When funding systems disproportionately reward already visible institutions, universities with fewer resources may find it harder to compete.

This can reinforce existing differences between higher education systems and countries.

The issue is especially important for universities whose primary mission includes widening access, training professionals for local economies or addressing regional development needs.

An institution may deliver considerable social value without producing the volume of internationally cited research associated with the highest positions in global rankings.

For example, a regional university that trains teachers, nurses, engineers and public-service professionals may make a substantial contribution to its community. Its value cannot be assessed solely through international research visibility.

This does not mean research excellence should be discouraged. It means higher education systems need to recognise that universities have different missions and that success should be assessed accordingly.

What Does This Mean for Students Choosing a University?

For prospective students, global rankings can be a useful starting point — but they should not be the final decision-making tool.

Before choosing a university, applicants should investigate questions such as:

What modules and practical skills will the programme teach?

How accessible are lecturers and academic advisers?

What opportunities exist for internships, research projects and industry placements?

What are the programme's graduation and employment outcomes?

Are tuition fees and living costs manageable?

Does the university provide adequate support for international students or learners with additional needs?

Students should also distinguish between an institution's overall ranking and the quality of the specific department or degree they intend to study.

A university's international reputation may be strong in one discipline and less established in another. The learning environment and programme structure can matter more to an individual student than a difference of several places in a global league table.

Edunews Analysis: The Problem Is Not Rankings — It Is What They Reward

University rankings have a legitimate role in helping students navigate an increasingly complex international education market. They can make some institutional information easier to compare and encourage universities to examine their performance.

But a ranking is a measurement tool, not a complete definition of educational success.

The danger arises when institutions begin organising their strategies around the indicators most likely to improve their position, rather than around the needs of students and society.

If universities concentrate heavily on research visibility, reputation and international recruitment, they may overlook less visible but equally important responsibilities: effective teaching, timely academic support, affordable access and the development of practical skills.

A better approach would combine rankings with transparent information about teaching, learning outcomes, student progression, graduate employment and equity.

Governments and funding bodies also have a role. If public funding rewards only a narrow set of indicators, institutions may have little incentive to invest in educational priorities that are harder to measure.

For higher education systems, the objective should be to encourage excellence without reducing the university mission to a single score.

What Could Change in the Future?

The debate over rankings points towards a broader reassessment of how universities demonstrate their value.

Future approaches to quality assurance could place greater emphasis on evidence of learning, student experience and the relevance of qualifications to society and the labour market.

Universities may also need to communicate their strengths more clearly, explaining not only where they rank but what students can expect to learn and achieve.

For policymakers, a balanced framework could recognise research excellence, teaching quality, inclusion, innovation and community contribution without assuming that every institution should pursue the same model.

Such an approach would allow universities to remain internationally competitive while preserving their wider educational responsibilities.

Conclusion

University rankings are likely to remain influential in international higher education. They provide visibility, facilitate comparison and can help students explore their options.

But they cannot answer every question about educational quality.

The real measure of a university is not simply how highly it ranks, how many papers it publishes or how widely its name is recognised. It is also whether students receive a meaningful education, develop lasting skills and graduate prepared for the challenges ahead.

The challenge for universities is therefore not to abandon rankings, but to ensure that the pursuit of prestige does not overshadow the purpose of higher education.

A university should not only be judged by how it compares with other institutions, but also by how much its students learn and how effectively it prepares them for life beyond graduation.

Sources

UNESCO. Rethinking Incentives, Metrics and Funding in Global Higher Education. May 28, 2026.

UNESCO. Quality Assurance in Higher Education.

UNESCO. Transforming Higher Education: Global Collaboration on Visioning and Action. March 2026.

UNESCO. Higher Education Global Trends Report 2026.

Editorial Note: This article draws on UNESCO publications and international higher education policy discussions. The examples comparing universities are illustrative, not descriptions of specific institutions.