Democratizing Excellence: The University of Mindanao’s Strategic Journey into Global Rankings

Davao City, Philippines — In the traditional landscape of higher education, "quality" is often synonymous with "exclusivity." The prevailing logic suggests that to maintain high standards, institutions must implement rigid admission barriers. However, the University of Mindanao (UM) is challenging this legacy. Guided by its vision of becoming a leading globally engaged university, UM operates on a philosophy of transformative education—polishing "diamonds in the rough" through a unique open admission policy. This mission stands in bold contrast to the elite "gatekeeper" model. At UM, the belief is that potential is not pre-determined by an entrance exam; instead, even those who may not fit the mold of traditional "elite" institutions deserve a chance to become successful, significant contributors to society. To ensure this transformative process meets the highest bar, UM has embarked on the rigorous path of global university rankings.

The University of Mindanao takes immense pride in its recent inclusion in several prestigious global ranking systems, which serve as an external validation of its institutional mission. It has successfully debuted in the QS Asia University Rankings, standing as the only higher education institution in the Davao Region to achieve both a QS Stars Rating and a spot in the regional rankings. Furthermore, the university has sustained its global standing in the Times Higher Education (THE) Impact Rankings, which evaluates institutions based on their commitment to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. Additionally, UM’s strong performance in the AppliedHE Private University Ranking—placing 17th in the Philippines and 188th in Asia—solidifies its position as a leader in delivering quality education that creates a measurable, positive impact within the community.

The Strategic Value of Global Rankings

For an institution like UM, participating in these global rankings serves as more than just a metric; it is a vital tool for planning, policy and control.

• Validation of Quality Assurance: Rankings prove that an "open-door" policy does not mean a "low-standard" output. By meeting international benchmarks, UM validates that its academic programs are on par with global standards, ensuring responsiveness and impact for all its stakeholders.

• Institutional Pride and Brand Equity: Beyond data, rankings bolster the pride and morale of students and faculty. It sends a powerful message: "The education we provide and receive at UM is world-class." This sense of belonging to a globally recognized institution fosters a culture of excellence and a shared commitment to the university’s mission.

Career Outcomes: The Tangible Benefit for Graduates

One of the most significant advantages of participating in global ranking is the impact on graduate employability. Research suggests that graduates from well-ranked universities often enjoy better career opportunities and higher entry-level salaries (Kapur et al., 2016).

• Signaling Effect: Rankings act as a "quality signal" to the labor market. High ratings in academic and employer reputation, though appearing subjective, reflect the institution's ability to translate its standards into the perception of the sectors it serves.

• Employability Advantage: Employers often use rankings as a proxy for the rigor of a student's training. Consequently, UM’s presence in these rankings helps bring its graduates’ names onto the "global map," providing them with a competitive edge in both local and international job markets.

Beyond Academic Cosmetics: Measuring Research and Teaching

Critics often dismiss rankings as "academic cosmetics"—a superficial branding exercise. However, the bulk of ranking criteria considers tangible institutional outcomes that are difficult to fake. To ensure that only institutions with well-established reputational outcomes and consistent academic contributions are considered, ranking organizations have set rigorous entry requisites.

For instance, THE requires a minimum threshold of Scopus-indexed publications (typically 1,000 relevant publications over a five-year period) and a sustained number of new publications annually. For QS, the requirement is a minimum of 100 publications. Even as critics like Soh (2017) highlight “deadly sins” such as methodological flaws and weight discrepancies, these strict eligibility criteria act as a filter, ensuring that a university possesses a critical mass of research before it can even be evaluated. For UM, meeting these entry requirements is the first proof that its policy and control mechanisms are successfully driving scholarly productivity.

Beyond the idea of academic cosmetics, global rankings measure institutional outcomes that define a university's true impact. As Hazelkorn (2015) observes, rankings have transformed from simple technical lists into powerful policy instruments that drive competition and institutional decision-making. Research excellence is a primary pillar, with criteria based on citations, international research networks, and research outputs per faculty; these metrics objectively indicate how well a university performs its major function of knowledge creation. Complementing this are reputation surveys, which—while subjective—reflect the institution’s ability to translate its quality and standards into the perception of the immediate sectors it directly connects with. For UM students, high ratings in academic and employer reputations translate directly to high employability, proving that a transformative education produces graduates who can successfully compete with those from even the most "elite" institutions.

These global benchmarks provide a two-pronged benefit for the UM community by bolstering institutional pride and directly enhancing graduate outcomes. For students and faculty, the knowledge that a UM education follows global standards fosters a deep sense of morale and confirms that their hard work is recognized on the international stage. According to Marginson (2013), rankings have become an integral part of a "status culture" that regulates the relative value of graduate credentials in a global market. This recognition acts as a powerful quality signal; graduates from well-ranked universities often enjoy higher employability, better career opportunities, and more competitive salaries. By placing UM on the global map of education, these rankings prove that the university’s unique open admission policy does not compromise quality but instead offers a global-level education to a broader, more diverse demographic.

Navigating Institutional Challenges and Strategic Shifts

The journey toward global engagement is a difficult climb that requires significant institutional shifts, beginning with the critical challenge of securing UM’s stakeholder buy-in. It is essential for its internal stakeholders, including faculty and students, to appreciate the added value of these efforts, not as burdensome administrative tasks but as a primary means of enhancing the value of every UM degree. Furthermore, a critical policy challenge exists in balancing the tension between research and teaching. Climbing the rankings necessitates a substantial increase in Scopus-indexed publications, which requires both rigid evaluation and a cultural shift for faculty members who, burdened by heavy loads, may naturally prioritize classroom instruction over the high-pressure of  publication in high-quality indexed journals. Finally, sustained participation requires strategic resource allocation to manage the rising costs associated with international visibility and research infrastructure, demanding a long-term financial commitment to ensure UM remains a key player in the global arena.

References:

• Hazelkorn, E. (2015). Rankings and the reshaping of higher education: the battle for world-class excellence. Palgrave Macmillan.

• Kapur, N., Lytkin, N., Chen, B.-C., Agarwal, D., & Perisic, I. (2016). Ranking Universities Based on Career Outcomes of Graduates [Review of Ranking Universities Based on Career Outcomes of Graduates]. In The 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference.

• Soh, K. (2017). The seven deadly sins of world university rankings: Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 39(1), 104-115.

• Marginson, S. (2013). University rankings and social science. European Journal of Education, 49(1), 45-59.