Editorial authors debate whether transforming, eliminating rankings would be beneficial

A recent pair of articles published in the Lancet and University World News (UWN) debate the future of institutional rankings. In the Lancet, Richard Horton points to a recent deconstruction of leading university rankings and their methodological issues. He discusses how rankings could be moved from a “game of winners and losers” to something that “measures what we really believe universities are for.” In UWN, Richard Holmes agrees with several of Horton’s points, but disagrees with the proposed solutions. Holmes provides an overview of the broader ranking field and recent trends in this area before concluding that the solutions proposed by Horton and others–including abolishing or radically restructuring rankings–are not likely to benefit the sector or the public.