Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues (Print ISSN: 1544-0036; Online ISSN: 1544-0044)

Research Article: 2021 Vol: 24 Issue: 2S

The Process of Building a World-class Educational System in Jordan

Eyad A. Shaban, Al-Ahliyya Amman University


This paper analyzes why the improvement of a top-notch university system addresses a judicious, even unavoidable, arrangement approach for Jordan because of world university rankings. It gathers proof scrutinizing the worth of arrangements that immediate unjustifiable accentuation on the grouping of assets and the improvement of world-class universities, particularly in more modest countries. A few ongoing strategy drives have improved Jordan’s capacity to keep a solid university system, and this has significant ramifications for the global advancement of Jordanian advanced education. The 'system' approach requires that Jordan keep on giving close consideration to world university rankings however foster more refined methods for characterizing and benchmarking universities to guarantee the necessary variety of institutional missions to accomplish all that is anticipated from the system.


Invigorate, Institutional Marketing, Financial Plan, Education


Not many countries see education as a fare item in a remarkable same manner as Jordan. Setting education as one of the top administrations sends out. This spots Jordan as the country with the extraordinary dependence on worldwide understudies to adjust the advanced education financial plan. Worldwide understudies currently include 19.7 percent of all tertiary education enrolments, well in front of the OECD normal of 7.3 percent. The normal university in Jordan currently infers 15% of its income from global understudy expenses. Each of the 27 universities are presented to the worldwide advanced education market causing a circumstance whereby Jordan is profoundly reliant upon its great remaining in the global market and the supportability of that market during financial slump.

What are the Global Ranking Systems Informing us Regarding Universities Systems?

World university rankings center consideration around the main universities and backing the hypothesis that centralization of assets to foster world-driving universities is fundamental for a country to take an interest adequately in the worldwide information economy. Past research has featured the potential for rankings to be utilized helpfully by governments to 'invigorate a culture of value' and by organizations 'for key arranging and quality improvement purposes' (Al-Zoubi, 2019). Others attest that rankings ought not be utilized to convey strategy messages on educational issues and that 'while markers and class tables are sufficient to begin a conversation on advanced education issues, they are not adequate to close it' (Saisana & D'Hombres, 2008). Absolutely what are the worldwide university rankings advising us? Not much, but rather they do uncover something about the static idea of university systems and the drawn-out responsibility needed by governments and social orders for singular universities to satisfy their latent capacity. Rankings can likewise be utilized as an amazing institutional benchmarking apparatus. Indeed, even the SJTU rankings started life as an endeavour to benchmark institutional execution (Liu, 2009). Before the rankings were distributed. On the disadvantage, rankings hazard filling a culture of university the board by moment delight bringing about transient techniques to lift obvious execution. They are one dimensional and normally planned to start from the top, with pointers dependent on the quantifiable attributes of driving universities. Measures utilized in the tables are 'generally controlled by the information accessible, not really by clear meanings of value'.

'A-list's gets inseparable from 'Western' which implies an accentuation on enormous financial plan logical examination. Hence, what is estimated by the world university rankings is how much universities adjust to those significant US foundations that are enormous, affluent and generally have expansive control inclusion.

This outcomes in universities in both created and non-industrial countries attempting to 'imitate the West', as opposed to 'foster their own interesting character' (Birnbaum, 2007). Governments are acutely searching for methodologies to lift their leader universities into the rankings with the supported methodologies being the centralization of monetary and HR and gathering of minimum amount through consolidations. Rankings anyway are a lose-lose situation and, best case scenario, such methodologies will just permit universities to hold their place given the pervasiveness of countries embracing comparative.

Methods and Strategies to Enhance the Performance of the Competing Universities

Hong Kong is the first among east Asian social orders to force quality measures to screen the advanced education area (Mok, 2000). While perceiving that individual HEIs in Hong Kong may have various jobs, missions, and attributes and that they offer an incredible assortment of projects and different styles of instructing, the UGC accepts that there is a solid need to advance and guarantee quality advanced education, particularly in the time of fast extension of advanced education. There are three significant quality confirmation exercises, in particular, research evaluation works out (RAEs), instructing and learning quality interaction audits (TLQPRs), and the board surveys (MRs). Since the mid-1990s, three RAEs were directed in 1994, 1996 and 1999 to guarantee research quality; while two TLQPRs were led in 1997 and 2003 to assess if HEIs had appropriately organized self‐monitoring and self‐evaluation. Also, the UGC is worried about whether universities in Hong Kong have embraced a "learner‐oriented culture" in instructing and learning. MRs have been led to analyze the jobs, missions, scholarly goals, asset allotment, arranging, and monetary interaction components of individual HEIs (French, 1997; Mok, 2000). Most as of late, universities have begun another flood of administration audit to smooth out their authoritative designs to advance productivity and adequacy of university administration. The accompanying part talks about and analyzes these presentation survey practices being directed somewhat recently in Hong Kong.

Concentration of Resources

There is no uncertainty that rankings have prompted unjustifiable strategy accentuation on the improvement of a-list universities which generally compares to the best two percent (top 200). Universities further down the request are reacting by adjusting to the highest quality level set by the pioneers, as one would anticipate. Be that as it may, universities set even at number 500 share little for all intents and purpose with the world chiefs. The methodologies utilized by the main establishments are unseemly to advise the course regarding 98% of world universities but these universities keep on drawing in a dominant part of strategy consideration and regularly give 'best practice' cases to the university area around the world.

Difficulties in Developing World-Class Universities

A few countries have communicated goals to foster universities which are put on the planet top 20. Investigation by QS (Sowter, 2008) of the Occasions HE-QS World University Rankings gives further bits of knowledge into driving universities showing that they are grounded, little or medium measured by world guidelines; are incredibly well resourced; and are profoundly specific in their enlistment of both staff and understudies. Sowter's evaluations line up with those announced by Usher (2006) which express that a world driving university is in any event a US$1.5 to 2 billion venture. Little and non-industrial countries are accordingly con fronted by practically impossible difficulties in the journey to foster world-driving universities including the accessibility of human resources inside their country and the failure to draw in driving specialists of the greatest request from abroad. Top notch universities can choose the best understudies and draw in the top educators and analysts and surprisingly affluent universities in little countries battle to draw in adequate ability in correlation with the main 20 universities.

The Importance of Attracting Highly Cited Researchers

The development of university scholarly rankings inside and across public education systems is a huge marvel in the field of similar investigation of advanced education. Education strategy networks and among expected understudies, yet in any case numerous pundits are hesitant to utilize it as a wellspring of examination and improvement. This hesitance has laid to some degree on the view that its outcomes are irreproducible. Since we have discovered how to repeat the consequences of the ranking, we can reveal insight into the job of the different Jordanian ranking pointers in adding to claims about relative execution of universities and whole Advanced education systems. In this specialized note, we present foundation data on the profoundly referred to analyst pointer to assist partners with understanding the elements of Jordan’s ranking. The beginning of the class "Exceptionally Referred to Analysts" (HCR) can be followed to the development by Eugene Garfield of the Organization of Logical Data (ISI) and the distribution of the Science Reference Record (SCI) during the 1960s. Garfield had foreshadowed the worth of reference ordering (by diverge from subject ordering) in a paper introduced to the American Synthetic Culture in 1955 and distributed (in acknowledgment of its content) by the US Patent Office (Garfield, 1957) and in Garfield (1955). By 1968 Garfield (Garfield & Malin, 1968) investigated the consistency of Nobel prizes utilizing reference examination, and in 1970 (Garfield, 1970) offered a scope of ideas about the utility of reference investigation in supporting exploration, including the capacity to distinguish and follow imaginative individuals and their organizations.

Given the guaranteed utility of reference data sets, public organizations, for example, between public consortia of public libraries or exploration universities may have decided to create and keep up complete and dependable reference data sets and inquiry apparatuses.

This would have been steady with their public help parts in supporting disclosure, access and assessment of public academic work. In any case, these organizations did not, and have not, acknowledged this duty. Luckily, arrangement of the help has business esteem, and appropriately there are a few private area foundations that give it in a business setting. ISI itself was offered to JTP Distributing in 1988 apparently as the methods for giving the capital needed to digitize the data sets and to help electronic access. JTP Distributing was obtained by an auxiliary of the Thompson Organization in 1992 as an early advance in Thompson's endeavor into the matter of specific computerized data administrations. The Thompson Company and Reuters converged in 2008 framing a worldwide media and data aggregate. All through these turns of events, ISI stayed a recognizable brand and business movement inside the more extensive and developing Thompson business setting. Like institutional rankings, the systems rankings have defaulted to the one-size-fits all methodology. The Advanced education Accreditation and Quality Confirmation Commission in Jordan have suggested that examinations can be delivered more viable with mission variety by utilizing a system of order like that being created in the Center East. While there are no ideal methods for evaluating the general presentation of university systems, better benchmarking, better profiling, and pattern examination give one method of comprehension and split away from the one-dimensional bad habit of world university rankings. This would consider the rise of significantly more nuanced public and institutional procedures, arrangement of better data to partners and enthusiasm for the system-wide measurements. While we are on the whole mindful of what the highest quality level is, there is a particular absence of comprehension of best practice and methodologies being utilized at all levels inside our individual university systems. How would we characterize excellence in a university that is just 10, 25, or 50 years of age for instance? What is the measuring stick for excellence? his answer involves better systems of university grouping and with it better profiling and benchmarking across systems, utilizing relative markers, enveloping foundations at all focuses inside the system – not simply the leads.

Profiling will make a more refined comprehension of the scope of accessible methodologies accessible broadly and institutionally. At that point we can start to address some intriguing vital situations. For instance, what separated designs and hierarchical plans, missions, and supporting techniques are needed at different focuses inside our university systems? What assumptions ought to be put on organizations at different phases of advancement in their exploration execution, learning encounters and results, local area commitment movement, commercialization and internationalization? What speculation is needed to create 'step change' and lift universities from all levels to the following phase of advancement? What are the ideal levels and blends of consumption (government and private), guideline and educational arrangement expected to guarantee that every organization meets its special mission?

Jordan- Steady Steps towards World-Class Education

In the course of recent years, the Jordanian government has laid the basis for major developments to Jordanian higher education, which will take into consideration systemwide renewal. The critical keys for conveying the advantages across its frameworks and systems, all to make sure that the progress will not be affected or stopped towards achieving the pre-determined strategies.


There is no doubt that world university rankings have conveyed the severe truth to governments and university organizers. While these have drawn reactions of their technique, brilliant universities invite the chance to benchmark with world pioneers and if rankings become too 'impartial' they may neglect to keep conveying reality. The decision for governments is to be a worker to the impulses of university rankings or have the certainty to set their own plan and move past rankings. Zeroing in on top notch systems is one other option – there may be others. The strategies and customized now set up in Jordan will bring about better framework across the system and will improve Jordan's general instructing and exploration execution levels.

We can be very sure that while Jordan will not foster a best 20 competitor any time soon, it will keep on performing admirably as an elite university system ensuring its worldwide standing and engaging quality as an objective of decision for global understudies and scientists and as a productive provider of an informed country and a gifted labor force.


Akour, M., & Alsmadi, I. (2015). Vulnerability assessments: A case study of Jordanian universities. In 2015 International Conference on Open Source Software Computing (OSSCOM).

Al Adwan, A., Ahmad, A., & Zamil, A.M.A. (2021). Development of theoretical framework for management departments' ranking systems in Jordanian universities. International Journal of Higher Education, 10(1), 106.

Al Frijat, Y.S. (2018). Activating balanced scorecard importance as a way to improve the accounting education in Jordanian universities. International Business Research, 11(9), 66-78.

Al-Bashir, N., Al-Ali, A. & Ahmad, A. (2021). Justice in gradation of female academics in the promotion ladder in Jordanian universities. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 24(2), 1-19.

Alharafsheh, M., Harahsheh, A., Lehyeh, S.A., & Alrawashedh, N. (2021). The impact of entrepreneurs characteristics of private jordanian universities leaders on strategic performance: The mediating role of strategic planning. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 10(1), 299-309.

Alma, B., Coşkun, E., & Övendireli, E. (2016). University ranking systems and proposal of a theoretical framework for ranking of Turkish Universities: A case of management departments. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 235, 128-138.

Al-Mobaideen, H. (2009). ICT diffusion in Jordanian universities. Izmir, Turkey: In European and mediterranean conference on information systems.

Al-Shatnawi, Z., Alnusairat, S., & Kakani, A. (2020). Towards zero solid waste in jordanian universities: The case of Al-Ahliyya Amman University. Environmental Research, Engineering and Management, 76(4), 46-59.

Altarawneh, I. & Al-Shqairat, Z. (2010). Human resource information systems in Jordanian universities. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(10), 113.

Al-Zoubi, A. (2019). Elaboration of internationalisation strategy in Jordanian universities. Journal of Education and Human Development, 8(3), 143.

Areiqat, A.Y., Zamil, A., Alheet, M.A., Ahmad, A.F., & Abushaar, M.M.M. (2020). The concept of governance in universities: Reality and ambition. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 13(1).

Hasan, L. (2013). Using university ranking systems to predict usability of university websites. JISTEM-Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management, 10(2), 235-250.

Kamal, I.W., Alsmadi, I.M., Wahsheh, H.A., & Al-Kabi, M.N. (2016). Evaluating web accessibility metrics for Jordanian universities. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 7(7), 113-122.

Kateb, M., Swies, R., Obeidat, B., & Maqableh, M. (2015). An investigation on the critical factors of information system implementation in Jordanian information technology companies. European Journal of Business and Management, 7(36), 11-28.

Krawczak, M., Bureva, V., Sotirova, E., & Szmidt, E. (2016). Application of the inter criteria decision making method to universities ranking. In Novel Developments in Uncertainty Representation and Processing. Springer, Cham.

Liu, N.C. (2009). The story of academic ranking of world universities. International Higher Education, 54.

Maali, B., & Al-Attar, A.M. (2020). Accounting curricula in universities and market needs: The Jordanian case. SAGE Open, 10(1).

Niqresh, M., Al Dweiri, K., & Tawalbeh, A.K. (2016). The impact of using databases in raising the level of scientific research in Jordan from the viewpoint of faculty members at Jordanian Universities. Information Science, 4(4), 130-138.

Qur'an, A., & Hussam, A. (2012). Comparative study of graphic design education in Jordanian universities: Towards best practice.

Safadi, R., Jaradeh, M., Bandak, A., & Froelicher, E. (2010). Competence assessment of nursing graduates of Jordanian universities. Nursing & health sciences, 12(2), 147-154.

Shehabat, I.M., & Berrish, M. (2021). Integration between knowledge management and total quality management in Jordanian Universities: Empirical study. In Research Anthology on Preparing School Administrators to Lead Quality Education Programs.

Taamneh, M., Athamneh, S., & Nsairat, B.A. (2017). The effect of administrators' work-related ethics on practicing human resource management functions at Jordanian universities. International Journal of Public Sector Performance Management, 3(3), 337-354.

Tawalbeh, A.K. (2021). The role of social media in knowledge sharing among faculty members in Jordanian Public Universities. International Journal of Contemporary Management and Information Technology, 1(2), 35-43.

Turgay, T. & Alhawamdeh, Z.M. (2013). Impact of the strategic statements adopted by Jordanian private universities in relation to their performance. European Scientific Journal, 9(2), 42-54.

Wahsheh, H.A., Alsmadi, I.M., & Al-Kabi, M.N. (2013). The evaluation of trust and credibility metrics: Websites of Jordanian universities and e-government portals as a case study. In 2013 IEEE Jordan Conference on Applied Electrical Engineering and Computing Technologies (AEECT).

Zamil, A.M.A., & Ahmad, Y.A. (2020). The impact of accreditation of higher education institutions in enhancing the quality of the teaching process. Journal of Talent Development and Excellence, 12(3s).

Get the App