Principles and Practices in National Rankings: Assessing the Alignment between the Berlin Principles and Brazil’s Folha University Ranking

Abstract

National university rankings have gained increasing prominence as instruments for quality signaling, institutional benchmarking, and policy influence. However, their methodological rigor and capacity to reflect diverse institutional missions remain contested. This study critically examines the extent to which the Ranking Universitário Folha (RUF), Brazil’s most visible national ranking, aligns with the Berlin Principles on Ranking of Higher Education Institutions. Drawing on a longitudinal document analysis (2012–2024) and semi-structured interviews with higher education experts, the study evaluates RUF’s compliance with each of the 16 Berlin Principles, with special attention to Principle 3 concerning the recognition of institutional diversity. The findings reveal strong alignment in areas such as methodological transparency, data verifiability, and multi-criteria evaluation, but persistent misalignment in acknowledging institutional mission differentiation and social engagement—dimensions central to Brazil’s higher education ecosystem. A comparative discussion with international rankings (e.g., THE, QS, U.S. News) and policy frameworks contextualizes RUF’s structural limitations. The article concludes with six actionable propositions to recalibrate RUF toward a more inclusive, balanced, and development-oriented ranking model. These findings contribute to critical debates on the future of rankings and their role in shaping equitable and context-sensitive higher education systems.