The Shanghai (Academic Ranking of World Universities) ranking is among the strictest and most influential in the world, as it relies on research criteria that are precise and do not grant points for promotional activity, student registration volume, or the number of academic programs. The core of the ranking is based on the production of scientific knowledge of global value, and the real impact of research published in the fields of natural and medical sciences, engineering, economic, and social sciences. Therefore, any university's entry or leap in this ranking is not related to improving building facades or increasing student numbers, but to enhancing its ability to produce high-quality research with a global citation impact, and providing students and researchers with a mature research environment conducive to growth.
Jordanian universities today have a concrete opportunity to advance in the Shanghai ranking if they manage to redirect some of their resources towards impactful scientific research, enhance their international partnerships, qualify their research staff, and develop internal incentive standards. The Jordanian scene has seen, over the past decade, an expansion in the number of researchers, a broadening in the interest in applied research, and the emergence of research groups that have achieved a respectable presence in the fields of medical engineering, energy, agriculture, artificial intelligence, material sciences, and economic sciences. Although these successes have not accumulated at the required pace in terms of global citations, they form a basis that can be built upon, especially if universities obtain a research vision that seeks quality and impact rather than numerical publication.
Shanghai ranking gives significant weight to five pillars: the number of highly-cited researchers globally, the number of publications in top-ranked journals like Nature andScience, the volume of scientific citations, major international awards, and the overall research performance of the university compared to peer institutions. From here, improving the position of Jordanian universities becomes contingent on their ability to enhance the quality of research rather than increase its quantity, and to build a support system that allows researchers to conduct advanced research, secure external funding, and publish in top-tier journals with a high impact factor. This requires a research mindset that embraces sustainability rather than randomness, and sees scientific research as a strategic path rather than a seasonal activity.
The most decisive factor is the formation of specialized research blocks with cumulative production in specific topics. Success in Shanghai is not achieved by having scattered researchers publishing individually, but by the university successfully creating cohesive groups that share the laboratory, funding, infrastructure, and methodology, and produce a series of citable research, capable of building a factual reputation in a specific field. This is what East Asian universities did, as they did not compete on the size of the university, but on the strength of their research groups, until each university had a clear research identity.
The second opportunity emerges through international partnerships with prestigious universities, allowing for co-publishing, researcher exchanges, and the use of world-standard laboratories. Co-publishing with influential researchers helps Jordanian universities raise their citation factor and improve the quality of associated data, while maintaining the authenticity of local scientific production.
The third opportunity is based on building genuine internal incentives for researchers based on rewards for high-quality publishing, not repeated publishing. It is important that this is accompanied by university policies that allow reducing the teaching burden on productive researchers, providing competitive grants, funding for vital projects, and laboratory support capable of producing robust data.
Improving the ranking of Jordanian universities in Shanghai is not a distant dream but a viable project if the compass is redirected towards research impact rather than promotional ranking. Successful experiences in Turkey, Malaysia, and Singapore prove that qualitative leaps start from a clear strategic decision and an institutional environment that allows the researcher to work in-depth, publish with quality, and compete globally. When this system is available, the ranking becomes a natural result of the accumulation of knowledge, not a formal goal sought without content.
