Meaningful Participation in Autism Research
Involve autistic people and families in shaping questions, methods and interpretation.
GRS Editorial · GARCRead guideGRS editorial · Higher education
Benchmarking Higher Education with Context
Compare universities without erasing mission, student mix or national system differences.
Higher education
A practical starting point.
Compare universities without erasing mission, student mix or national system differences. This guide offers a starting method for teams developing research and institutional decisions. Adapt it to the question, context and relevant scientific, ethics and data requirements.
Step 01
Begin with the use case
A university comparing research support processes needs different peers from one evaluating student progression. Define the decision and select a small number of relevant comparison dimensions before collecting rankings or public data.
Step 02
Choose defensible peers
Consider mission, size, funding model, disciplines, location and the population served. Record why each peer belongs in the set. If strong peers do not exist, use multiple reference groups and explain their limitations.
Step 03
Mix numbers and practice
Quantitative indicators can reveal differences, but interviews and process maps explain how an institution works. Check definitions, denominators and reporting years. Avoid turning a metric designed for one system into a claim of universal excellence.
Step 04
Turn comparison into learning
Identify practices worth testing, the conditions that enabled them and the resources adaptation would require. Set a baseline and follow-up review. The outcome of benchmarking should be a reasoned improvement decision, not simply a position in a table.
Illustrative application
What this could look like.
Two institutions may report different graduate employment rates because one surveys after six months and the other after fifteen. Before comparing, align definitions, cohorts and response rates. If harmonisation is impossible, describe the measures separately and study the support practices that each institution uses instead of announcing a league-table winner.
Put it into practice
A short working checklist.
- Write the precise decision or research question this work should support.
- Record the sources, methods, stakeholders and permissions needed before proceeding.
- Agree who reviews the output and how limitations will be communicated.
- Set a date to revisit the decision when evidence or conditions change.
GRS Group editorial guide · Published 24 September 2026 · Informational guidance, not an empirical study or formal professional advice.
Related research
Continue with the centre and knowledge model.
Global Higher Education Research Center Research & Knowledge All guidesFurther reading