This is the first time Thai-based universities have been ranked by a Thai agency. Relevant parties have a lot to learn from this list, its implications and all the fuss about it.

Many university presidents have publicly attacked the commission for, in their own words, "unacceptable and unreliable rankings".

Some went as far as submitting a complaint to caretaker Education Minister Chaturon Chaisang demanding that the list be revised.

The commission's secretary-general, Pavich Thongroach, defended the list just as vigorously. The commission has bought space in newspapers, detailing why and how the commission ranked the universities.

The commission says the rankings serve three purposes: to inform parents and students of the quality of each higher-education institute; to inform university administrators about what improvements are needed at their institutes; and to provide information on how best to allocate resources and budgets to each higher-education institute.

Pavich insists that university academics from various fields had developed ranking indicators to ensure justice to all universities, new or old.

"Most university lecturers have accepted our indicators," Pavich said.

While some universities have welcomed the commission's list, the University Lecturers' Council of Thailand (ULCT) issued a resolution not to accept it.

"We do not trust the tools used in the ranking. The criteria can't work for all universities because each institute has a different philosophy.

"Also, we do not trust the procedures, or that there is complete information for the rankings," said ULCT president Thawatchai Phirapatdit, adding that the announcement of the list also hurt the reputation of many universities and their alumni.

"It's a sort of stigma," he said.

He said it was highly likely the commission was the first government agency to rank universities because other top university lists were compiled by private organisations or independent agencies.

So, what is all the fuss about?

The university lists reflect something, if not everything, about the higher-education institutes that will produce graduates who will in some way shape the country's future.

At the very least, the institutes will get some idea about how to improve themselves.

Like it or not, Thai universities have been ranked by different foreign organisations for years.

Instead of complaining, wouldn't it be better if university administrators, educators and senior education officials were to pore over the latest rankings and see what improvements they could make for the sake of the country's higher education?

The list should prod university administrators to continue improving their institutes.

At the same time, the commission must keep an open ear so it can improve the way it conducts rankings in the future. It should not be too concerned about saving face and embrace improvements.

By doing this, students, and of course the country, stand to benefit.

Chularat Saengpassa

The Nation