World beaters: but what makes these universities special?

I very much hope that another factor can be added to the equation when it comes to ranking the world's universities - the contribution to their students education made by the places in which the universities are located. Surely that is not, not by a long stretch, a trivial consideration. Nor should it be seen as something that can be properly assessed by an over-simplistic survey or appraisal: for example, Dartmouth College would not have anything like the reputation it has if it were not for the fact that it's a magnet for very bright high school students who are devoted to "the outdoors." And a love of the outdoors is not just a recreational factor, a bigger playground, as it were: it has meant that the College has become a leader in the education of ecologists and others connected to some of the major concerns of our times. It is probably not accidental that the most highly regarded "green architect" in the United States is a Dartmouth graduate - William McDonough. Or that another was the winner of the landscape architecture competition for the new World Trade Center - Michael Arad. <p>I have a vested interest in making this suggestion: if the quality of the education students receive was seen as including (as I fervently believe it should) what is learned from the environment in which they live during their student years, it may stop people giving me odd looks when I tell that that Columbia is the greatest university in the world. I cannot imagine how any university could come close to Columbia if this, as it were, environmental factor was in play. The fact is that quite apart from the multi-faceted effect of spending ones undergraduate years in New York City, and the culture which attaches to a place with a long history of superb research AND of inspiring teachers - there is the city's immense impact on virtually all of Columbia's professional graduate schools. <p>Where better to student international and public affairs than in the city where the United Nations is located? The alumni of the Graduate School of Journalism are the most distinguished such group in the world. Law, Business, Architecture, Social Work are all schools for which the city provides an inestimably rich setting. And I recall telling the Provost under whom I served, at the time when I was championing the introduction of undergraduate majors in the practice of the arts, that even if Harvard were to decide to devote every discretionary dollar in its fabulous endowment to such teaching - something its essentially conservative attitude towards such studies made unthinkable in any case - it would still not ever be compared with Columbia, where you get an Ivy League education in the most vibrant arts city on the face of the globe. <p>It's a no-brainer, if I may use such an uncouth expression on this site. <p>I look forward to reading challenges to my thesis. <p>Peter Smith <br>Emeritus Dean of the Columbia University School of the Arts <br>Emeritus Director of the Hopkins Center at Dartmouth College

I can't help feeling that the rankings doesn't tell us how we are going to get out of this credit cruch financial mess created by graduates from top universities. It is okay trying to market your programs to naive young school leavers but really do they graduate with ideas that are less than pragmatic when solving the woes of economic stress and global climate change. We want even keeled people with common sense to run the world these days, not egoist with over inflated opinions of themselves and where they graduate from.

How on earth did UCLA get ranked above Berkeley? It's an excellent university but far from a super power.

Times Higher Education Survey needs to be complimented for this consistent effort that will lead to a process of critical review and appraisal hopefully leading to competitive excellence in the global higher education sector. It is good to know what has made those Universities to excel straight from those who are part of the process. This story gives very important strategy constructs from the top academic leadership of these Universities. This will be very vital for many others to compete for following years. I think this would certainly help in improving overall quality of the higher education sector. <p>Barring two IITs, out of over 400 Indian Universities’ not single figures out in this list. Although, this may look strange it gives very strong message. It is high time now for Indian Higher education system to liberate and become active and dynamic part of internationalization process. The Emerging Directions in Higher Education (EDGE) initiative may be an apt platform where all those leaders who have been quoted in this article may be invited to share experiences and let the Indian Universities interact to understand and practice. <p>Many Indian Universities especially from private not for profit sector such as Manipal, BITS or Symbiosis should deserve to be in such list and may offer inspiration to several others so that one of the largest higher education systems in the world is able to show at least a noticeable presence in such rankings.

I am a reader (US Associate Professor) at one of the 30 top univeristies in the world according to THE raking. My university is in Britain, but I have worked and studied in universities in Europe and the US. I just cannot understand how my present university (again, top 30 in the world) can be "better" than European universities I know. Their research is better, their students are better. Why British universities are so well placed in comparison to other European universities which are arguably much better. Just because of peer esteem and our own esteem? To be an academic in Britain is to be merely an administrator who spend endless hours completing forms and responding to emails from lazy students who only think about lodging appeals if they dont get the marks they think they deserve (but they actually dont because they are lazy, unmotivated and far from being cultivated). <p>If my university is indeed in the top 30, all I have to say is I cannot wait to get a position in any European university that is well below my university. in these bottom universities I will be treated like an academic, not like a mere administrator and a slave

I am highly impressed with the annually world-wide university ranking announced by The Times Higher Education. This ranking can be wisely used by university administrators and staff for adjusting and improving their performance. Such improvement will certainly benefit the students, the society and the nation. I personally am very proud of the performance of our university, Chulalongkorn University, the only university in Thailand to be listed at 166, an impressive jump from 223 in the year 2007. We do hope for a much better ranking next year, probably in the top 100. <p>Prof. Dr. Aran Incharoensakdi <br>Department of Biochemistry <br>Faculty of Science <br>Chulalongkorn University <br>Bangkok 10330 <br>Thailand

This time around, the ranking released by THES, showed that no public institution of higher education from Malaysia made it to the top 200. Well, I'm and undergraduate at the top university in Malaysia, which is University Malaya and we were in the list for the pass few years. The reason I'm writing this comment is not criticize the rankings and selection process carried out by THES but rather just to make a statement, which is, the exclusion of University Malaya from the list is very much welcomed. Since the drop in ranking of UM in the list, from what I see, everyone here has just been pointing fingers against each other without any constructive or proactive steps taken to improve the rankings. All I can say is if University Malaya is to break into the list again, I think the whole education system in Malaysia needs a big reshuffle and brand new master plan again, especially to have a fair education system and to removes quotas when it comes to student intakes. <p>Final year engineering undergraduate, <br>University Malaya, <br>Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

When will the quality of the graduate's results after graduation be factored in? Publish or perish does not focus on the use of the ideas, just another take. The quality of training in industry is measured by the use of the skills/results/dollar impacts back on the job. Why aren't universities looking at this as a more valuable indicator? Following alumni progress during their lifetimes would yield much in this regard. <p>Given our economic losses around the world in the last few days, it is time for the university system to wake up and trumpet their achievements in terms of alumni results.

Do you really expect us to believe that UCL and Imperial are ranked higher than MIT, Columbia, Princeton, Duke and Stanford?

There seems to be wrong with the distribution of weight on each criterion used for this ranking. For example, the International Student as well as the Staff/Student Score shouldn't weigh as much as the Peer Review or the Citations should. One or two of the criteria must be more important than the others. I think this is where the mistakes about this ranking have all started. <p>Stanford and UC Berkeley are globally super-elite schools. They should have been in the top 10. Imperial and UCL, though they're quite good academic institutions, are obviously not as good as the other two. <p>Some Asian universities are missing. For example, the University of the Philippines and the Universiti Malaya are not in the top 200, yet Chulalongkorn, which isn't any better than either the University of the Philippines or Universiti malaya, is in the top 180? <p>I know most rankings are flawed. But this has got to be the most unreliable and most ridiculous thus far.

From my recent experience as Professor Pelawat in a Malaysian uiversity, I saw that the national priority was meeting the large pent-up demand for higher education, and to fill quotas for graduates trained in areas that will directly impact the economy. Engagement with research at a world class standard will come more slowly, but the basics are all in place: skill, facilities, ambition and a decent funding system not yet dominated by vested interest groups. All thats missing is confidence to publish in the better international journals, but this will come as national confidence grows. Watch out for the THE league table about 2020. <p>David Bignell <br>Queen Mary, University of London, UK

What did the UNAM (National Autonomous University of Mexico) do to go up 49 spots higher than last year??? <p>On my opinion I like the UAM better than the UNAM, at least folks would attend classes (meaning teachers, staff and alumni). <p>Maybe there is $$$ involved... with Mexico you never know.

These Times supplement rankings must be taken with a pinch of salt. They broadly judge entire schools and compare schools whose strengths might lie in some specific field with others that might specialize in something altogether different. An example is Carnegie Mellon which is one of the best four (the others being Stanford, MIT and UC Berkeley) schools for Computer Science. Any person who knows anything about CS would choose one of these schools over any other university in the world. Comparing CMU to, say, the London School of Economics is like comparing Tandoori chicken to the Great Wall of China. It is just senseless. <p>Overall, apart from giving people something to boast about, these rankings are "Absolutely Useless". <p>PS:One must take a look at the following rather amusing (and grossly inaccurate) ratings: <p>Australian National University > Stanford and U.Michigan {Uni. Sydney, Uni. Melbourne} > Uni. Toronto {NYU, Boston Uni.} > Uni. of Illinois {Rutgers, Texas A&M, Stony Brook, Boston Uni} > {IIT-Delhi, IIT-Bombay}

I agree with everything said, but you forgot to mention the great effort made by Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México to level with all of these other Institutions. <p>Just a short comment to celebrate, yet another year, as the most prestigious Spanish Language University in the ranking.

I completely disagree with this ranking, it's kind of ads for some universities. forget about it

Berkeley comes on top in all important categories- peer review (in all fields, mind you), employer review, citation/staff score, yet ends up behind the likes of UCLA, U Michigan , U Hong Kong only because it has a really low "international student score" and "staff/student ratio". <p>More importantly, though, is that I don't want to trust an extremely volatile ranking, where some universities move by 50-100 points from year to year. Do you really think the university quality changes that much in a single year? If not, then when was THES not telling the truth- when it called Berkeley a second best in the world, or when it put it on 36th place?

Waseda University, one of powerful private universities in Japan, is ranked at 180 in 2008 after the ancient 7 imperial universities league. Few believes this order is still valid nowadays, as several private universities have been preferred more strongly by many applicants than some of them.

I certainly believe that Imperial and UCL are ranked higher than certain universities such as those mentioned by Richard Giordano. Sometimes, US universities are overrated.

Choosing a locality for post graduate program is a very definite task that runs in mind of every fresh graduate. Thanks to THES for providing adequate information on top renowned universities and so as to many other aspiring students.. <p>Dr Jayaraman Jayakumar <br>Faculty of Dentistry <br>The University of Hong Kong

This ranking system paints an incredibly inaccurate picture of universities and is no better than the unfounded system that US News has produced in the United States. To even attempt to holistically rank world universities is rather ridiculous considering that each country/university has developed its own education system. <p>The university (Boston College) that I studied at for an AB in the United States is among the top institutions in the country and did not even find a place on your 200-list. It is one of the most popular schools in the United States and also one of the most competitive in nature. Additionally I have studied at Oxford University and can attest to the fact that the education I received at Boston College was equal if not superior to Oxford. <P>I think we need to put an end to ridiculous ranking systems. For example, is impossible to compare a school such as MIT to a school that does not offer studies in engineering. Additionally, to suggest that only 58 American universities are on the 200-list is absurd. It is no mystery why countless international students flock to the United States each year to pursue their studies.

if the quality of the education students receive was seen as including (as I fervently believe it should) what is learned from the environment in which they live during their student years, it may stop people giving me odd looks when I tell that that UNAM is the greatest university in the world, top ranked as #150. <p>There are many excelent universities but in Mexico with the goverment that no try to help the people as a really extraordinary miracle to see graduates.

Just a comment to the final year engineering student in Universiti Malaya concerning the quotas. The quota system have been replaced by the merit system and still Universiti Malaya down in the ranking. The quota system has nothing to do with the ranking procedures of THE. If you have problem in the university system or living in Malaysia just transfer or migrate elsewhere.

UCLA's ranking above Berkeley is both, credible and correct. I have studied in both of these univesities, transferring from Berkeley to UCLA. <p>At UCLA I've encountered the latest thinking in research in the classroom and laboratory research. At least in both of my majors, math and physics. Surprising to Mr. Willard Bohn, UCLA is a super power in many fields of learning.

I completely agree with Richard Giordano. Few would argue that UCL and Imperial are better than those American universities in the top-30. Or better than University of Tokyo, NUS or ANU for that matter. Similarly, Oxbridge is almost nothing compared to Chicago, Stanford or Princeton. <p>I have worked in the higher education sector in China, Korea and Japan. THES rankings were considered seriously for the first one or two years. In contrast, they are currently entirely dismissed because of their obvious bias towards UK universities. <p>If THES really wants its rankings to be relevant and not just a self-congratulatory exercise for UK institutions, I would recommend a total revamp of the evaluation system. Obviously this will not happen, since many in the UK still like to pretend that Oxbridge can compete with top American universities, which it cannot.

I´m very proud to be part of the most important, according with the top 200 Universities over the world (place 150), University in IberoAmerica. Our University is public ($ 0.020 US DLLS/semester) with high quality, with great facilities, that depends of goverment support and where very poor people can have the opportunity to obtain pregraduate and posgraduate studies with only the compromise of being the best one in their field of knwoledge. Many of our students are continuing with high sucesfull their studies as posdocs in very famous Universities like Harvard or they are working in top great companies. This is one of the most clear demonstration that high quality education and research can be performed in developing countries.

What is the whole purpose of this ranking? Perhaps, it is all about business... the commercialisation of education. Just take a good look.. what our world is getting into. If great universities are so great after all.... why we are facing so much problems?

One can only wonder out loud, where are African Universities? and it's justifiable to conclude that the criterion used by Times (THE) is obviously benefiting the all time privileged universities, and there's no way we'll see any changes in the top 20 best universities [in this century], they'll stay as rigid as they're, Harvard, Yale, Cambridge & Oxford will keep playing against each other while other universities are reduced to spectators. <p>Furthermore, if the one of the decisive factor used is “research production” and/or “community development”, then you cannot tell me that none of African universities qualified to even make the top 100 or 150 best universities to produce such…for me this listings leaves more questions than answers. <p>By the way, I’m thrilled by my university’s performance and thanks again for preserving your status of being one of the best 40 Unis in the world, yet again. <br>Bravo!!! <p>Regards, <br>Concerned student

Seems to me that to rank Academic institutions 2 major surveys should be made: 1)Checking by sampling the positions the graduates and post graduated of these institutions take in human society, science, technology, health, economics, culture, and more, and their contributions in these fields. 2) Checking worldly achievements and academic advancement by the academic staff of these institutions and their former students. <br>The results of these surveys should be added to the other criteria in weighing the ranking of these institutes.

Congratulations to Australian National University (ANU). This is certainly a testiment to how it values its standards in teaching and learning, and how it nurtures its staff and students. At UniJobs, Australia' University Job Website, we are regularly told by ANU staff of their great satisfaction in working within this organisation. ANU have not only the ability to nurture their staff, but continue to give good reason and evidence why others should consider seeking a life time career at ANU. Well done again!

What i personally feel that is required is a stream wise ranking. We need rankings for Engineering, liberal arts, medicine, etc seperately as it becomes more discernible. Anyway I was a part of the faculty at the prestigious Indian Institute of Science and so it pains me that the most premier institute in India for scientific and engineering research/academia is not featured in the rankings. This may misguide people. IISc is the best research Institute in india at graduate and doctoral level

Is the UCl really that good? As a student I would say it is completely unrealistic and obviously biased. It is a Uk publication after all.

Congratulation to the university that have been included in the best 200...sad to see that there is no malaysian university included in it... but the introduction of an apex university in Malaysia in the middle of this year would surely help... watch out for our university in the few years to come....and congrats to Chulalongkorn University for their great leap...you surely made Asian proud..

The rankings tend to be taken more seriously the further up the list you happen to be. Many of the comments here seem to reflect this. It's a natural reaction. My employer seems to have sunk without a trace off this list, I suspect it will serve to irritate the Marketing staff more than anyone else. <p>Anyone who chooses their place of study based on this list alone probably should not qualify for a place at any of the Universities. Of course the current state of the sector, seemingly the world over, is governed more by economic factors than pure academia and as such this sort of ranking competition is likely to become more commonplace. <p>It was better in my day when we walked uphill (in both directions) for 3 hours, with stone tablets, barefoot to learn.

I think you all need a big hug ! <p>Quit writing useless blogs and go increase your Uni's rank.

re: yuri's comments. "the likes" of university of michigan? how elitist. that's gross. as a graduate of both UofM AND berkeley, for you to try and characterize UofM as somehow being not of the same caliber as berkeley is completely ignorant and shows how little you know about the former. just look us up and see why we are a very legitimate candidate for #1 public university. the resources here FAR outweigh those available at berkeley. i've been to both universities for over 4 years at each so I WOUULD KNOW. UofM had nearly 1 billion dollars in research expenditures last year alone. why don't you inform yourself before you make statements like that which actually devalue berkeley and opining resonating from there. <p>and can ppl quit getting defensive over this ranking. it's just for fun, seriously. who actually takes this ranking seriously?

Leicester's on the list while Loughborough doesn't even manage to make it there? You've gotta be kidding me! :D Thanks for the laugh! <p>Toronto in 41st place? Sheesh they were rounding up anyone from our school with a high school diploma no matter what marks they got. <p>And Washington University in St Louis being better than LSE? Where's the camera? I'm sure this is a prank to see our reactions. <p>Cheers for the laugh!

THES should be commended for doing this greatwork of projecting the contribution of our universities into limelight. But why is there a great variance in the result of THES compared with ARWU ranking? <br>For me I am proud to be a part of UCL's success story.

This ranking is definitly not based on scientific criterias. I just don't believe it. Seems like the biggest universities are at the top ranking... Please try to provide us criterias that show the real strenghth of the institution such as research, leadership, careers opportunities, international recognition...

I disagree on some aspects of the point system. A University's international staff should not play a role in its ranking.....for example The University of Melbourne dropping 11 ranks with a poor score on that! <p>Plus, there are many great institutions out there like the IITs in India which in my view are top class and should be much higher in the rankings.

Lets just face the reality, there is no way the London colleges can contend with some institutions like MIT, Cornell and Stanford or even slip comfortably into the top 10 list. It saddens me when the THE-QS slides in UCL and Imperial college because the government has cut investment in the U.K higher education and enforced strict polices on the entrance of international students.. We have to ask ourselves this question, " Does the THE-QS ultimately serve its purpose as a plausible guide to higher institutions by slipping in UCL and Imperial college to attract international students or Yess!! UCL is better than MIT and Cornell?”

How can a university president take seriously an annual ranking that change in a random manner each year? The first to comment on how proud they are of their place in the ranking being McGill, here are the rankings of that university over the last 5 years: 2004=21; 2005=24; 2006=21; 2007= 12; 2008=20. <p>Who can believe that a univeisity can change so much in a year? All this is not serious and universities are just cynical in marketing themselves using such a ranking. Of course a university will never say "we dropped from 12 to 20 in 2008 so we must reform ourselves! It is a pity that institutions of higher learning play that selfcongratulation game that has no scientific value... To say nothign about the linguistic bias of that ranking...

The THES and Shanghai Jiao Tang rankings should be only used as indicators. Having studied in three continents (India, UK, and US) at three of their prestigious institutions and having served on the faculty of eminent US, UK and Canadian institutions I am of the opinion that the THES rankings are self-serving towards UK and Australian institutions. The top 20 or so US institutions are in a class by themselves- excellent facilities, motivated students and mostly outstanding faculty. Top Canadian, Australian, and UK universities only stand out for their mediocrity with a few exceptions and that too only in terms of certain faculty. <p>Seriously, placing Imperial and UCL above MIT or the University of Michigan, Berkeley and UCLA? And ranking Ecole Normale Superieure (ENS) so low in comparison? Of course such rankings are broad and thus are not to be taken literally. Creating equivalence classes is better but someone will always find fault. <p>In my experience one should differentiate between research institutions and primarily undergrad ones. The IITs in India are good because of their student intake not because of their research or teaching- indeed very few can compare with the top US schools. Imperial and UCL might be good in a local context but cannot hold their own to the top US scientific universities at any level. ANU can hardly be thought of as a major global institution and has much less impact than ENS. <p>As an academic I tend to come across students from all backgrounds and countries. Good students from China, Korea and India excel but their training while being superior to UK students falls below their French and other continental peers. Rankings do not reflect this. <p>Essentially rankings can only serve a local purpose and the rest really is voted on by students who seek further education and in that respect the US wins hands down and with good reason.

Nothing necessary to debate on this ranking as we all know that this ranking is based on overall subjects. Teaching and research are two different entities in which their strength relies on different parameters. <p>German traditinally known strong in engineering, Japan on the other hand in sound in electronics. US possibly more versatile. <p>I would also want to comment that most of the universities at the top ranking is already known for years and their ranking is also influenced by their reputation. For those who want to pursue their tertiary education, my advice is do not depend too much on ranking but choose your future campus based on the course that you are going to undertake.

When are you going to publish the top 50 rankings in individual fields. We are eagerly waiting for it, as all your listings upto 2007 hade one list of general rankings and other 4 to 5 lists of individual fields, like natural sciences, life sciences, arts/humanities, technology etc..

Congratulations to the Australian National University (ANU) -- 16th in the world 3 years straight. <p>I am currently an undergraduate student at the ANU, currently on exchange at Peking University, but have also experienced a semester at the University of Sydney. I can attest that the quality of the staff, facilities and teaching standards, stand head and shoulders -- with all due respect -- ahead of the other abovementioned universities (both of which ranked top 50). <p>ANU is one of the rare universities in Australia where almost every student, whilst they may not love Canberra, are full of praise towards the ANU and their university experience there. <p>It is, however, strange that the international ranking and standing of the ANU has yet to be acknowledged by the bulk of Australian undergraduates or final year high school students outside New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory. <p>Hopefully consistently high scores from SH Jiaotong (top 50 - top in Australia), THES (top 20 - top in Australia), and Newsweek (top 40 - top in Australia) will further enhance the image and demand amongst undergraduates to study at the ANU, as currently there is a disjuncture between what the international academic community at-large believe as opposed to your average Australian year twelve student. <p>This is an issue the ANU needs to address if it is to sustain and enhance its prestige not only within Australia, but more importantly in the context of a globalised job market, also internationally.

Taking cognizance of the financial prowess of western countries,it does not amaze me for them to top the list. <p>After all,how much support do less developed countries have in order to booster their educational dreams? I think the determination to learn in the most harsh and difficult conditions should make the less developed country universities to Top the list. Western countries enjoy the advantages not perculiar and far-fetched in less developed countries,please next year let it be Europe and American Top 200 Universities not World Universities, you do not fully understand the context of world classification and stratification. <br>How the hell do you expect a university in Cambodia,Vietnam,Iran, Laos, Zambia,Cameroon or Peru to be compared to a university in the US, France or the Netherlands? <br>Please, overhaul your statement.

It’s great to see Australian Universities featuring on the world stage of standards. The University of Sydney may be Australia’s oldest, but it has one of the strongest futures with their dedication in sourcing highly skilled staff from UniJobs, Australia’s University Job Website. Australian universities will continue their academic success as more campuses focus their attention on maintaining and attracting high quality staff from all over the world by using new technology rather than rely on traditional print mediums to source uni jobs. Judging by everyone’s very interesting comments I think the key to a good university ‘rank’ is the quality of its staff to support students, and the respect staff receive.

Why are Cdn schools ranked so low? I go to a Cdn school, and have also studied at Harvard, and I do not think the likes of Queen's (not in top 100) or UofT, deserve the ranks they got. Very biased towards UK universities - UCL placed over MIT, Princeton - everyone knows that the opposite is the truth.

I am always wondering what ranking would be suitable for universities such as Sharif University of Technology (Iran), which is a well-known university in MIT and other top US universities (just ask a MIT Prof. if you don't believe). This is because many excellent graduates from Sharif go to top US univs and contribute to their high ranking. <p>I was accepted for MS in both Sharif and NUS. I chose NUS, and now I should choose among NUS,ANU, and CMU for PhD. My friends who chose Sharif for MS have almost the same situation as me for their PhD. I understand that Sharif might lack some of the criteria used for the ranking. Nevertheless, it is a "good" university. (based on my experience it could be ranked at least as equal as NUS). <p>This is only an example. In my opinion, there are many good universities which are not even taken into account in the ranking.

Richard Giordano <p>"Do you really expect us to believe that UCL and Imperial are ranked higher than MIT, Columbia, Princeton, Duke and Stanford?" <p>I love this kind of peremptory statements trying to suggest what is said is so obvious that it doesn't need to be backed. <p>Fyi from european point of view, the fact that Princeton or Columbia are better than Imperial is not obvious at all.

Don,t belive to much in all Ranking lists that popup at regular times every year.In these lists you get the answers you are asking for.Even at the Nobel prize ceremony you don´t get the "right" answer.

While it is good to note two IITs in the list, I do not understand why Indian Institute of Science does not figure in the list. That is an anomaly that defies explanation!!

As a graduate of University of Massachusetts-Amherst, it is most interesting to see the institution ranked for several years running. Not that it is in any way undeserving, but in that American rankings usually have it in the "Top 100" but the schools ahead on these lists are excluded from yours. For the most part, it is located in a terrific setting, yet if it were within the immediate Boston area, it would chart much higher on the American lists. But let's face it - rankings are simply numbers - and numbers can be interpreted any way one wishes.

Why are Cdn schools ranked so low? I go to a Cdn school, and have also studied at Harvard, and I do not think the likes of Queen's (not in top 100) or UofT, deserve the ranks they got. Very biased towards UK universities - UCL placed over MIT, Princeton - everyone knows that the opposite is the truth.

There is indeed a glaring omission in the assessment of most rankings for higher education and that is the accomplishments and viable / notable contributions of the school's prlmary product -- attendees and credentialed graduates. The actual effectiveness and impact of these enlightened souls is treated merely as a by-product and neglected to be actually measured. Instead, the process itself is often focused upon rather than the ultimate, practical results of the education process affecting economies, organizations and the social fabric of localities, nations and hopefully mankind. Establishing the tangible value of the educational experience at each institution (as the throughput) would not be an easy task (nor an impossible or fruitless one) but should be attempted to derive a more well rounded, meaningfully rich perspective upon which to base such rankings. <p>It is worth noting that separating out the competency of a university''s ability to select the most talented and able students from the actual impact of the educational process on engendering graduates who are effectively incurring accomplishments in a variety of ways, may be a Herculean task, but one that could be more valuable to the consumers of higher education (to make better informed choices) as well as the various payers supportiing institutions of higher education.

There seems to be a negative bias towards US schools vs UK and the rest of the international schools on the part of the International Staff and International Students. Their ratings show the US at 50% of UK and lower than the rest of the international schools. Peer reviews show the US schools at the top followed by the other international schools, with the UK schools at the bottom. Seems to be a disconnect here.

The fact that there are so many comments on justifying why your university is better than MIT, Stanford, Princeton, etc. only underscores the fact that these institutions are top notch in your own hearts. Just admit it.

I do not see the requirement for a coloumn regarding "international staff" in these rankings. The mix of undergraduates/graduates studying at a university may be important (educating the world) - but the requirement for international staff is preposterous! <p>I am an Australian and am glad that the ANU is ranked so highly. However, I fail to see how such a university (underfunded in my opinion) could outrank a giant like Stanford! Think about it - a multi-billion dollar institution close to the Silicon Valley. The birthplace of GOOGLE and Yahoo! If ANU has benefited the world more than them I would like to know how.

ARCH. CARLOS MARTÍNEZ LÓPEZ - VICE-CHANCELLOR´S CABINET MEMBER <p>University of Córdoba, Argentina <p>The University of Córdoba (Universidad Nacional de Córdoba) of Córdoba City in the northwest of Argentina is Latin America´s oldest with San Marcos University of Lima, Perú, and has a long-standing commitment to excellence. <p>We have built upon this tradition by ensuring that we have the most able staff and students from around the world (usually in United States, Spain, Italy France and Great Britain) investing heavily both in attracting high-calibre researchers to Argentina and the university, and in research training for young Argentinians. <p>In addition, we are infrastructure development in a bid to make our central campus an internationally competitive environment for our staff and students in the "Ciudad Universitaria". <p>A distinctive feature of the university is its remarkably broad range, with 12 faculties and 140,000 students. We undertake research and research-led teaching in the basic and medical sciences (the most traditionjal in South America frequented by brazilians, peruvians, venezuelans, chileans, uruguayans, bolivians and paraguayans students), humanities and social sciences, but also in applied health and professional disciplines like the aeronautics, mechanics, civil and informatic engineering, and in creative and performing arts like architects and designers. This breadth of activity means that our intellectual life is usually rich, and that we can build strong links between theory and practice, and between the university and the broader community of which it is a part in a Province of 3 millions peoples and Córdoba Capital City with 1.5 million. And in the in the middle of the axis Atlantic and Pacific Ocean.

What the heck? when did black listed universities made it into top 200 leaving behind, Technical Universities of GErmany and Nederland???

Let's start from the premise that any rankings system is flawed and at least give THE credit for trying to improve their system. <p>That said, these rankings have a terrible effect on the universities themselves. Institutions like my own (Singapore - ranked mysteriously high yet again despite having very little in the way of real accomplishment) drool over these rankings. Their budgets literally rise and fall based on them. Another poster from Malaysia noted the same thing at his uni. Of course, the logical response from administrators is thus to game the system - producing statistics that will drive up their rankings - Singapore you may notice has a full 100 in international faculty! Well! Does it matter that this country is the size of a postage stamp, and that people live here for 10 years without even considering citizenship? Is it worthwhile to compare to the US (much bigger and more immigrant friendly) on this question? <p>We all know not to take these rankings seriously, but in fact there is no way not to -- except in the US, where it seems nobody has ever heard of them...

My understanding is that universities are meant to be places where people study/ research/ think about things in a spirit of shared enquiry - deep thoughts and all that. On this basis I'd say there's little to suggest that Yale, Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Chicago et al are any better than hundreds of other less prestigious institutions in America, Europe or elsewhere. IMO, many of their products are corporate clones; highly schooled, very pleased with themselves, but essentially dull. Given the size of Harvard's endowment, it would be disgraceful if it did not feature at the top of any ranking of research output, for example. But are its undergraduates superior to those of, for example, Bochum, Ulmea, Poitiers or Hull? In my experience/ opinion - no. <p>Having graduated from the decidedly unprestigious Open Univ; worked with graduates of numerous "high prestige" places (incl Ivy Leaguers, Oxbridge etc), and "been around the block" a few times, I've concluded that where people went to university is generally the least significant thing about them - except, all too often, in a negative sense. <p>These generic rankings are meaningless - specificity, please! LSE is very good for what it is ( but rather soulless & full of gimlet eyed fanatics!), but comparison with a truly comprehensive university such as Birmingham (UK) or Duke (USA) is absurd. Imperial is also very good - but again, it's a highly specialised institution & comparison with, for example, the more comprehensive Queen Mary, London is problematic. Imperial is great for tedious technocrats, aspergic medics with very high grades, and astrophysics buffs, but if you're a more integrated personality who wants to study with fellow members of the human race/ experience a range of opinions & perspectives then Queen Mary wins hands down. But try convincing some innocent 18 year old of this - league table rankings are all ("Cos it'll get me a better job, see!"), and only a year or two later do so many of them realise the error of their ways. <p>BTW, and FWIW, MIT probably is pretty overrated - Imperial is at least as good, and what about Harvey Mudd? Personally, having worked with many of their products, I'd rate any of the US Service Academies WAY ABOVE the Ivies, Stanford, Chicago et al for undergrad ed - ironically, because they seem to turn out more independently minded individuals! Not politically correct to say it, but there's the rub...

Quasimodo, I have prepared to study AI at IMPERIAL... Do you think mine is a good decision???

I can't understand how people in Mexico keep to underestimate UNAM, it becomes clearer every time that it is the best university in the country and not only that, it is also the best in latin america, people who think that any other university in Mexico is better that UNAM think that way because they clearly haven't been anywhere near the central campus of UNAM, CU, in Mexico City.

can you send me university name which is in top 50 in the world because i want to get admission in UK top university

I do not understand how the most citated university in the world, Wageningen university and Research centrum in The Netherlands is so low graded in this ranking??? It is just impressive and completely out of mind! There are other really weird things, how UCLA got better than Berkeley????

First of all I also would like to say, that rankings are always somewhat biased. It is difficult if not impossible to compare universities from so many different cultures in an objective way! I for myself have studied at Imperial, however my nationality is german. I think that US and UK universities are in no way an academic match to ANY universities in France, Germany or Spain!!! Students in the US or UK receive an extremely good training, but that can not be advertised as an outstanding "academic" achievement!! Having graduated from a top UK university I am capable of working concentrated and very effectively no matter how big the pressure or stress. I am certainly much more capable than other european students to adapt quickly and learn knew things, judge what knowledge and task should be prioritised etc. meaning I do believe that my success in my professional live now, is thanks to the training Imperial has given me. However, I am not an academic; I do not explode with amazing ideas for scientific research and development!! In the end of the day everyone will have to decide if they want to pursue an excellent academic career (then go to France, Germany, Spain or Scandinavian countries) or if they want to first learn the basics and receive an excellent training (then go to the US or UK). After the "training" and a few years at work you can still decide to be an academic instead and do a PHD. I am sorry that I left out Asian and South American universities, but I have no knowledge about them. Finally, I do not think that the university marks your character!!! I can not think of any fellow graduate that doesn't have a remarkable character each in their own way. I assume that by "dull" products in one the above comments were graduates described who are not very creative within their expertise. I would like to point out that this is just one of the effects of being trained. Creativity only prospers in an environment were students receive the opportunity (in terms of time and staff support) to think and dream. This is not possible in most US or UK education schemes! And it won't be for long and other European universities won't be any better anymore as they all introduce the bachelor/masters program now, just to fit in and climb up the ranking table.... I think it’s sad!! Different cultures should stay different, what’s the fun in studying abroad if your studies are exactly the same? That’s like Americans that come to Europe and won’t even try local food, but go to Mc’Donalds instead….

It is clear that the 'international students' category (weighted equally with citations/Nobels!!!!!) is designed to artificially bolster the ranking of UK universities. Comparing the research outputs/academic culture at M.I.T. and Imperial (admittedly I was only there for one year) is like comparing a calculator to an abacus. It is absurd. King's College the 22nd best institution world? UCL at 7th? It is best that we drop the pretence that this is a serious meaningful enterprise that you are involved in here.

The irony is that while many UK universities claim to be international-friendly, they don't even provide them with full funding. Instead, the universities capitalize on international students to make money.

which is the best universities in Uk for MSc construction project management

I'd like to know if CEU(central europian university) or University Luigi Bocconi are in which places?

The UNAM, simply the best university in the Latinamerican stage. UAM? ok, is a good school, but this ranking is for universities, not for high schools.

Terribly biased towards UK institutions. No way oxbridge is better than, let's say, Iowa or Michigan anymore. This rank is missing the alumni quialifications, that at the end, it is what a University should work for.

Do you know anything about Universiti Industri Selangor (UNISEL) in Malaysia? It's among the top private university in Malaysia.

I think you are doing a great job in increasing public awareness on which University worthy studying in. I am so impressed by your rating and glad that the University I hope to go and pursue my additional studies is in there. You highly shape interests of those like me who strive for excellence. Poverty and poor governance in Africa still lets us down but I am optimistic some day of the Lord, we will come strong in this world ranking. As we strive to become professionals, we have hope for our continent.

when I cannot find a job who cares if I studied at harvard or some other university which is not even in the top 200, grow up! This ranking is childish!

How could UC Berkeley, UCLA, and Stanford placed out of top 10?

Clearly readers here believe that US Universities are the best in the world and no other country could possible come close. I don't want to read your unfounded scepticism of the standard of education in countries you have never been to, or universities you have never heard of. It's also really annoying to read complaints about rankings solely because the writer believes that universities more prestigious and famous couldn't possibly be ranked lower than others less prestigious. The ranking is not about how much it costs to attend universities or if you need a rich mum and dad to pay your fees.

This ranking is made in England, so universities in England are ranked in much more than other world universities ranking. Also US universities that are very famous in the nation but not in other countries are ranked much lower than what they really are... like u of colorado, u of florida, berkeley, stanford and more....

I appreciate the fact that universities will have to benchmark their achievements with respect to other universities of the world. But it is quite unfortunately African universities have failed to improve on their rankings year-in year-out, except for the University of Cape Town in South Africa, three other South African universities and the University of Cairo in Egypt. I wish All African universities will start to innovate and improve on their performances.

Utah isn't there at all?

The fact is whatever how much invest at university in UK,even if American universities see its competitors ' actions ,US universities may not feel threatened.Dupers! Every university presents sight of its original goals to students,that is beingless! It is impossible because you haven't strived any one time,no pain , no palm!

The rankings system is heavily flawed. The number of international students at a University can be highly dependent upon a country's immigration laws, the focus on predominantly educating their own students, the native language in that country and whether classes are taught in more universal languages liek English, and/or trying to make big money by educating foreign students. Look at the US universities rank for international students. With the exception of the top ones, which are small schools, the rest have very low ratings! How is Kyoto University supposed to have a high international score when it teaches it's classes in a language (Japanese) that isn't as popular as English, French, or others? So, the international students ranking is COMPLETELY FLAWED and should be removed. It's an absolute joke. Citation score can also be misleading. I don't know much about the SCOPUS system used to extract citation count. It could only look at certain journals or conferences, and not count others. Universities these days try to measure their research quality, and there is no exact formula. They are all flawed. As an academic myself, I know this to be true. International staff score: again, how is Kyoto University supposed to have a high score here? By the way, I'm not Japanese and have no affiliation with Kyoto. I'm just using them as an example. University of Tokyo has similarly poor figures. I'm unsure how they got the international staff score, but some schools that are VERY GOOD, have low scores. Why does it make a university seem "not as good" if they don't have enough of a global staff? Princeton has a 91 score, but Columbia's is 29. How did that happen? Stanford's is only 26, but if you are an academic, you'll know that Stanford has absolute top-notch world-elite staff. A school like HKUST (39) and NUS (30) have high international faculty scores. Do you know why? Because they CANNOT get enough quality academics from their region. They also have a great deal of money to throw around as well. They do not have better staff than your Chicago's, Berkeley's, or MIT's. Staff/student score: Private universities win out here. Public universities lose here. I don't know how Michigan's score was 85 in this department. It's staff/student ratio is not that high, and is similar to Berkeley, Wisconsin, UCSD, Illinois, etc. Berkeley was hit with a 24 rating in this category. Employer review score: I question how this was done. If you ask any US or European employer how to rank Monash University, the first thing they would say is: where the hell is that? What is my point? I believe the figures are biased by asking the particular region about their views of the universities. I used Monash as an example (it's an Australia by the way), as they only way to get enough rankings on the Australian universities is to ask Australian empolyers. There's a bias right there. Similarly, you'll get bias by region because most graduates work in the country or nearby countries (in the case of Europe) that they studied in. I don't have the proof, but I expect it to be heavily flawed! HEAVILY!! It is my opinion that the UK and the Australian Universities are heavily overrated. 6 Australian universities in the top 50??? Are you kidding me? They mostly all do very well on international student score. Know why? MONEY! They need the big money the international students pay to survive, while giving the Australian students a subsided education cost. They are not trying to be very international. It's purely out of financial necessity. The same is true of some of the UK universities. They make BIG MONEY off students (from wealthy families) in such countries as India, China, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, and some African countries. They send many resources to these countries to recruit students (and their parent's money) to pay high fees to come to the UK and Australia. Can I properly rank all these schools? Absolutely not. I'm biased by my field, where I work, and where I went to university just like everyone. I just think the rankings here are poorly done, and there are clearly better ways (which may end up with UK universities not looking as good, and I don't think that Times wants to do this). I'll compare Berkeley and University of Sydney, which are next to each other at #37 and #38. I have visited both universities and know staff at both places. The two universities aren't even close. 75% of the academic staff at the University of Sydney would literally wet themselves if they got a job offer from Berkeley. Another 15% or so think they are Berkeley elite quality, but are not. The remaining 10% or so are Berkeley quality for sure. (Note: I don't have a degree nor have I worked at Berkeley. I'm very familiar with it though). My numbers are rough and just a "guestimate". The point is, even U Sydney staff will openly admit they aren't near the Berkeley quality level. They won't openly tell this to students or the press, but they'll say it in private and among colleagues. It's not purely a reputation of the name. They look at the quality of staff members in their respective field at Berkeley and are in awe. Many schools have a few all-stars mixed in with a wide range of academic staff that are not all stars. Berkeley has many all-stars. Many! Let's reverse it, and let's remove the notion of living in Sydney itself (bridge, opera house, beaches, etc.) and focus only on quality of university. If Berkeley academics got a job offer in the mail from U Sydney, and it didn't entail a promotion, then it would be put in the recycling bin. The facilities and support, pay, and the ability to attract the best PhD students is by far in the favor of Berkeley.

useless rankings

useless rankings

International staff/students score is not important. These criteria push UK universities up.

I agree completely with "ME."

please send me worlds universities assessment standardes in 2009 very thanks leila soofizadeh-iran-tehran-reasearcher

I don't know whether it"s been mentioned in the previous comments as there are too many to read but I believe that one of the most important measuring criteria ought to be what the graduate has accomplished later in life. Which university has generated the greatest world leaders in the sciences, world leadership, arts, engineering, etc.. What have these students done with their lives since graduation? What impact have they had either in their field of study or the world in general? How many Nobel laureates has aparticular school "produced"? Just a thought.

I find it hilarious all these academics like "Me" that are crying over the results. I'm sure you would all be happy to design your own ranking system, and if you did, there would be a whole parade of other people complaining about how terribly unbalanced it is. Don't worry though, the US universities will still be the best because they can buy all the smartest minds.... until China takes over that is.

If I have counted correctly, I would like to point out that 8 of the top 200 schools in the WORLD are located in the state of California, USA. Pretty awesome.

Yes, it is the Terminator's home ground!

These Universities are Special only because they are located in UK, USA, Canada, Australia, NZ--- all Anglo-American countries. So, they must go to the top, wheras great universities in Europe, India, and elsewhere cannot have any mentions. The authors of these Rankings are just publicising prejudicial myths, not any reality. How can they judge Universities, quality of their their courses,quality of their research. how many people are working for the THES ranking department. How many languages do they know? How many subjects they have learned. What are the qualifications? What are the criteria for these judgement? For example: Waseda University in Tokyo, Japan is famous because its Baseball team gangraped some young females. It has no other reputation.