The Full Wiki

More info on Academic Ranking of World Universities

Academic Ranking of World Universities: Map

Advertisements
  
  

Wikipedia article:

Map showing all locations mentioned on Wikipedia article:

The Academic Ranking of World Universities is compiled by Shanghai Jiao Tong Universitymarker. The ranking compared 1200 higher education institutions worldwide according to a formula that took into account alumni winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals (10 percent), staff winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals (20 percent), highly-cited researchers in 21 broad subject categories (20 percent), articles published in Nature and Science (20 percent), the Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index (20 percent) and the per capita academic performance (on the indicators above) of an institution (10 percent). The methodology is set out in an academic article by its originators, N.C. Liu and Y. Cheng. Liu and Cheng explain that the original purpose of doing the ranking was “to find out the gap between Chinese universities and world-class universities, particularly in terms of academic or research performance.” The rankings have been conducted since 2003 and then updated annually.

Commentary

As the first multi-indicator ranking of global universities, ARWU has attracted a great deal of attention from universities, governments and public media worldwide since its publication. A survey on higher education published by The Economist in 2005 commented ARWU as “the most widely used annual ranking of the world’s research universities.” Bollag (2006) wrote on Chronicle of Higher Education that ARWU “is considered the most influential international ranking.”

One of the factors in the significant influence of ARWU is that its methodology looks globally sound and transparent. EU Research Headlines reported the ARWU’s work on 31st Dec 2003: “The universities were carefully evaluated using several indicators of research performance.” Chancellor of Oxford Universitymarker, Prof. Chris Patten, said “the methodology looks fairly solid ... it looks like a pretty good stab at a fair comparison.” Vice-Chancellor of Australian National Universitymarker, Prof. Ian Chubb, said “The SJTU rankings were reported quickly and widely around the world… (and they) offer an important comparative view of research performance and reputation.” Margison (2007) also commented the ARWU ranking that one of the strengths of “the academically rigorous and globally inclusive Jiao Tong approach” is “constantly tuning its rankings and invites open collaboration in that.”

The ARWU ranking and its content have been widely cited and applied as a starting point for identifying national strengths and weaknesses as well as facilitating reform and setting new initiatives. Bill Destler (2008), the president of the Rochester Institute of Technology, draw reference to the ARWU ranking to analyze the comparative advantages the Western Europe and US have in terms of intellectual talent and creativity in his publication in the journal Nature. European commissioner of Education, Jan Figel, pointed out in an interview in 2007 that “if you look at the Shanghai index, we are the strongest continent in terms of numbers and potential but we are also shifting into a secondary position in terms of quality and attractiveness. If we don't act we will see an uptake or overtake by Chinese or Indian universities.” Also, Enserink (2007) referred to ARWU and argued in his paper published in Science that “France’s poor showing in the Shanghai ranking ... helped trigger a national debate about higher education that resulted in a new law... giving universities more freedom.” The world leading think tank organisation, Rand Corporation, also used the ARWU ranking as evidence in their consultancy paper to the European Institute of Innovation and Technology.

Criticism

College and university rankings often stimulate controversy (see Criticism of college and university rankings and Criticism of college and university rankings ) and the ARWU is no exception. A 2007 paper published in the journal Scientometrics found that the results from the Shanghai rankings could not be reproduced from raw data using the method described by Liu and Cheng.

In a report from April 2009, J-C. Billaut, D. Bouyssou and Ph. Vincke analyze how the ARWU works, using their insights as specialists of Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM). Their main conclusions are that the criteria that are used are not relevant, that the aggregation methodology is plagued by a number of major problems and that the whole exercise suffers from an insufficient attention paid to fundamental structuring issues .

The ARWU researchers themselves, N.C Liu and Y Cheng, think that the quality of universities cannot be precisely measured by mere numbers and any ranking can be controversial. They suggest that university and college rankings should be used with cautions and their methodologies must be read carefully before reporting or using the results.

Rankings

2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009

The table below contains the rankings from 2003 to 2009 for all universities which ranked at least 100 in one of the years. The ranking is omitted for years in which the school did not land within the top 100. Note, the full ranking contains over 500 universities. If a university is not listed in this table, it fell below 100 in all seven years.

University 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Aarhus Universitymarker 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 93 97
Arizona State Universitymarker 1000 1000 1000 100 96 93 94
Australian National Universitymarker 49 53 53 54 57 59 59
Boston Universitymarker 98 86 86 81 83 83 74
Brown Universitymarker 49 82 82 85 70 71 69
California Institute of Technologymarker 3 6 6 6 6 6 6
Carnegie Mellon Universitymarker 61 62 62 56 60 62 59
Case Western Reserve Universitymarker 51 65 65 70 78 83 87
Columbia University 10 9 9 7 7 7 7
Cornell Universitymarker 12 12 12 12 12 12 12
Duke Universitymarker 32 31 31 31 32 32 31
École Normale Supérieure - Parismarker 1000 85 85 99 83 73 70
Emory Universitymarker 99 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 100
Free University of Berlinmarker 95 1000 1000 99 83 1000 1000
Harvard Universitymarker 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Hebrew University of Jerusalemmarker 94 90 90 60 64 65 64
Humboldt University of Berlinmarker 1000 95 95 1000 1000 1000 1000
Imperial College Londonmarker 17 23 23 23 23 27 26
Indiana University - Bloomingtonmarker 1000 1000 1000 97 90 92 93
Johns Hopkins University 24 22 22 20 19 20 19
Karolinska Institutetmarker 39 46 46 48 53 51 50
King's College Londonmarker 75 77 77 83 83 81 65
Kyoto Universitymarker 30 21 21 22 22 23 24
Lund Universitymarker 93 92 92 90 97 97 1000
Massachusetts Institute of Technologymarker 6 5 5 5 5 5 5
McGill Universitymarker 79 61 61 62 63 60 65
McMaster Universitymarker 86 88 88 90 87 89 91
Michigan State Universitymarker 87 80 80 80 80 83 86
Moscow State Universitymarker 1000 66 66 70 76 70 77
Nagoya University 68 97 97 98 94 1000 82
New York Universitymarker 55 32 32 29 30 31 32
North Carolina State Universitymarker 99 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
Northwestern Universitymarker 29 30 30 33 29 30 30
Ohio State Universitymarker 81 73 73 66 61 62 62
Osaka Universitymarker 53 54 54 61 67 68 71
Pennsylvania State Universitymarker 40 43 43 42 43 42 45
Princeton Universitymarker 7 7 7 8 8 8 8
Purdue Universitymarker 80 71 71 73 68 65 65
Rice University 61 75 75 87 87 97 99
Rockefeller Universitymarker 28 29 29 30 30 32 32
Rutgers Universitymarker 38 44 44 46 47 54 55
Stanford Universitymarker 2 2 2 3 2 2 2
Stockholm Universitymarker 1000 97 97 84 86 86 88
ETH Zurichmarker 25 27 27 27 27 24 23
Technical University of Munichmarker 60 45 45 54 56 57 57
Texas A&M Universitymarker 70 1000 1000 88 91 88 88
Tohoku University 64 69 69 76 76 79 84
Tokyo Institute of Technology 1000 1000 1000 89 99 1000 1000
Tokyo Universitymarker 19 14 14 19 20 19 20
Tufts Universitymarker 83 99 99 1000 1000 1000 1000
University of Arizonamarker 55 76 76 76 74 77 77
University of Baselmarker 96 91 91 81 82 87 85
University of Birminghammarker 1000 93 93 90 92 91 94
University of Bonnmarker 1000 99 99 1000 99 97 98
University of Bristolmarker 55 60 60 62 62 61 61
University of British Columbiamarker 35 36 36 36 36 35 36
University of California, Berkeleymarker 4 4 4 4 3 3 3
University of California, Davismarker 36 42 42 42 43 48 49
University of California, Irvinemarker 44 55 55 44 45 46 46
University of California, Los Angelesmarker 15 16 16 14 13 13 13
University of California, Riversidemarker 88 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
University of California, San Diegomarker 14 13 13 13 14 14 14
University of California, San Franciscomarker 13 17 17 18 18 18 18
University of California, Santa Barbaramarker 26 35 35 35 35 36 35
University of Cambridgemarker 5 3 3 2 4 4 4
University of Chicagomarker 11 10 10 8 9 9 9
University College Londonmarker 20 25 25 26 25 22 21
University of Colorado 31 34 34 34 34 34 34
University of Copenhagenmarker 65 59 59 56 46 45 43
University of Edinburgh 43 47 47 52 53 55 53
University of Floridamarker 75 67 67 53 51 58 58
University of Freiburg 1000 88 88 93 94 96 1000
University of Ghentmarker 99 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
University of Goettingenmarker 91 79 79 85 87 90 90
University of Groningen 84 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
University of Heidelbergmarker 58 64 64 66 65 67 63
University of Helsinkimarker 74 72 72 74 73 68 72
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaignmarker 45 25 25 25 26 26 25
University of Illinois at Chicagomarker 96 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000
University of Iowamarker 90 1000 1000 95 97 1000 1000
University of Leiden 78 63 63 72 71 76 72
University of Manchestermarker 89 78 53 50 48 40 41
University of Maryland, College Parkmarker 75 57 57 37 37 37 37
University of Melbournemarker 92 82 82 78 79 73 75
University of Michigan, Ann Arbormarker 21 19 19 21 21 21 22
University of Minnesota, Twin Citiesmarker 37 33 33 32 33 28 28
University of Munichmarker 48 51 51 51 53 55 55
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hillmarker 52 56 56 59 58 38 39
University of Nottinghammarker 1000 80 80 79 81 82 83
University of Oslomarker 63 68 68 68 69 64 65
University of Oxfordmarker 9 8 8 10 10 10 10
University of Paris 6 (Pierre and Marie Curie Universitymarker) 65 41 41 45 39 42 40
University of Paris 11 (Paris-Sud 11 University) 72 48 48 64 52 49 43
University of Pennsylvaniamarker 18 15 15 15 15 15 15
University of Pittsburghmarker 53 48 48 48 49 52 50
University of Rochestermarker 72 52 52 74 75 73 77
Sapienza University of Romemarker 70 93 93 100 1000 1000 1000
University of Sheffield 68 69 69 69 72 77 81
University of Southern Californiamarker 40 48 48 47 50 50 46
University of Strasbourg I (Louis Pasteur University) 1000 82 82 96 99 1000 1000
University of Sydney 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 97 94
University of Texas at Austinmarker 47 40 40 39 38 39 38
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas 34 36 36 38 39 41 48
University of Torontomarker 23 24 24 24 23 24 27
University of Utahmarker 81 95 95 94 93 79 80
University of Utrecht 40 39 39 40 42 47 52
University of Viennamarker 84 86 86 1000 1000 1000 1000
University of Virginiamarker 67 1000 1000 1000 1000 95 91
University of Washingtonmarker 16 20 20 17 16 16 16
University of Wisconsin–Madisonmarker 27 18 18 16 17 17 17
University of Zurichmarker 45 57 57 58 58 53 54
Uppsala Universitymarker 59 74 74 65 66 71 76
Vanderbilt Universitymarker 32 38 38 41 41 42 41
Washington University in St. Louismarker 22 28 28 28 28 29 29
Yale Universitymarker 8 11 11 11 11 11 11


See also



References

  1. N.C. Liu and Y Cheng 2005 “Academic ranking of world universities - methodologies and problems”, Higher Education in Europe, Vol. 30, No 2., and earlier in the proceedings of Meeting of the International Rankings Expert Group 2004.
  2. N.C. Liu and Y Cheng 2008 “Academic ranking of world universities: FAQ”[1], retrieved Jun 2009
  3. The brains business, The Economist, Sep 8th 2005
  4. Bollag, B. 2006 International group endorses principles for ranking of higher education institutions. Chronicle of Higher Education, June 1st[2]
  5. European Research Headlines 2003 Chinese study ranks world’s top 500 universities[3]
  6. Marginson, S. 2007 Global university comparisons: the second stage. Paper presented at the Symposium on International Trends in University Ranking and Classifications. Feb 12, 2007, Griffith University, Australia[4]
  7. Destler, B. 2008 A new relationship. Nature, 453, 853-854, Dec 2008
  8. Figel, A. 2007 Asia threatens to knock British universities off the top table, The Times [5]
  9. Enserink, M. 2007 Who ranks the university rankers? Science vol317(5841), pp.1026-1028{http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/317/5841/1026}.
  10. Galama, T. et al. 2006 The Pursuit of Excellence. A European Institute of Technology. [6]
  11. .


External links




Embed code:
Advertisements






Got something to say? Make a comment.
Your name
Your email address
Message