<p>The USNWR rankings are only based 5% on alumni giving, which they use as “an indirect measure of student satisfaction.”</p>
<p>I would imagine the scientific papers ranking is based more or less 100% on scientific papers.</p>
<p>The USNWR rankings are the most highly regarded and referenced in the U.S. because they’re the most applicable for undergrads. They measure things that actually, you know, matter to undergrads.</p>
<p>22.5% Undergraduate academic reputation
20% Student retention
20% Faculty Resources
15% Student Selectivity
10% Financial Resources
7.5% Graduation </p>
<p>What academics in every country around the world think of your university’s reputation in research is certainly not irrelevant, but it’s not highly relevant either to most undergraduate students. A metric that uses those reputation rankings as 40%-80% of their rankings as most global rankings do isn’t relevant to undergrads.</p>
<p>It’s also frankly wrong to say that USC’s surge comes from a high number of applicants alone. It’s only 15% of the metric. USC is hiring better faculty (poaching LOTS of them from UCLA), dramatically increasing the endowment, and improving its reputation internationally.</p>