<p>According to Times rankings 2010, Berkeley is ranked 39th....</p>
<p>Times</a> Higher Education - Rankings 09: Asia advances</p>
<p>Berkeley ranks 4th in Arts & Humanities, 2nd in Engineering & IT, 5th in Life Sciences & Biomedicine, 3rd in Natural Sciences, and 2nd in Social Sciences and ranks 39th overall?</p>
<p>[Times</a> Higher Education-QS World University Rankings - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“Times Higher Education–QS World University Rankings - Wikipedia”>Times Higher Education–QS World University Rankings - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>Berkeley was killed by 2 non-sense criteria: International factors (10%) and Student Faculty rank (20%).</p>
<p>International Factors
In today’s increasingly globalized world, the most successful universities have to attract the world’s bet students and faculty. Simple evaluations of the proportion of international students and international faculty serve as indicators of an institution’s international attractiveness.</p>
<p>These indicators are then combined using standard statistical methods to yield the overall scores you will see in the results tables. If you are interested in greater detail, this section of the website contains a wealth of in depth information on how the rankings are compiled.</p>
<p>Faculty Student Ratio
Faculty Student Ratio is used in many ranking systems and evaluations in the world, and whilst it may not be a perfect measure of teaching quality, it is the most globally available and accessible measure of commitment to teaching. An indication that the institution in question has sufficient staff to teach its students.</p>
<p>[Methodology:</a> A simple overview | Top Universities](<a href=“http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/methodology/simple-overview]Methodology:”>http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/methodology/simple-overview)</p>
<p>University of Bristol (UK) is above Berkeley? Lol. This list is not worth the virtual paper its written on.</p>
<p>Plus there’s the common pro-Western bias shown in such lists.</p>
<p>lack of money</p>
<p>lmao, are they affiliated with time magazine?</p>
<p>isn’t 39th pretty good? lol</p>
<p>Bekeley was number 2 according to times in 2004 or 2005 i believe.
They dropped randomly to 30s in like 2008.</p>
<p>I don’t believe randomly fits well in that sentence good sir.</p>
<p>
No, Financial Times of London, I believe.</p>
<p>The Chinese rankings are much better… 
[ARWU</a> 2009](<a href=“http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2009.jsp]ARWU”>http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2009.jsp)</p>
<p>lol london? What a joke. Who the **** do they think they are putting american schools on that list?</p>
<p>This ranking is a joke</p>