<p>The bias lies in the methodology</p>
<p>
[quote]
why's priceton so low international-wise?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The ranking of The Times heavily took into account the # of scientific publications. Therefore the smaller institutions invariably fall behind in this ranking.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thes.co.uk/worldrankings/%5B/url%5D">http://www.thes.co.uk/worldrankings/</a></p>
<p>Relatively speaking, the curious thing is less, why P is "so low", but rather how it manages to still stay so close to S and Y. ;). H is dominating as a function of its combined quality AND size.</p>
<p>Inuendo, nobody likes a cry-baby.</p>
<p>Gentleman, ad hominem attacks are no permitted on CC. I hope you'll find your forced vacation from CC to helpful to appreciate the value of civility.
Trinity. </p>
<p>Inuendo is making the perfectly valid point that larger colleges with strong graduate programs are at a huge advantage in this ranking. The Times is looking at the school as a whole rather than the undergraduate program in particular.</p>
<p>no matter what approach you use, Harvard is always #1</p>
<p>zzzsleepzzz you go to harvard right?</p>
<p>Thank you ICargirl. I think I was vindicated by the CC moderator. </p>
<p>To response to Grad'06's post, zzzsleepzzz is right. No matter what ranking of global institutions you look at, Harvard will come out on top. Its enormous endowment, diverse graduate schools and ability to attract the best proffesors make it an outstanding institution as a whole. Since these are the objective measures that rankings are based on, Harvard will come out on top, followed by schools with similar charactersitics such as Stanford UCB and UChicago.</p>
<p>Grad'06, no, i'm a junior home student who found this ranking online</p>
<p>by the way my first choice is NOT harvard; it is: a small college in the middle of no where......no, it's not in the top 200 universities</p>
<p>These rankings dont take into account things like art, architecture, drama, music, and quality of students-one of the most important indicators of a university's worth. It is, moreover, quite biased towards larger universities.</p>
<p>And there is a quote in the article about Harvard that intimates that Harvard always gets the best students period. Yes, Harvard students are among the best, but Harvard certainly does not have a monopoly on the best students, especially in certain disciplines.</p>
<p>Yes, there are several flaws and inconsistencies with this ranking. Additionally, some of the measures used do not appear to make much sense, such as the number of international faculty member per university.</p>
<p>by the way, what measures are used by the u.s. news?</p>
<p>i give harvard four thumbs down! :P</p>
<p>why not 5?</p>
<p>That "four thumbs down" thing is from the dave chappelle show...but not a bad idea hugh! lets give it 5...the more the better :P</p>
<p>Byerly, how is this at all scientific? Did you look at the methodology? Fifty percent of it is based on pre-existing rankings, and 45 percent of it is based on "selectivity." But their "selectivity" result is very different from that of USN&WR, which has a decidedly more rigorous methodology.</p>
<p>You will note that "scientific" was in quotes.</p>
<p>These rankings are getting a lot of attention around the world, as Asian students are consulting them when deciding what countries, and what schools, should be considered for foreign study.</p>
<p>regarding the Consus rankings...</p>
<p>Chicago at 48!?!?!?! ridiculous.</p>
<p>And Princeton above Stanford? I think not.</p>