<p>No offence to Canada or Canadians, but I think this list is heavily slanted in favor of Canadian universities. Given that the % of international students and faculty are a major part of this ranking, Canada's ultra-lenient visa policy may be a big part of that.</p>
<p>Indian institute of technology.</p>
<p>Enough said.</p>
<p>i think people need to remember that this list is about the top "global universities". if i'm reading this correctly, looking at how good the univeristy is at teaching/being involved with the world.</p>
<p>i was being sarcastic of anyone who wasted their time doing the whole 'comment on comment' thing</p>
<p>lol someone said that already</p>
<p>berkeley should be number 2 or 3....</p>
<p>why? Because it's full of Asians?</p>
<p>trancestorm- What about Indian institutes of technology? They aren't even in the top 100. What ever you said DEFINITELY WASN'T ENOUGH !!!</p>
<p>India Institute of Technology: which campus are we talking about? :rolleyes:</p>
<p>while we're at it, can someone rank the IIT campuses?</p>
<p>Finally, a list that isn't private school biased!</p>
<p>There's an irony to your comment. The reason that public schools don't suffer is because these rankings don't take student quality into account, which is a glaring omission. Except for the faculty student ratio, most of the measures favor schools with large numbers of high quality professors regardless of how good the undergrads are.</p>
<p>If Cal Berkeley were to admit an extra 5,000 international students with SAT scores 150-200 points below their current minimum with no other redeeming characteristics, while hiring an extra 100 professors, most of whom were bad teachers and published almost nothing while a few of whom were superstars, their ranking might actually improve even if the student experience were to worsen.</p>
<p>university of california at san francisico?</p>
<p>i've never even heard of that...</p>
<p>UCSF is a global leader in biotech and top med school.</p>
<p>Columbia2007: as weird as it may sound to you, Yale or Stanford are not bigger names than Berkeley overseas.</p>
<p>Bump to the people pointing out that this is not a research quality rank but a research quality + "global-ness" rank.</p>
<p>If the ranking were of Graduate quality, they would be patently ridiculous. Penn and Duke wouldn't belong close to the top 20. Nor would Imperial. Yale would be overranked as well, though it is actually top-20 and probably top-10.</p>
<p>GRAD quality rank would be more like (excluding foreign places, which I'm not too familiar with):</p>
<p>Stanford/Harvard
Berkeley
Princeton
MIT
Michigan/Caltech
Yale/Chicago
Columbia/UCSF
UCLA/Cornell
(lots of state schools)
Duke/Penn</p>
<p>In defense of my school:</p>
<p>"Uh.. Uchicago is #2 in econ, not #1. Also that shouldn't make it great. Stern is #2 in finance and Georgetown's #1 for IR."</p>
<p>In what source? It's #1 in USNews and NRC.</p>
<p>"Takes more than one thing to make a good college."</p>
<p>Look at some grad rankings. I've never gone over USNews, but Chicago has a better average rank than Yale and a way better average rank than Columbia in NRC (I know it's outdated until next December). It's also one of the handful of schools that's top ten in just about everything (including in the up-to-date USNews). Claiming that Chicago is a one-subject school is ridiculous.</p>
<p>"Columbia2007: as weird as it may sound to you, Yale or Stanford are not bigger names than Berkeley overseas."You wrong..Stanford has much much more prstige abroad(south america , europe, asia) then berkeley, yale maybe no</p>
<p>sternman87, of course one department doesn't make a school great. That's why Chicago keeps its physics, biology, sociology, law, business, political science and public policy departments around. Oh yeah, and then there's that whole humanities division. You know, the philosophy and languages departments. And there's that Chicago school of literary criticism that never seems to go away.</p>
<p>Compared to some of its other departments, Chicago's economics departments is downright mediocre....</p>
<p>Actually, our highest concentration of non-top programs is in the humanities.</p>
<p>^ (before edit) I would argue that the sciences are, but again the term "weakest area" doesn't mean too much in this context. Chicago is ranked #6 for its overall English program, just below Stanford and Princeton and tied with Cornell (which also has an amazing English department). Its ranked #4 in History with Harvard and Stanford. And then there's that whole Great Books thing. I don't have the numbers, but Chicago is also very strong in foreign languages and fairly strong in philosophy.</p>
<p>We're 18 in philosophy, which is extremely weak in comparison to the majority of our program.</p>