Top 500 World Universities

College Search & Selection
1

<p>Each year one university from Japan creates this list.
<a href="http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2004/top500list.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2004/top500list.htm&lt;/a>
World Rank Institution Country Total Score Score on Alumni Score on Award Score on HiCi Score on N&S Score on SCI Score on Size
1 Harvard Univ USA 100.0 98.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 60.6<br>
2 Stanford Univ USA 77.2 41.2 72.2 96.1 75.2 72.3 68.1<br>
3 Univ Cambridge UK 76.2 100.0 93.4 56.6 58.5 70.2 73.2<br>
4 Univ California - Berkeley USA 74.2 70.0 76.0 74.1 75.6 72.7 45.1<br>
5 Massachusetts Inst Tech (MIT) USA 72.4 74.1 78.9 73.6 69.1 64.6 47.5<br>
6 California Inst Tech USA 69.0 59.3 66.5 64.8 66.7 53.2 100.0<br>
7 Princeton Univ USA 63.6 61.0 76.8 65.4 52.1 46.8 67.3<br>
8 Univ Oxford UK 61.4 64.4 59.1 53.1 55.3 65.2 59.0<br>
9 Columbia Univ USA 61.2 77.8 58.8 57.3 51.6 68.3 37.0<br>
10 Univ Chicago USA 60.5 72.2 81.9 55.3 46.6 54.1 32.7<br>
11 Yale Univ USA 58.6 52.2 44.5 63.6 58.1 63.6 50.4<br>
12 Cornell Univ USA 55.5 46.6 52.4 60.5 47.2 66.2 33.6<br>
13 Univ California - San Diego USA 53.8 17.8 34.7 63.6 59.4 67.2 47.9<br>
14 Tokyo Univ Japan 51.9 36.1 14.4 44.5 55.0 91.9 49.8<br>
15 Univ Pennsylvania USA 51.8 35.6 35.1 61.2 44.6 72.6 34.0 </p>

<p>What do you think about top15?</p>

2

<p>Biased except for Harvard.</p>

<p>I am not too skilled in grad research but for undergrad this ranking SUCKS.</p>

3

<p>In terms of reputation, I think each country only has one or two colleges that the general worldwide public can name:
Japan: U of Tokyo
Britain: Oxford and Cambridge
Canada: McGill and Toronto
US: Harvard and MIT</p>

4

<p>Actually, this ranking comes from a Chinese source.</p>

5

<p>Yale really gets the shaft.</p>

6

<p>I think the top 100 is trash. Rice is ranked 75!! That is such garbage. And University of Washington is ranked 20!!! How is that even possible. UW is even ranked above UT-Austin which I disagree with as well. I mean according to this ranking UW is better than Duke. Whoever did this ranking must have just put the names of five hundred world universities in a hat and than randomly pulled them out. It makes no sense.</p>

7

<p>I don't know, could international audiences name MIT? I think it would be Harvard and Princeton, or Harvard and Yale.</p>

8

<p>hahha that's such a messed up chart</p>

9

<p>this chart is retarded and totally USA biased</p>

10

<p>i dont know why you say it's biased in favor of the USA, since it was made in Japan. what motive do they have to promote the USA? </p>

<p>but yeah, this chart is ridiculous. look at their methodology. all they consider is how many awards the alumni and professors receive, and other such nonsense. here's one way you know this is phony: dartmouth isn't even the top 100. I'm not saying every Ivy League school is perfect, but I think somehow I would put Dartmouth ahead of Rutgers, not 50 places behind.</p>

11

<p>This ranking is so freaking dumb. Too engineering centered, it seems. Very skewed. Dumb crap-ignore it...</p>

12

<p>uh..this list has very little credibility in my opinion, what about IIT?? lol..that is by far the most selective university in the world, furthermore people that get accepted to hyps don't get into IIT (although I must say this is specifically for engineering, but even as newyorker stated, although the list seems engineering centered, then it would be even more realistic that IIT would be top 5 for sure..)</p>

13

<p>
[quote]
This ranking is so freaking dumb. Too engineering centered, it seems. Very skewed. Dumb crap-ignore it...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Considering that Harvard is by no means better than Stanford, Berkeley, or MIT in engineering, you're theory is unrealistic.</p>

14

<p>whoa, ucsd 13??? yea it must be engineering-oriented. chinese/asian ppl all want their kids in engineering/premed or something so that would make sense kinda...</p>

15

<p>What is Univ. of California San Francisco?</p>

16

<p>1) That is the old ranking from last year.
2) It's Chinese not Japanese.
3) The ranking is untrustworthy. Considering Duke leaped 40 slots in one year (to #11), I find myself questioning the ranking's accuracy.
4) Of course it favors US universities. If you bother to read the methodology, it's based on research.
5) The ranking factors are almost completely irrelevant to an undergraduate education.</p>

<p>Quality of Education (10%): Alumni of an institution winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals
Quality of Faculty (20%): Staff of an institution winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals Award
Highly cited researchers in 21 broad subject categories (20%)
Research Output Articles published in Nature and Science (20%)
Articles in Science Citation Index (20%)
Size of Institution Academic performance with respect to the size of an institution Size (10%)</p>

17

<p>"UCSD" is far too high, even with their medicine</p>

18

<p>how is UCSD in the top 15 but not UCLA...</p>

19

<p>Yale must have ****ed off someone working there...
Besides this ranking was done in China without any foreign support.
My opinion is that this is one badly messed up study</p>

20

<p>Link to 2005 rankings</p>

<p><a href="http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2005/ARWU2005_Top100.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2005/ARWU2005_Top100.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>