<p>This deserves its own thread on this forum. The changes from last years ranking are pretty minimal, although several universities lost prestige points.</p>
<p>Observations:</p>
<p>In 2013, Berkeley is still in its #5 spot, but Stanford has fallen to #6 from #4 in 2012. (#4 is now Oxfords spot, which was #6 in 2012)</p>
<p>UCLA's slight ascension in the rankings are interesting to note. Not only is it ranked higher than TokyoU now (which suffered a +2 prestige point loss) it also shred the gap with Princeton, from a 4 point advantage for Princeton in 2012, to slightly over half a point in 2013 (in part due to loss in prestige points on Princeton's part.) By moving to the #8 spot from #9 last year, it also cut the gap with Berkeley which has only a three ranking advantage now (although Berkeley still has over twice as many prestige points as UCLA)</p>
<p>I didn't really see any big jump in the rankings, which isn't surprising. If they did increase, most universities ascended by one or two positions. </p>
<p>For anyone else interested in comparing both, here are the rankings side by side.</p>
<p>Lol where is dartmout, brown, georgetown? These rankings are not for reputation. They only take the size of the institution into acoount. Dont waste your time reading these</p>
<p>Just shows the complete impossibility and pointlessness of “university rankings.” Outside some broad classing, it’s a ridiculous, unscientific and totally subjective fool’s errand.</p>
<p>I find it very funny that you small minds judge the accuracy of one ranking based only on how closely it resembles the us news rankings.</p>
<p>obviously this is based on academic peer evaluation, not undergraduate selectivity, which is a meaningless heuristic that puts Dartmouth and brown so high ahead on us news.</p>
<p>WUSTL is in the 90s? Michigan State is above Brown? There’s nothing wrong with this, all of these schools are perfectly fine, and I’m sure in some areas and respects, their rankings are about right. That said, universities are HUGE and complex groups with many different schools, programs and departments. That’s what makes rankings so useless, they generalize systems that should be kept specific.</p>
<p>The Times Higher Education World Reputation Rankings employ the world’s largest invitation-only academic opinion survey to provide the definitive list of the top 100 most powerful global university brands.</p>
<p>I don’t think they’re pointless because they don’t compare to the US News rankings; I think they are pointless because overall reputation of a university doesn’t really matter wrt graduate school. What matters is rankings in field. In my primary field, a good deal of these universities don’t count because they don’t even have programs in my field. Yale is ranked higher than my university in this ranking table but my university has a better program than Yale in my primary field. And in my secondary field, I think Michigan is the number-four program and Caltech doesn’t even have a program in that field.</p>
<p>I’m just curious as to when or why these rankings would even matter to anyone or be useful, other than marketing/branding for the universities themselves. I certainly wouldn’t use them when deciding on PhD programs.</p>