<p>Worlds Top Universities Rankings:
1) Harvard University (1000 pts)
2) University of California, Berkeley (880.2)
3) Massachusetts Institute of Technology (786.9)
4) California Institute of Technology (738.9)
5) Oxford University (731.8)
5) Cambridge University (731.8)
7) Stanford University (698.0)
8) Yale University (582.8)
9) Princeton University (557.5)
10) ETH Zurich (553.7)
11) London School of Economics (484.4)
12) Tokyo University (482.0)
13) University of Chicago (444.0)
14) Imperial College London (443.7)
15) University of Texas at Austin (421.5)
16) Australian National University (417.7)
17) Beijing University (391.8)
18) National University of Singapore (385.9)
19) Columbia University (384.1)
20) University of California, San Francisco (376.5)
21) McGill University (364.1)
22) Melbourne University (353.2)
23) Cornell University (348.8)
24) University of California, San Diego (331.5)
25) Johns Hopkins University
26) University of California, Los Angeles (316.4)
27) Ecole Polytechnique (315.5)
28) University of Pennsylvania (306.9)
29) Kyoto University (303.7)
30) Ecole Normale Superleure (298.4)
31) University of Michigan (298.4) Im assuming Ann Arbor?
32) Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (289.4)
33) Monash University (286.0)
34) University College London (284.2)
35) University of Illinois (281.6)
36) New South Wales University (275.7)
37) Toronto University (272.5)
38) Carnegie Mellon University (259.4)
39) Hong Kong University (249.5)
40) Sydney University (245.2)
41) Indian Institute of Technology (241.7)
42) Hong Kong University of Science & Technology (240.6)
43) Manchester University (238.5)
44) School of Oriental and African Studies (235.8)
45) University of Massachusetts (235.7)
46) University of British Columbia (230.4)
47) Heidelberg University (228.3)
48) Edinburgh University (227.6)
49) Queensland University (223.9)
50) Nanyang University (217.1)</p>
<p>Is this that Shanghai University rating list? That has about as much credibility as... Michael Moore at the RNC.</p>
<p>It's not shanghai's ranking... but this one seems even worse.</p>
<p>Why are universities like Hong Kong and Nanyang even mentioned, when they are no where near the level of Tsinghua (which is not mentioned)?</p>
<p>Melbourne University above Cornell? In what?</p>
<p>Or it has about as much credibility as US News.</p>
<p>Not another ranking table again!!</p>
<p>I think this one is by The Times (UK), from what I have read. The rankings are based on academics' peer assessment in their field of research. So it reflects what the academic staff in each university think of their peers in other universities. I am just a little surprised that they thought alot more of Berkeley than Stanford.</p>
<p>But of course, it is no business of mine what they think :)</p>
<p>That poll was commissioned by the Trustees of Harvard.</p>
<p>As Jim Carrey would say, "All righty then!"</p>
<p>The creator (or culprit?) is, in fact, the highly respectable Times Higher Eductation Supplement:</p>
<p>(If you can't download the pdf file, here is a link to a text version of the same ranking: <a href="http://www1.bbsland.com/education/messages/210799.html%5B/url%5D">http://www1.bbsland.com/education/messages/210799.html</a>)</p>
<p>It's funny how schools like U-Texas rate higher in the world, then nationally.</p>
<p>BTW, I don't have anything against texas, it's just funny to see that. Same for other schools.</p>
<p>UMAss??? Come on.</p>
<p>another ranking to ignore. yawn. The asian counties must be obsessed with inaccurate worldwide university rankings.</p>
<p>I don't agree with how they give so much more points for having more international students and faculty.... most universities have tiny international student bodies at the undergrad level and intentionally keep it that way to put the needs of students in their own country first. Look at schools like Harvard, Caltech, UCBerkeley, and MIT... their international scores in both categories are less than 20's! All the UK schools seem to benefit from this scoring system however. London university gets about a 150 point lead on the above mentioned US schools, Oxford/Cambridge both get a 50 point lead - is this possibly biased towards UK schools and those with large international student bodies?</p>
<p>University of Illinois and UMass are on there but Georgetown isn't?</p>
<p>Bah humbug.</p>
<p>calm down everyone, why would you be more informed than these guys. because you read usnews and heard so and so college was good from your neighbor? I'm not saying that these rankings are absolute, but obviously they have some base in their rankings.</p>
<p>When one university scores higher than another university in every category except international enrollment - and that other university wins anyways because they enroll a much larger proportion of international students, you know something is wrong with this ranking. A university who chooses to only admit a 5% international undergrad student body loses huge number of points to another university who chooses to enroll something like 40% internationals for undergrad. In this ranking I see many good universities bumped off the list for these 'international' schools, which are not necessarily any better.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
It's not shanghai's ranking... but this one seems even worse.
[/QUOTE]
Well its been created by asking 1,300 odd academics which institutions they consider as leaders in their respective fields so i would consider it a pretty accurate as its basically been drawn up by those whos opinion matters.
[QUOTE]
I think this one is by The Times (UK), from what I have read. The rankings are based on academics' peer assessment in their field of research. So it reflects what the academic staff in each university think of their peers in other universities. I am just a little surprised that they thought alot more of Berkeley than Stanford.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
It's funny how schools like U-Texas rate higher in the world, then nationally.
[/QUOTE]
The same thing can be seen when the UK rankings are compared to the international rankings. 'lesser' institutions can be found noticably higher in these international rankings than certain peers. </p>
<p>This table seems far superior to the previous one where the science/maths bias was hugely significant - for example the London School of Economics was 400th or so according to Shanghai, whereas here it is placed 11th, a position which far better reflects its quality. The School of Oriental and African Studies is another institution which makes a notable gain in this table whereas its arts/social science/language concentration left it severely disadvantaged in the shanghai table. I expect some of the American Universities have made similiar gains due to the fact this table takes all subjects into account.</p>
<p>Ok, let's see...</p>
<p>London school of economics---
Peer Review: 257
Faculty/Student Score: 27
Citations/Faculty Score: 6
Total: 290</p>
<p>Points for having tons of international students/faculty: 179 (38% of total points)</p>
<p>Seems like alot of points to give out just because they chose to enroll a ton of international students, doesn't it?</p>
<p>Harvard
Peer Review: 643
Faculty/Student Score: 50
Citations/Faculty Score: 243
Total: 936</p>
<p>Points for having tons of international students/faculty: 34 (3.6% of total points)</p>
<p>See the bias in there yet?</p>
<p>Ecole Polytech
Peer Review: 56
Faculty/Student Score: 13
Citations/Faculty Score:44
Total: 113</p>
<p>Points for having tons of international students/faculty: 167 (60% of total points)</p>
<p>This one is ranked #32 worldwide, when just about every university ranked below it has better peer review/faculty/citation scores. The only reason they are up there is because they have a very large international student body. NOT because they are known better among academics or they have better faculties, etc... it's all there in the report. So just because a university is ranked #20, does not mean it is better than one ranked #50 - look at the score reports to see what they actually included in the methodology.</p>
<p>Seems as though everyone hates the international portion of this ranking. Thats ok because I dont know if I agree with it either. Perhaps we are all bias against anything that doesnt have to do with the United States. Look at it this way, whenever someone says something good about a UC or any other public school people complain by saying they dont have enough students from out of state. Some people argue that in order for a school to be truly great, they need to have a student body with many more states represented than what public schools tend to have. Whoever thinks like this should have absolutely no problem with the way this rankings take international students into consideration. After all, we are ranking WORLD universities here. </p>
<p>I personally dont totally agree with this ranking but it needs to be taken with a grain of salt. I like it because it gives another perspective on University rankings. This ranking may be flawed but it is no more flawed than US News ranking. Keep in mind people that US News is not the Bible!</p>
<p>UCBerkeley #2?? Better than MIT, yale,stanford,princeton,etc..??
...This ranking doesn't make sense..</p>
<p>Numerical ranking is bad. It is unlike Super Bowl that two schools actual play and compete against each other. Can only one tell me what or why the # 1 in any ranking is better than the # 2 school? The # 1 School doesnt win in all criteria if you can even call it a winner in some highly subjective measurements. Just remember that what is good for one student is not necessary good for another student. </p>
<p>The ranking is worst! Harvard is 1000 points, almost 2 times better than Yale or 3 time better than Columbia. Give me a break. I wonder if any school gets 1000 in this ranking?</p>