Worldwide University Rankings

Colleges and Universities A-Z Brown University
1

<p>By the London Times.</p>

<p>Methodology used peer review based on strength/effectiveness of teaching, research, and international reputation.</p>

<p>Worldwide Ranking:</p>

<li>Harvard</li>
<li>University of California at Berkeley</li>
<li>MIT</li>
<li>California Institute of Technology</li>
<li>Oxford</li>
<li>Cambridge</li>
<li>Stanford</li>
<li>Yale</li>
<li>Princeton</li>
<li>ETH Zurich</li>
</ol>

<p>US Ranking:</p>

<li>Harvard</li>
<li>University of California at Berkeley</li>
<li>MIT</li>
<li>California Institute of Technology</li>
<li>Stanford</li>
<li>Yale</li>
<li>Princeton</li>
<li>University of Chicago</li>
<li>UT Austin</li>
<li>Columbia</li>
<li>University of California at San Francisco</li>
<li>Cornell</li>
<li>University of California at San Diego</li>
<li>John Hopkins</li>
<li>University of California at Los Angeles</li>
<li>University of Pennsylvania</li>
<li>University of Michigan</li>
<li>University of Illinois</li>
<li>Carnegie Mellon</li>
<li>University of Massachusetts</li>
<li>Duke</li>
<li>Purdue University</li>
<li>Brown</li>
<li>Georgia Institute of Technology</li>
<li>University of Wisconsin</li>
</ol>

2

<p>it came after UMass? Blah.</p>

3

<p>London Times isn't exactly U.S. News.</p>

4

<p>Among other factors, this ranking was based upon percentage of international students enrolling. Hence, UT Austin is a spot above Columbia.
I'm going to have to be blunt on this one: California1600, you are uninformed and ignorant and as a result you are angering people all over the CC forums. It's obvious that nobody likes you and it's equally obvious that this is why you keep coming back to post inflammatory threads. This is meant to be helpful: you're making yourself look like an idiot. For your own sake, stop, and for ours, stop wasting everyones's time.</p>

5

<p>The ranking was based on peer review scoring, Intl Faculty, Intl Students, Faculty/Student ratio, and Citations/Faculty. There is a heavy emphasis on peer review scoring.</p>

6

<p>Here is an excerpt from the ranking methodology group.</p>

<p>This listing of the most-esteemed
universities in the world, compiled on
the basis of a peer review of 1,300
academics and weighted by area and
subject, shows that old is beautiful.
The top two are Berkeley and Harvard in
the US — the second a 17th-century
foundation and the first set up as the
Harvard of the West 200 years later — and
they are followed by the medieval
foundations of Oxford and Cambridge.
More encouragingly, this analysis shows
that academics find excellence across the
world, with Japan and China joining the
UK and the US in the top ten. Singapore’s
National University comes in at 11 and the
next nine places go to universities from the
UK, the US, India, Australia and Japan.
The discipline balance achieved in this
analysis removes some of the bias in favour
of science and technology that is apparent in
our citations-based data, as well as eroding
the advantage the US enjoys in the citations
count. The California Institute of Technology,
substantial staff numbers, it performs less
well on citations per staff member than its
reputation might suggest. By contrast, the
California Institute of Technology, fourth in
the world overall, drops down to 11th on this
analysis despite its low student numbers.
This analysis shows that the most
student-oriented institutions vary widely
in attractiveness to overseas staff and
students. The Ecole Polytechnique
Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland, is top
at attracting foreign students, but it comes
in at joint 117th on the faculty-to-student
count. The top institution for overseas
students, the London School of Economics,
is 29th on this measure.
But despite the wide variety in
institutional behaviour this measure reveals,
it is notable that the world’s top university,
Harvard, is also prominent in this ranking,
where it appears in eighth place.
fourth in our overall rankings, plummets to
15th on this count, while ETH Zurich, tenth
in the world overall, falls to number 25. ETH
is a specialist science and technology
university and does not have a medical
school. An exception to this rule is the Indian
Institute of Technology, which is 18th in our
peer review but 41st in the world overall.
Peer review favours large universities with
a wide range of subject coverage. The
Massachusetts Institute of Technology is the
only specialist institution in the top ten, and
its agenda now runs far beyond technology.
Beijing, at number ten in this ranking,
has seen its reputation outside China rise
rapidly in recent years across a wide range
of subjects, including science and
technology. It is already widely regarded as
a substantial institution, and this reputation
may grow and be followed by success in
citations and by our other criteria in future
years. By the same token, Tokyo University,
like many other pillars of Japanese society,
is involved in a slow process of
modernisation in response to social and
economic change in Japan. Its prestige may
rise or fall in line with trends over which it
has little control.
Future analysis will show whether this
peer-review exercise predicts future success
or reflects past glory. Institutions such as
Harvard and Cambridge have enormous
financial advantages over their newer and
less prestigious rivals but can stay ahead of
the game only by reinventing themselves
continuously.</p>

7

<p>I'm sorry, but I hafta go with dcircle on this one. </p>

<p>Shut teh face. :O</p>

8

<p>Blahblahblahblahblah...who cares? Brown is my #1.</p>

9

<br>


<br>

<p>Shut teh face. :O>>>>>>></p>

<p>Don't get mad at me. It was the London Times that did this ranking. How far reaching this will be worldwide, or whether it will be more accurate than US News is unknown. However, direct criticisms of the methodology would be more appreciated.</p>

10

<p>Call the care police.</p>

11

<p>LOL Tommyz0r...i have no idea what's going on, what are the hidden Brown conflicts (i'm an ED Penn) but that was brilliant. i'm totally going to use that phrase from now on and pretend i was cool enough to have come up with it lol</p>

12

<p>yeah, I actually stole it from my vast array of geek vocab. Sorry, I'm not that original :(</p>

13

<p>California1600, what do you think of Pomona and the Claremont colleges?</p>

14

<p>same here punchline05.....Brown is mine #1 too</p>

15

<p>exac</p>

<p>GWB</p>

16

<br>


<br>

<p>I think they are very good schools. I know Harvey Mudd graduates are treated to be on par with Cal Tech, MIT, Berkeley, Stanfurd engineers.</p>

17

<p>But none of those schools have ranked departments. Isn't that your criteria?</p>

<p>Also, a general college prequisite is the ability read.
You know that long blurb that you unnecessarily copied and pasted? It says that the criteria is an international reputation ("peer review") garnered through international faculty hirings and international student matriculation. That Brown is even on the radar in this regard is pure coincidence--it is certainly not a priority for the University. Moreover, a citations/faculty ratio says nothing about quality, only quanity and varies widely from field to field. As a direct result, engineering schools do best (this is why princeton makes the list despite its small size).</p>

18

<br>


<br>

<p>I do not know of any ranking system that can match LAC's and larger universities. There are seperate rankings for a reason. However, I believe that US News does not have enough emphasis on academic quality, and the SAT score criteria is not uniform, meaning that especially the UC's should have a 30-50 point higher average SAT score if using similiar methodology as other schools. Also, too much emphasis is placed on something as simple as waiting 30 minutes vs. 5 minutes to see your counselor. No criteria is made for say, size of alumni pool, or worldwide reputation. Considering all these flaws, I see this London Times ranking as addressing much of the US New's deficiencies, and at the same time an excellent criteria to see how to keep American universities above the rapidly rising international university system.</p>

19

<p>"I do not know of any ranking system that can match LAC's and larger universities. There are seperate rankings for a reason."</p>

<p>Brown has less than 2,000 graduate students, 300 medical students, and no other professional schools. Brown is a liberal arts college. Please don't pretend it isn't.</p>

20

<p>I'm sorry, where in the U.S. News rankings does counselor waiting time appear? I'm fairly certain you made that up. I agree that the U.S. News ranking is flawed, and most of academia agrees that it does high school students a disservice because of these flaws, but its deficiencies are not the ones you mentioned and the London Times does not compensate for them by any stretch.</p>

<p>1) "Worldwide reputation" (simlar to the "peer assessment" of U.S. news) is unmeasurable because it doesn't mean anything. What the London Times is actually mentioning is cosmopolitanism, a point that has already been discussed and to which you have no rebuttal.</p>

<p>2) Size of alumni pool is equally meaningless (I don't even know why you mention this because no one measures it). On the contrary, alumni giving, retention, grad rate, and even matriculation yield are all more telling--these are things that U.S. News measures.</p>

<p>Again, I'm not advocating for U.S. News, I'm just trying to curb the misinformation that California1600 feels compelled to propagate.</p>