<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>
<p>It can't have any relevance. I'm no expert, but I don't think I have ever seen a ranking that puts the University of Texas at Austin ahead of Umich. Not to mention the absence of Northwestern in the list.</p>
<p>Not only does having UT-Austin ranked ahead of Michigan suspicious, but look at where schools like Dartmouth, Brown, Northwestern etc.. are ranked. And UC-San Francisco is #11? UCSF is merely a Medical school. </p>
<p>The top 7 or 8 universities make sense. But after that, things get WEIRD!!!</p>
<p>Here are more examples while the London Times ranking is not worth the paper it's printed on...</p>
<ol>
<li>Tokyo University</li>
<li>U of Chicago</li>
<li>Beijing University</li>
<li>National U of Singapore</li>
<li>Columbia</li>
<li>Cornell</li>
<li>Johns Hopkins</li>
<li>U Penn</li>
<li>U of Michigan</li>
</ol>
<p>How many of you guys are willing to forego your change to study at Columbia and Johns Hopkins for Tokyo U, Beijing U and National U of Singapore?</p>
<p>Not a single Japanese, Chinese or Singaporean I know of...</p>
<p>Nirvana, I actually like Cal1600. He seems like a good guy. </p>
<p>GoBlue, I agree that Beijing and Singapore are not going to compete with any of the top 20 American universities. But Tokyo is a legitimate top 15 university in the World. It may not be as appealing as many American universities, but in terms of quality of faculty, research and students, it is up there with the best.</p>
<p>Alexandre, I'm aware that Tokyo U is a top notch university, probably the best in Asia. However, it doesn't have the international appeal of the top US universities.</p>
<p>What I'm really 'attacking' is the credibility of the London Times ranking. Seems to me it was compiled by a team of statisticians with little or no knowledge of the academic world. They fed the data into some sort of formula and came up with the list. If the ranking contains significant discrepancies (e.g., Beijing University), you have to question the validity of the 'formula'. The London Times ranking contains so many ridiculous discrepancies that there is only one place it deserves -> in the wastebasket.</p>
<p>To further illustrate how absurd this ranking is: Beijing University is not even the #1 ranked university in China. That honor belongs to Tsinghwa University, which is not even on the list!</p>
<p>It is like ranking top US universities without considering HYP!</p>
<p>I wish this Cali douche would stop posting the damn rankings everywhere.
a) we've probably already seen them
b) credible or not, who cares
c) rankings dont tell much, you need to find the school thats right for you</p>