1195 - LISTA DAS 200 UNIVERSIDADES AMERICANAS

Aachen RWT Aarhus University Aberdeen University Amsterdam University Auckland University Australian
National University Basel University Bath University Beijing University Birmingham University Boston University
Brandeis University Bristol University Brown University Brussels Free University (Flemish) Brussels Free University
(French) California Institute of Technology Cambridge University Cardiff University Carnegie Mellon University
Case Western Reserve University Catholic University of Leuven (Flemish) Catholic University of Louvain (French)
Chalmers University of Technology China University of Science and Technology Chinese University of Hong Kong
Chulalongkorn University City University of Hong Kong Columbia University Copenhagen University Cornell
University Cranfield University Curtin University of Technology Dartmouth College Delft University of Technology
Duke University Durham University Ecole Normale Supérieure, Lyon Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris Ecole
Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne Ecole Polytechnique Edinburgh University Eindhoven University of
Technology Emory University Erasmus University Rotterdam ETH Zurich Frankfurt University Free University Berlin
Free University of Amsterdam Fudan University Geneva University George Washington University Georgetown
University Georgia Institute of Technology Ghent University Glasgow University Göttingen University Harvard
University Hebrew University of Jerusalem Heidelberg University Helsinki University Hokkaido University Hong
Kong University Science and Technology Humboldt University Berlin Imperial College London Indian Institutes of
Management Indian Institutes of Technology Innsbruck University Jawaharlal Nehru University Johns Hopkins
University Keio University King’s College London Kobe University Korea Advanced Institute of Science and
Technology Korea University Kyoto University Kyushu University La Sapienza University, Rome Lausanne
University Leeds University Leiden University Liverpool University Lomonosov Moscow State University London
School of Economics Lund University Maastricht University Macquarie University Malaya University Manchester
University Maryland University Massachusetts Institute of Technology McGill University McMaster University
Melbourne University Michigan State University Monash University Munich University Nagoya University Nanjing
University Nanyang Technological University National Autonomous University of Mexico National Taiwan University
National University of Singapore New York University Newcastle upon Tyne University Nijmegen University
Northwestern University Notre Dame University Nottingham University Osaka University Oslo University Otago
University Oxford University Pennsylvania State University Pennsylvania University Pierre and Marie Curie University
Pittsburgh University Princeton University Purdue University Queen Mary, University of London Queen’s University
Queensland University Queensland University of Technology Reading University Rice University RMIT University
Rochester University Royal Institute of Technology Saint Petersburg State University School of Oriental and African
Studies Sciences Po Seoul National University Shanghai Jiao Tong University Sheffield University Southampton
University St Andrews University Stanford University State University of New York Stony Brook Sussex University
Sydney University Technical University Munich Technical University of Denmark Technion — Israel Institute of
Technology Tel Aviv University Texas A&M University Tohoku University Tokyo Institute of Technology Tokyo
University Trinity College Dublin Tsing Hua University Tufts University Université de Montréal University College
London University Louis Pasteur Strasbourg University of Adelaide University of Alberta University of Barcelona
University of Bern University of British Columbia University of California, Berkeley University of California, Davis
University of California, Irvine University of California, Los Angeles University of California, San Diego University of
California, Santa Barbara University of Chicago University of Hong Kong University of Illinois University of
Kebangsaan Malaysia University of Massachusetts, Amherst University of Michigan University of Minnesota
University of New South Wales University of North Carolina University of Paris-Sorbonne (Paris IV) University of
Southern California University of Texas at Austin University of Toronto University of Tubingen University of Twente
University of Ulm University of Western Australia University of Wisconsin University of Wollongong Uppsala
University Utrecht University Vanderbilt University Vienna Technical University Vienna University Virginia University
Wageningen University Wake Forest University Warwick University Waseda University Washington University
Washington University, St Louis Yale University Yeshiva University York University Zurich University 06
WORLDUNIVERSITY
RANKINGS OCTOBER 6 2006
This third edition of The Times
Higher World University Rankings
shows most of the leading
institutions maintaining their
positions, but considerable change
further down the main table. Harvard
University remains at the top of the tree
— albeit with a much-reduced lead
at the end of a turbulent year —
and Imperial College London is
the only newcomer in the top ten.
Cambridge University has
moved up to second place and
Yale University has entered the
top five for the first time, but
there is a settled look about the
leading group. US universities still
dominate the top ten, with the UK
well represented, but the top 30 includes
institutions from China, Australia, France,
Singapore, Japan, Canada and Switzerland.
After only two years, inevitably the
rankings are still settling down. The
methodology continues to be refined — in
this edition, for example, with a shift from
measuring ten years of citations to five —
and the prevailing views of universities do
alter. As a result, there have been some big
shifts this year. Tsing Hua University, which
regularly tops China’s domestic university
league tables, is a prime example, climbing
from outside the top 50 to 28th place.
There will be further changes of
methodology as new sources of comparison
become available. But, for the sake of
consistency, the basis of the rankings has
remained the same in the current edition.
More academics from a wider range of
countries have taken part in the peer-review
exercise conducted by QS Quacquarelli
Symonds, and the company’s survey of
international employers has been greatly
expanded, but the same six measures
have been used as in 2005.
Consequently, the calculation of citations
per academic and the ratio of students
to academic staff remain the other key
indicators, while the proportion of
international staff and students is
included with a lower weighting. A full
explanation of this year’s methodology
follows on pages 6 and 7.
The decision to opt for a
stable system at this stage has
not been for want of discussion
with academics and university
administrators in many parts of
the globe. Over one weekend in
May, the rankings were being
discussed in Berlin, Seoul and
Tartu, in Estonia. Other meetings
have been held in Australia,
Japan, Greece and Lithuania, to name but a
few. The overriding theme of these debates
has been the difficulty of sourcing truly
international data and agreeing a framework
for comparing the world’s great universities.
Ranking universities will remain
controversial for the foreseeable future. But
there is much less argument than there was
two years ago about whether the process
should even be attempted.
Universities continue to define
themselves internationally, both
at subject level and as whole
institutions. Different rankings
have emerged in the past
12 months, and there is broad
acceptance that cross-border
comparisons are here to stay in
higher education.
David Levin, the president of Yale, gave
his account of what makes a global
university in the magazine Newsweek earlier
this year. “In response to the same forces
that have propelled the world economy,
universities have become more selfconsciously
global: seeking students from
around the world who represent the entire
spectrum of cultures and values, sending
their own students abroad to prepare them
for global careers, offering courses of
study that address the challenges of an
interconnected world and collaborative
research programmes to advance science
for the benefit of all humanity,” he wrote.
The World University Rankings will
continue to focus on research, teaching
and international outlook, attempting to
give a picture of current strengths rather
than the backward look that is inherent in
tallies of Nobel prizes and other accolades
from past decades. That requires not only
the adoption of proxy measures such as
staffing levels, in the absence of international
comparisons of teaching standards, but also
the sampling of expert opinion. As in
previous editions, full-time academics
have been asked to identify the leading
universities in their own discipline, and their
views have been aggregated into a judgment
on overall institutions. The results by groups
of subjects — the arts and humanities, social
sciences, natural sciences, biomedicine and
engineering and IT — will appear in The
Times Higher over the next three weeks.
But the aim is to produce the most
expert view of academic strengths
rather than an impressionistic
verdict on whole universities that
may be swayed by outside factors.
The main ranking, as in previous
years, is more diverse than many
experts would have predicted.
Thirty countries have universities
in the top 200 in the world, and
more will be represented in the 500 that will
be listed in a book based on the rankings to
be published in the next few weeks.
There remain issues about the advantages
enjoyed by English-language universities
and those institutions with a base in science
and medicine, but there will be continuing
efforts to level the playing field as far as
is practicable.
‘The decision
to opt for a
stable system
at this stage
has not been
for want of
discussion’
‘There is broad
acceptance
that crossborder
comparisons
are now here
to stay’
WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS EDITORIAL
2 OCTOBER 6 2006 THE TIMES HIGHER
Global vision ensures
healthy competition
The elite institutions have mostly held their places, but below them is a host of challengers from
around the world. John O’Leary tracks changes in fortunes and refinements in survey methods
1 1 Harvard University US 93 100 15 25 56 55 100.0
2 3 Cambridge University UK 100 79 58 43 64 17 96.8
3 4 Oxford University UK 97 76 54 39 61 15 92.7
4= 2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology US 81 93 11 39 42 54 89.2
4= 7 Yale University US 72 81 45 26 93 24 89.2
6 5 Stanford University US 82 85 9 34 32 55 85.4
7 8 California Institute of Technology US 53 21 24 40 67 100 83.8
8 6 University of California, Berkeley US 92 75 6 13 22 39 80.4
9 13 Imperial College London UK 65 44 55 56 88 12 78.6
10 9 Princeton University US 68 61 21 29 53 34 74.2
11 17 University of Chicago US 57 67 19 30 73 17 69.8
12 20 Columbia University US 57 64 9 32 74 17 69.0
13 11 Duke University US 39 78 11 21 100 19 68.3
14 15 Beijing University China 70 55 5 11 69 2 67.9
15 14 Cornell University US 60 74 10 25 44 26 65.9
16 23 Australian National University Australia 72 30 48 33 38 13 64.8
17 11 London School of Economics UK 42 85 89 100 53 1 63.9
18 24 Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris France 46 30 22 28 69 37 63.3
19= 22 National University of Singapore Singapore 70 44 82 47 22 8 63.1
19= 16 Tokyo University Japan 72 29 8 10 35 27 63.1
21 24 McGill University Canada 57 61 31 33 52 10 62.3
22 19 Melbourne University Australia 72 44 51 36 25 7 61.6
23 27 Johns Hopkins University US 49 37 15 20 65 29 61.3
24 21 ETH Zurich Switzerland 51 25 84 45 44 23 59.7
25 28 University College London UK 46 28 39 47 70 12 58.7
26 32 Pennsylvania University US 45 64 17 26 52 22 57.8
27 29 University of Toronto Canada 63 51 37 17 15 25 57.7
28 62 Tsing Hua University China 45 34 22 9 84 1 56.1
29= 31 Kyoto University Japan 61 20 15 7 44 18 56.0
29= 36 University of Michigan US 50 61 15 19 46 15 56.0
31 37 University of California, Los Angeles US 58 42 2 12 34 25 55.9
32 26 University of Texas at Austin US 44 56 24 14 19 53 55.0
33= 30 Edinburgh University UK 54 42 28 29 42 11 54.8
33= 41 University of Hong Kong Hong Kong 48 40 84 27 46 6 54.8
35= 44 Carnegie Mellon University US 44 64 28 40 48 11 54.6
35= 38 Sydney University Australia 65 26 56 31 23 8 54.6
37 10 Ecole Polytechnique France 37 40 18 40 64 17 53.0
38 33 Monash University Australia 57 40 61 51 21 5 52.6
39 88 Geneva University Switzerland 26 13 69 58 81 7 49.9
40 35 Manchester University UK 44 50 42 29 38 6 49.0
41 40 University of New South Wales Australia 56 36 23 37 20 7 48.2
42 46 Northwestern University US 32 71 12 20 44 19 47.9
43 56 New York University US 39 51 8 16 55 6 47.6
44 42 University of California, San Diego US 46 16 3 9 26 42 47.5
45 47 Queensland University Australia 52 26 51 31 18 12 47.2
46= 52 Auckland University New Zealand 51 17 44 21 38 2 46.8
46= 73 King’s College London UK 42 28 42 30 44 7 46.8
48= 73 Rochester University US 21 26 8 23 91 12 46.7
48= 58 Washington University, St Louis US 25 32 5 18 73 22 46.7
50= 38 University of British Columbia Canada 51 38 23 15 19 16 46.4
50= 51 Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong 39 38 62 24 41 7 46.4
52 69 Sciences Po France 21 29 22 53 86 – 45.6
53 114 Vanderbilt University US 22 37 2 14 81 14 45.3
54= 71 Brown University US 32 32 34 20 50 18 45.0
54= 66 Copenhagen University Denmark 44 21 12 13 51 5 45.0
56 141 Emory University US 19 38 1 14 84 15 44.9
57 50 Indian Institutes of Technology India 45 34 0 1 27 24 44.5
58= 45 Heidelberg University Germany 43 28 17 28 36 11 44.3
58= 43 Hong Kong University Sci & Technol Hong Kong 40 41 74 21 17 16 44.3
60 109 Case Western Reserve University US 19 34 3 24 77 19 44.2
61= 117 Dartmouth College US 22 56 13 17 59 16 43.7
61= 48 Nanyang Technological University Singapore 40 37 77 56 21 3 43.7
63 93 Seoul National University South Korea 43 13 2 7 57 4 43.6
64= 49 Bristol University UK 36 44 37 26 34 10 43.2
64= 34 Ecole Polytech Fédérale de Lausanne Switzerland 28 13 70 66 47 11 43.2
66 54 Boston University US 35 38 9 21 47 10 42.9
67 70 Eindhoven University of Technology Netherlands 19 18 21 11 92 3 42.1
2006 RANK
2005 RANK
COUNTRY
NAME
OVERALL SCORE
PEER REVIEW SCORE
(40%)
RECRUITER REVIEW
(10%)
INT'L FACULTY SCORE
(5%)
FACULTY/STUDENT
SCORE (20%)
CITATIONS/FACULTY
SCORE (20%)
THE WORLD’S TOP 200 UNIVERSITIES
INT'L STUDENTS
SCORE (5%)
THE TOP 200 WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS
THE TIMES HIGHER OCTOBER 6 2006 3
Source: QS
THE WORLD’S TOP 200 UNIVERSITIES
68 84 Indian Institutes of Management India 31 46 0 10 60 2 41.6
69 58 Amsterdam University Netherlands 42 20 30 10 28 15 41.3
70= 103 School of Oriental and African Studies UK 23 9 48 74 64 0 40.4
70= 105 Osaka University Japan 39 0 4 9 45 17 40.4
72 92 Ecole Normale Supérieure, Lyon France 21 18 15 19 50 34 40.1
73 77 Warwick University UK 39 40 38 41 22 4 40.0
74 95 National Autonomous Univ of Mexico Mexico 29 36 3 1 65 0 39.8
75 127 Basel University Switzerland 21 0 76 28 63 10 39.7
76 88 Catholic University of Louvain (French) Belgium 37 25 29 25 29 11 39.4
77 58 University of Illinois US 39 31 10 16 32 9 39.3
78 111 Trinity College Dublin Ireland 37 34 58 29 17 9 39.1
79= 186 Otago University New Zealand 26 17 94 20 45 3 38.5
79= 73 University of Wisconsin US 39 11 0 14 35 16 38.5
81 101 Glasgow University UK 35 33 17 16 35 9 38.4
82= 67 Macquarie University Australia 32 40 100 51 10 5 38.3
82= 105 Technical University Munich Germany 30 26 22 30 42 10 38.3
84 88 Washington University US 31 23 13 10 38 20 38.2
85 97 Nottingham University UK 34 37 34 29 28 6 38.1
86 53 Delft University of Technology Netherlands 34 13 52 18 37 7 38.0
87 65 Vienna University Austria 43 22 23 26 10 15 37.8
88 193 Pittsburgh University US 22 19 20 10 62 11 37.6
89 133 Lausanne University Switzerland 20 21 54 33 53 9 37.3
90= 143 Birmingham University UK 34 27 34 29 28 9 37.2
90= 138 Leiden University Netherlands 33 21 33 11 20 26 37.2
92 57 Erasmus University Rotterdam Netherlands 22 49 24 31 11 38 37.1
93= 79 Lomonosov Moscow State University Russia 42 28 1 7 30 3 37.0
93= 88 Pierre and Marie Curie University France 31 0 29 35 49 6 37.0
95 120 Utrecht University Netherlands 37 12 24 9 25 18 36.7
96 95 Catholic University of Leuven (Flemish) Belgium 37 35 11 20 18 13 36.6
97 108 Wageningen University Netherlands 16 9 16 45 61 17 36.5
98 55 Munich University Germany 35 23 19 21 29 9 36.4
99= 112 Queen Mary, University of London UK 26 9 44 40 47 4 36.3
99= 64 Pennsylvania State University US 33 43 7 8 31 6 36.3
101 124 University of Southern California US 27 28 7 28 45 9 36.2
102= 159 Georgetown University US 19 65 6 17 41 11 36.1
102= 150 Rice University US 20 31 12 23 50 15 36.1
102= 143 Sheffield University UK 31 22 32 28 33 8 36.1
105= 80 University of Adelaide Australia 38 0 47 44 14 14 35.9
105= 112 Humboldt University Berlin Germany 32 15 18 18 43 5 35.9
105= 100 Sussex University UK 27 18 42 27 41 6 35.9
108 114 National Taiwan University Taiwan 40 0 1 0 43 4 35.8
109= 136 St Andrews University UK 26 20 40 53 33 9 35.7
109= 85 Zurich University Switzerland 26 0 69 23 41 11 35.7
111= 133 Maryland University US 27 33 16 15 35 14 35.6
111= 180 Uppsala University Sweden 36 0 17 8 41 9 35.6
111= 199 Wake Forest University US 10 32 2 6 80 10 35.6
111= 80 University of Western Australia Australia 34 11 61 28 19 13 35.6
115 217 University of Twente Netherlands 23 15 29 16 59 3 35.5
116= 72 Fudan University China 39 47 11 8 18 2 35.4
116= 62 Helsinki University Finland 38 20 7 5 16 20 35.4
118 99 Tokyo Institute of Technology Japan 29 18 3 14 39 16 35.3
119 77 Hebrew University of Jerusalem Israel 41 0 14 5 22 16 35.2
120 215 Keio University Japan 28 25 18 4 48 2 35.1
121 103 Leeds University UK 32 33 28 25 25 7 35.0
122 180 Lund University Sweden 35 0 26 9 36 10 34.8
123 143 University of North Carolina US 23 38 7 8 36 19 34.6
124= 68 University of Massachusetts Amherst US 32 28 1 10 20 23 34.5
124= 109 York University UK 28 22 31 30 33 8 34.5
126 138 Aarhus University Denmark 30 15 38 13 33 9 34.4
127 61 Purdue University US 32 42 20 15 21 6 34.2
128= 222 Kyushu University Japan 21 17 8 8 59 7 34.1
128= 129 Nagoya University Japan 29 11 4 9 41 13 34.1
130= 164 Tufts University US 17 31 12 17 42 22 33.9
130= 105 Virginia University US 20 57 6 11 34 14 33.9
132 83 Durham University UK 25 41 43 25 23 10 33.8
133= 149 University of Alberta Canada 32 11 40 21 17 18 33.6
133= 259 Brussels Free University (Flemish) Belgium 16 15 21 17 72 – 33.6
WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS THE TOP 200
4 OCTOBER 6 2006 THE TIMES HIGHER
2006 RANK
2005 RANK
COUNTRY
NAME
OVERALL SCORE
PEER REVIEW SCORE
(40%)
RECRUITER REVIEW
(10%)
INT'L FACULTY SCORE
(5%)
FACULTY/STUDENT
SCORE (20%)
CITATIONS/FACULTY
SCORE (20%)
INT'L STUDENTS
SCORE (5%)
Source: QS
133= 157 Hokkaido University Japan 29 0 8 6 52 8 33.6
133= 168 Newcastle upon Tyne University UK 25 24 33 32 36 7 33.6
137 177 Nijmegen University Netherlands 21 9 33 10 55 7 33.5
138 86 Vienna Technical University Austria 29 17 27 34 36 3 33.3
139 119 Liverpool University UK 26 26 32 21 32 8 33.2
140 234 Cranfield University UK 14 26 31 62 52 2 33.0
141= 159 University of California, Santa Barbara US 31 11 7 8 22 24 32.9
141= 228 Cardiff University UK 29 13 27 23 36 4 32.9
141= 219 Ghent University Belgium 29 9 20 10 43 4 32.9
141= 206 Southampton University UK 26 16 38 25 34 7 32.9
145 147 Georgia Institute of Technology US 30 36 2 27 19 13 32.8
146 82 RMIT University Australia 34 26 31 65 9 1 32.5
147= 166 Chalmers University of Technology Sweden 27 9 17 8 46 5 32.4
147= 188 Tel Aviv University Israel 35 22 0 3 13 21 32.4
148 172 Free University Berlin Germany 37 0 27 17 25 6 32.3
150= 184 Korea University South Korea 25 8 5 19 55 1 32.2
150= 125 Texas A&M University US 30 39 12 13 16 13 32.2
152 179 Notre Dame University US 19 51 17 14 35 9 32.0
153 130 Bath University UK 21 36 34 35 32 5 31.8
154 178 City University of Hong Kong Hong Kong 28 11 75 14 25 5 31.7
155 184 McMaster University Canada 29 24 9 13 18 19 31.6
156= 101 Curtin University of Technology Australia 28 18 71 70 12 – 31.5
156= 114 Göttingen University Germany 32 0 17 17 31 8 31.5
158= 194 Technion — Israel Inst of Technology Israel 31 17 6 6 23 16 31.4
158= 240 University of Ulm Germany 12 0 22 16 70 9 31.4
158= 202 Waseda University Japan 27 24 11 6 42 1 31.4
161= 121 Chulalongkorn University Thailand 33 18 9 1 33 0 31.2
161= 131 University Louis Pasteur Strasbourg France 25 15 22 34 28 12 31.2
163 121 Michigan State University US 28 39 10 12 21 9 31.1
164 219 Saint Petersburg State University Russia 26 18 1 9 47 1 30.7
165= 76 Brussels Free University (French) Belgium 30 19 15 39 13 12 30.5
165= 93 China University of Sci & Technol China 36 14 3 0 24 5 30.5
165= 175 State Univ of New York, Stony Brook US 26 16 6 15 30 14 30.5
168= 199 George Washington University US 24 46 3 13 30 5 30.4
168= 136 Tohoku University Japan 26 0 8 7 31 21 30.4
170= 206 University of California, Davis US 30 0 2 8 30 17 30.3
170= 260 University of Tubingen Germany 21 21 21 19 37 9 30.3
172= 172 Aachen RWT Germany 23 37 24 24 28 4 30.2
172= 157 Maastricht University Netherlands 18 28 34 46 24 13 30.2
172= 196 Royal Institute of Technology Sweden 24 11 17 12 43 4 30.2
172= 254 Yeshiva University US 7 0 9 6 70 20 30.2
176 261 Queen’s University Canada 21 36 38 8 28 7 30.0
177 138 Oslo University Norway 30 0 17 9 34 5 29.9
178 228 University of Bern Switzerland 17 9 1 16 54 9 29.8
179 169 Shanghai Jiao Tong University China 31 37 13 5 19 1 29.7
180 150 Nanjing University China 35 20 24 2 16 3 29.6
181= 172 Kobe University Japan 25 17 8 7 38 5 29.4
181= 132 Université de Montréal Canada 25 25 48 11 13 14 29.4
183= 192 Jawaharlal Nehru University India 32 14 2 6 27 4 29.3
183= 186 Free University of Amsterdam Netherlands 25 9 19 8 36 8 29.3
185 289 University of Kebangsaan Malaysia Malaysia 32 22 9 6 25 0 29.2
186 165 Innsbruck University Austria 23 0 30 48 32 6 29.1
187= 213 Brandeis University US 19 23 7 23 34 13 29.0
187= 142 Frankfurt University Germany 30 17 22 17 19 7 29.0
187= 150 University of Minnesota US 26 20 8 10 20 16 29.0
190= 240 University of Barcelona Spain 31 16 2 11 26 4 28.9
190= 248 Reading University UK 21 19 32 25 30 6 28.9
192= 169 Malaya University Malaysia 33 14 10 7 24 1 28.6
192= 118 Queensland University of Technology Australia 33 8 51 19 13 2 28.6
194 154 Technical University of Denmark Denmark 25 0 19 19 25 17 28.5
195 267 Aberdeen University UK 20 9 37 25 33 7 28.3
196 308 University of Wollongong Australia 23 8 69 64 15 3 28.2
197 125 La Sapienza University, Rome Italy 37 15 2 6 11 5 28.1
198= 254 University of California, Irvine US 24 16 2 10 19 21 28.0
198= 143 Korea Advanced Inst Science & Technol South Korea 24 11 14 6 29 12 28.0
200 305 University of Paris-Sorbonne (Paris IV) France 32 29 6 29 13 0 27.9
Complied from data by QS and Evidence Ltd
THE WORLD’S TOP 200 UNIVERSITIES
THE TOP 200 WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS
THE TIMES HIGHER OCTOBER 6 2006 5
2006 RANK
2005 RANK
COUNTRY
NAME
OVERALL SCORE
PEER REVIEW SCORE
(40%)
RECRUITER REVIEW
(10%)
INT'L FACULTY SCORE
(5%)
FACULTY/STUDENT
SCORE (20%)
CITATIONS/FACULTY
SCORE (20%)
INT'L STUDENTS
SCORE (5%)
Source: QS
WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS METHODOLOGY
The tables on pages 3-5 are the third
edition of The Times Higher/QS
World University Rankings. As in
2004 and 2005, they list the world’s
top 200 universities according to a
range of qualitative and quantitative criteria.
Our methodology this year follows that we
used in 2005 very closely.
Qualitative and quantitative forms of data
each account for half the total score. The
qualitative data is based on our belief that
the people who know most about university
quality are those who work in them or are
closely connected to them.
For this reason, 40 per cent of the score
allotted to each university is derived from
peer review carried out among academics by
QS Ltd, partners with The Times Higher in
compiling the World University Rankings.
This has involved gathering data from 3,703
academics around the world. Each was
asked which area of academic life — science,
medicine, technology, the social sciences or
the arts and humanities — they are expert in,
and then asked to name up to 30 universities
they regard as the top institutions in their
area. This is a robust and simple test, and is
almost immune to fraud. To achieve this
large total of participants, we amalgamated
data from our surveys in 2004 and 2005
with this year’s responses. However, only
the most recent response was used from any
individual. In future years, we shall not use
data more than three years old.
This peer review shows that, although
there are a few dozen universities that are
plainly world leaders, there are also wellregarded
universities in a surprisingly large
variety of countries, in both the rich and
developing worlds. Indeed, Top Universities
Guide, the book that accompanies this
supplement, shows that the top 500
universities in the world all have their
supporters. The top 200 come from 30
countries, while the top 500 come from 51.
This peer review is enhanced by a further
10 per cent of the score based on the opinion
of a vital group of outsiders who observe
the world’s universities closely. These are
graduate recruiters, especially those who
work internationally or on a substantial
national scale. The sample includes people
from companies in manufacturing, services,
finance and transport, as well as from the
public sector. They were asked which
universities they like to recruit from, a
question that we hope reveals something
about the quality of the students an
institution can attract and the teaching they
receive there. We sampled 736 recruiters.
Peer review is the standard way in which
the quality of individual pieces of academic
work is judged. We believe that applying it
to institutions in the controlled way we have
done provides an up-to-date measure of the
dynamism of whole institutions and of wide
groups of subjects in them.
The other half of the rankings scores are
made up of quantitative measures. As with
the whole of this exercise, the problem is to
obtain a measure of university quality that
can be calculated on a consistent basis in
widely differing environments. This means
developing questions that can be answered
in a valid and informative way in Norway
as well as in Brazil.
Teaching and research are the main
activities that occur in universities.
Measures designed to capture the quality of
these activities account for 40 per cent of the
total score in our rankings.
We measure teaching by the classic
criterion of staff-to-student ratio. This is
captured by asking universities how many
staff and students they have, and dividing
one by the other. In practice, things are not
quite so simple. One complication is to
decide exactly who is a student. We ask
universities to count people studying towards
degrees or other substantial qualifications,
not those taking short courses. Staff
numbers, too, can be a matter of opinion.
We ask universities to submit a figure based
on staff with some regular contractual
relationship with the institution. A guest
lecturer, however distinguished, should not
count. This measure is also prone to subject
bias. Teaching people to be surgeons or
musicians is inherently more personintensive
than transmitting some other forms
of knowledge. But because our analysis
deals mainly with large general universities,
this variation should even itself out.
The measure of staff-to-student ratio is
intended to determine how much attention a
student can hope to get at a specific
institution, by seeing how well stocked it is
with academic brainpower relative to the
size of its student body. It accounts for
20 per cent of the possible score.
Our next measure, relating to research, is
intended to examine how much intellectual
power a university has relative to its size. It
is based on citations of academic papers,
since these are regarded as the most reliable
measure of a paper’s impact. The world’s
accepted authority on citations is Thomson
Scientific in Philadelphia, formerly the
Institute of Scientific Information. We use
data from Thomson’s Essential Science
Indicators database, processed by Evidence
Ltd in Leeds. The ESI concentrates on the
world’s most highly cited and influential
research. Our analysis uses data covering
2001-06. This is a change from the first two
editions of the World University Rankings,
which used ten years of data. Using five
years increases the dynamism and rate of
change of this measure, but still provides a
statistically valid amount — more than
40,000 papers and more than a million
citations each for Texas and Harvard
universities, the world’s top two generators
of scholarship on this measure.
To compile our analysis, we divide the
number of citations by staff numbers to
correct for institution size and to give a
measure of how densely packed each
university is with the most highly cited
and impactful researchers.
Peer review is once again a key
criterion in this year’s rankings.
But research quality is now
gauged on five rather than ten
years of citations, making it
more topical, says Martin Ince
6 OCTOBER 6 2006 THE TIMES HIGHER
Insiders and outsiders
lend a balanced view
There are well-known problems with
citations as a measure of research. One is
the underrepresentation of papers in
languages other than English in citations
data. Thomson is addressing this issue by
sampling more journals in Asian and
continental European languages. But it is
also becoming less of a factor as English
becomes the language of choice for academic
publishing across the world.
As our introduction on page 2 makes
clear, the increasingly international nature
of higher education is a key reason for the
existence of the World University Rankings.
The final 10 per cent of our score is intended
to determine how global universities are:
5 per cent is awarded on the basis of the
percentage of overseas staff each university
has, and a further 5 per cent for its
percentage of overseas students. This
measure is intended to help mobile staff and
students by giving them an impression of
how international a university may be. But
because this measure counts for only 10 per
cent of the total score, it is not possible for
an institution to do well in the overall table
on this measure without being excellent in
other categories.
There are many measures we do not
attempt to capture in these pages. We
gather data on universities that teach
undergraduates only. This eliminates many
high-quality specialist institutions such as
Rockefeller University and the University of
California, San Francisco, both of which are
postgraduate medical institutions.
We have considered a wide range of
other criteria, such as graduate employment
and entry standards, as possible quality
measures. But these have all failed the test
of being applicable evenly around the world.
For example, a university in a particular
country could show poor graduate
employment figures because of the state of
its national economy, not because it
provided a bad education.
Likewise, universities are under pressure
to produce spin-off companies and other
forms of knowledge transfer. But their
success in doing so will depend to a large
extent on the economic system in which they
are embedded. In the same way, it is
impossible to devise a universal measure for
entry standards. However, we are always
interested in readers’ suggestions for new
measures we could consider applying.
We regret that there are no data on
Royal Holloway, University of London.
We plan to include the institution in
the rankings for 2007.
Aachen RWT Aarhus University Aberdeen University Amsterdam University Auckland University Australian National University Basel
University Bath University Beijing University Birmingham University Boston University Brandeis University Bristol University Brown
University Brussels Free University (Flemish) Brussels Free University (French) California Institute of Technology Cambridge University
Cardiff University Carnegie Mellon University Case Western Reserve University Catholic University of Leuven (Flemish) Catholic
University of Louvain (French) Chalmers University of Technology China University of Science and Technology Chinese University
of Hong Kong Chulalongkorn University City University of Hong Kong Columbia University Copenhagen University Cornell University
Cranfield University Curtin University of Technology Dartmouth College Delft University of Technology Duke University Durham
University Ecole Normale Supérieure Ecole Normale Supérieure, Lyon Ecole Polytech Fédérale de Lausanne Ecole Polytechnique
Edinburgh University Eindhoven University of Technology Emory University Erasmus University Rotterdam ETH Zurich Frankfurt
University Free University Berlin Free University of Amsterdam Fudan University Geneva University George Washington University
Georgetown University Georgia Institute of Technology Ghent University Glasgow University Göttingen University Harvard University
Hebrew University of Jerusalem Heidelberg University Helsinki University Hokkaido University Hong Kong University Science and
Technology Humboldt University Berlin Imperial College London Indian Institutes of Management Indian Institutes of Technology
Innsbruck University Jawaharlal Nehru University Johns Hopkins University Keio University King’s College London Kobe University
Korea Advanced Institute Science and Technology Korea University Kyoto University Kyushu University La Sapienza University, Rome
Lausanne University Leeds University Leiden University Liverpool University Lomonosov Moscow State University London School of
Economics Lund University Maastricht University Macquarie University Malaya University Manchester University Maryland University
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Massachusetts University, Amherst McGill University McMaster University Melbourne
University Michigan State University Monash University Munich University Nagoya University Nanjing University Nanyang
Technological University National Autonomous University of Mexico National Taiwan University National University of Singapore New
York University Newcastle upon Tyne University Nijmegen University Northwestern University Notre Dame University Nottingham
University Osaka University Oslo University Otago University Oxford University Pennsylvania State University Pennsylvania University
Pierre and Marie Curie University Pittsburgh University Princeton University Purdue University Queen Mary, University of London
Queen’s University Queensland University Queensland University of Technology Reading University Rice University RMIT University
Rochester University Royal Institute of Technology Saint-Petersburg State University School of Oriental and African Studies Sciences
Po Seoul National University Shanghai Jiao Tong University Sheffield University Southampton University St Andrews University
Stanford University State Univ of New York, Stony Brook Sussex University Sydney University Technical University Munich Technical
University of Denmark Technion — Israel Institute of Technology Tel Aviv University Texas A&M University Tohoku University Tokyo
Institute of Technology Tokyo University Trinity College Dublin Tsing Hua University Tufts University Université de Montréal Universiti
Kebangsaan Malaysia University College London University Louis Pasteur Strasbourg University of Adelaide University of Alberta
University of Barcelona University of Bern University of British Columbia University of California, Berkeley University of California,
Davis University of California, Irvine University of California, Los Angeles University of California, San Diego University of California,
Santa Barbara University of Chicago University of Hong Kong University of Illinois University of Michigan University of Minnesota
University of New South Wales University of North Carolina University of Paris-Sorbonne (Paris IV) University of Southern California
University of Texas at Austin University of Toronto University of Tubingen University of Twente University of Ulm University of Western
Australia University of Wisconsin University of Wollongong Uppsala University Utrecht University Vanderbilt University Vienna
Technical University Vienna University Virginia University Wageningen University Wake Forest University Warwick University Waseda
University Washington University Washington University, St Louis Yale University Yeshiva University York University Zurich University
METHODOLOGY WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS
THE TIMES HIGHER OCTOBER 6 2006 7
Acknowledgments
The World University Rankings
are co-ordinated by Martin Ince
(martin@martinince.com),
contributing editor of The Times
Higher.
He would like to thank Nunzio
Quacquarelli and Ben Sowter
of QS (www.qsnetwork.com),
Jonathan Adams of Evidence Ltd
(www.evidence.co.uk) and their
colleagues, as well as the staff of
The Times Higher, for their
participation in this project.
12 4 5 3
The World University Rankings leave
no doubt that the US contains the top
universities. US institutions fill 11 of
the top 20 slots, and they are well
represented lower down the table.
But the message of our top 200 is that there
is more than one road to academic excellence.
In 2004 and 2005, Harvard University, the top
institution, was more than 10 per cent ahead
of its nearest rival, and both years the
runners-up were US universities. This year,
the gap has narrowed to less than 4 per cent,
and the second and third contenders are
European. They are among five European
universities in the top 20.
Oxford and Cambridge universities,
Europe’s top two, are of course medieval
establishments that have retained a central
role in British life, not least because their
graduates — who range from Isaac Newton
to Tony Blair — have been in charge of the
country most of the time. They produce top
research and are the European pioneers of
US-style spin-offs and industrial links.
Our analysis shows that as well as being
well liked by academics (Cambridge University
is top in the world in our peer review) and
employers, these universities have a highly
international staff and student body. This is
not only an academic plus but also allows
them to benefit from the higher fees they can
charge students from outside the European
Union.
The same applies to the other UK
universities with high rankings, Imperial
College London and the London School of
Economics. Another part of the reason for the
excellence of these top UK institutions is that
the vast bulk of the country’s research funding
goes to a small number of universities. This is
a message that the European Commission has
noticed and that informs its plans for a
European Research Council.
Best of
British
close in
on Uncle
Sam’s
finest
WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS EUROPE
8 OCTOBER 6 2006 THE TIMES HIGHER
Erasmus University:mostnon-Anglophone citations
Focused research funding and
broad international appeal are
helping Europe’s centres of
excellence to gain on their US
rivals, suggests Martin Ince
IP3 PRESS/MAX PPP
CAREL VAN HEES/HOLLANDSE HOOGTE
ty
ng
is
as
But a closer look at our table of top
European universities suggests there may
be other ways of attaining quality. France’s
Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris, is 18th in
the world, up from 24 in 2005; it is in fifth
place in Europe, making it the Continent’s
top institution outside the UK. It is less
international than its UK rivals and less well
regarded by academic peers around the
world. Although its graduates occupy many
key positions in French business and politics,
it has comparatively little prestige with the
international recruiters consulted by QS. But
it is impressive on staff-to-student ratio and on
citations of papers by its staff. On this latter
criterion, it is just behind Erasmus University
Rotterdam, the leading non-Anglophone
university in the world for citations. This is
significant because of the known bias of
citations data towards publications in English.
While European universities fill 88 of the
top 200 slots, the Continent’s top universities
are far from evenly distributed. Twenty-nine
are in the UK, but the presence of other major
EU countries varies widely. Germany and
France have ten and seven institutions
respectively in the top 200. But both countries
have significant public research organisations
that employ many of the most cited scientists,
reducing the ability of universities to get top
slots in our research category.
German observers are
also more critical than
most of the rankings
process. Some have
made the point that
German universities are
intended to produce
qualified professionals
and solid incremental
research advances, not
compete head to head
with Harvard.
Smaller and more
internationally focused European nations also
come out well in our survey. Both Belgium
and the Netherlands (six and 11 respectively in
the top 200) are prominent, while Austria and
Denmark have three representatives each. As
well as being very international, Dutch
universities are popular with employers and
produce much-cited research. Critics point out
that it is simple to be international if one is in
a country such as the Netherlands, where
several other countries are within a day’s
drive. But it is still tricky to make the most of
the international opportunity geography has
offered. Switzerland has seven entrants — the
two federally funded institutions, plus five
cantonal universities.
More alarming among small European
nations is the position of Ireland, which has
only one entrant, Trinity College Dublin. Its
rise from 111th place in 2005 to 78 today will
be a relief to a Government that wants
Ireland’s universities to match the country’s
increasing emergence on the European stage.
But the real issue is not Trinity’s position but
the fact that no other Irish university has
made it to the top 200, not even University
College Dublin.
The real gap in Europe’s higher education,
however, seems to be in southern Europe.
Italy’s only entrant, La Sapienza University,
appears in 197th place, down 72 places since
last year’s rankings. Spain manages one new
entrant, Barcelona, at 190, replacing the
relegated Madrid. These results reemphasise
the severe challenges higher education faces
in both countries.
EUROPE WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS
1 2 Cambridge University UK
2 3 Oxford University UK
3 9 Imperial College London UK
4 17 London School of Economics UK
5 18 Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris France
6 24 ETH Zurich Switzerland
7 25 University College London UK
8 33 Edinburgh University UK
9 37 Ecole Polytechnique France
10 39 Geneva University Switzerland
11 40 Manchester University UK
12 46 King’s College London UK
13 52 Sciences Po France
14 54 Copenhagen University Denmark
15 58 Heidelberg University Germany
16= 64= Bristol University UK
16= 64= Ecole Polytech Féd Lausanne Switzerland
18 67 Eindhoven University of Technol Netherlands
19 69 Amsterdam University Netherlands
20 70 Soas UK
21 72 Ecole Normale Supérieure, Lyon France
22 73 Warwick University UK
23 75 Basel University Switzerland
24 76 Catholic Univ Louvain (French) Belgium
25 78 Trinity College Dublin Ireland
26 81 Glasgow University UK
27 82 Technical University Munich Germany
28 85 Nottingham University UK
29 86 Delft University of Technology Netherlands
30 87 Vienna University Austria
31 89 Lausanne University Switzerland
32= 90= Birmingham University UK
32= 90= Leiden University Netherlands
34 92 Erasmus University Rotterdam Netherlands
35= 93= Lomonosov Moscow State Univ Russia
35= 93= Pierre and Marie Curie Univ France
37 95 Utrecht University Netherlands
38 96 Catholic Univ Leuven (Flemish) Belgium
39 97 Wageningen University Netherlands
40 98 Munich University Germany
41 99 Queen Mary, Univ of London UK
42 102 Sheffield University UK
43= 105= Humboldt University Berlin Germany
43= 105= Sussex University UK
45= 109= St Andrews University UK
45= 109= Zurich University Switzerland
47 111 Uppsala University Sweden
48 115 University of Twente Netherlands
49 116 Helsinki University Finland
50 121 Leeds University UK
Source: QS
RANK
WORLD RANK
COUNTRY
NAME
EUROPE’S TOP 50
UNIVERSITIES
THE TIMES HIGHER OCTOBER 6 2006 9
The Ecole Normale
Supérieure in Paris
is one of the great
institutions of revolutionary
France, a
grande école created
in 1794 to train
university and lycée
teachers for the
agrégation, the
competitive highlevel
teaching
examination.
Today, the
school, also known
as ENS, is France’s
elite training ground
not only for academics
and
researchers but also
for those seeking
careers in the Civil
Service, in business
or in politics.
Alumni number
winners of Nobel
prizes and Fields
medals and include
scientists, philosophers,
writers, social
scientists and politicians,
such as Louis
Pasteur, Jean-Paul
Sartre, Michel Foucault,
Jacques Derrida,
Léon Blum
and Georges Pompidou.
And Samuel
Beckett taught
there.
ENS has more
than 1,300 normaliens
(pupils
selected on the concours
exam) and
students up to doctorate
level, and
224 teachers.
In addition to its
150 researchers, it
has 1,004 associated
researchers
from institutions
such as the National
Scientific
Research Centre
and the National
Medical Research
Institute.
About 60 foreign
academics visit the
ENS annually for
about a month, and
some 300 international
researchers
stay for up to two
years.
Jane Marshall
ECOLE
NORMALE
SUPERIEURE
‘Dutch
universities
are very
international;
they are also
popular with
employers
and produce
much-cited
research’
IP3 PRESS/MAX PPP
The US is the world’s largest
economy and has a bigger
propensity than any other major
nation to spend its wealth on
universities. While European Union
countries spend on average about 1.1 per
cent of gross domestic product on higher
education, as does Japan, the US spends
2.6 per cent, an annual total of about
$250 billion (£133 billion).
But although money is the essential input
for universities, simply having a lot of it
does not guarantee success. Unlike the UK,
the US decided long ago not to have a
national university system and nobody
drives US higher education from the centre.
Instead, the managers of individual
universities have taken the major role in
shaping the system — along, of course, with
their world-beating fundraisers.
WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS NORTH AMERICA
Yale University,
which breaks into
our top five for
the first time this
year, has one of
the broadest
curricula in US
higher education,
requiring its
undergraduates to
take at least three
classes in each of
four groups:
languages, culture,
social sciences,
and science and
maths. Students
are required to
speak a foreign
language and to
submit a senior
essay or project,
unusual in US
higher education.
The university
also seeks to make
itself affordable to
the broadest possible
range of students.
From the 2005-
06 academic year,
families with combined
incomes
below $45,000
(£24,000) a year
were no longer
required to pay
towards their children’s
education, a
groundbreaking
move that is being
watched closely by
other universities.
The university is
in New Haven,
Connecticut, a
small city plagued
with problems of
urban poverty.
Its economic
decline appears to
be slowly reversing,
helped in part
by the role of the
university in attracting
biomedical
and pharmaceutical
companies.
Alumni include
presidents George
Bush and George
W. Bush, Clinton
and Ford, and
Senator Hillary
Clinton; actors
Jodie Foster and
Meryl Streep, and
telegraph inventor
Samuel Morse.
Jon Marcus
YALE
How the land of
the free charged
right to the top
Well-resourced private universities continue to be world-beaters in
technology and science, says Martin Ince, despite concern that the
clash between knowledge and belief is undermining scholarship
ALAMY
10 OCTOBER 6 2006 THE TIMES HIGHER
NORTH AMERICA WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS
As the table shows, this freedom of action
has yielded results. The US has 11 of the top
20 universities in the world, and Harvard
University has been top of our rankings in
all three years of their publication.
This table is dominated by
heavily resourced private
universities, led by Harvard and
its neighbours in the North-
Eastern US such as Yale, Cornell
and Columbia universities. They
are joined by the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology and the
California Institute of Technology,
which like Imperial College
London in the UK have succeeded
by dominating fast-growing and
high-prestige areas of science and
technology. But despite their
similar titles, these institutions
have different roles. MIT trains future
technologists and scientists in large
numbers, while Caltech is mainly a research
and postgraduate university.
In recent years, many US commentators
have bemoaned the comparative collapse of
the US state university system, once seen as
only slightly less prestigious than the private
research universities. Our analysis shows
they are right to be concerned. Berkeley, part
of the University of California, is among our
top institutions but has always been
exceptionally well resourced. It is seventh in
our rankings this year, having been second
in our first edition in 2004. The University of
California, Los Angeles, and the University
of Texas at Austin, 31 and 32 in the world,
are the next public universities we list.
Part of the reason seems to be money.
Between 1990 and 2004, the public four-year
universities of the US increased the amount
they charged undergraduates from $10,900
to $15,100 a year in constant dollars. This is
a huge sum to European eyes. But over the
same period, private non-profit four-year
universities upped their resources per
undergraduate from $21,200 to $29,500. In
addition, the big private universities are
home to the most lucrative research centres.
Johns Hopkins University, 23rd in the world
in these rankings, runs the Hubble Space
Telescope for Nasa.
However, bigger questions arise about the
strength in depth of the US university
system. While the US has 2,500 accredited
four-year universities, only the top few
produce globally significant research, attract
attention from international employers or
are visible to the internationally oriented
academics in our peer review. Having taken
11 of the top 20 places in our rankings, US
universities fall away drastically lower
down and account for just 55 of the top 200
compared with 88 for Europe.
In recent years, questions have been raised
about just how serious the US is
about its role as the world’s
leading producer of knowledge.
Reluctance to use public money for
stem-cell research and the power
of creationist teaching in schools
are commonly cited evidence for
these doubts. But the sceptics may
be underestimating the diversity of
the US, financial and intellectual.
In California, the state has stepped
in to fund stem-cell research that it
would be illegal to support with
federal cash. And across the US
research and teaching in science
coexist with beliefs that might
seem to oppose our basic knowledge of the
universe. This means that the US is likely to
remain a magnet for the brightest Asian and
European students and researchers.
Canada spends about 2 per cent of GDP
on education, less than the US but more
than any other developed country except
Korea. Its success in the rankings reflects
this commitment, with two universities,
McGill and Toronto, in the top 30 and seven
in the top 200. McGill’s breadth and
international reach make it the most visible
of Canada’s institutions. It is popular with
academics and recruiters, and has an
impressive staff-to-student ratio. Its main
rivals in Canada are Toronto and British
Columbia universities, which appear here in
the same league as the top European and
US research institutions.
‘Questions
have been
raised about
just how
serious the
US is about
its role as
the world’s
leading
producer of
knowledge’
Nasa’s Hubble telescope: run by Johns Hopkins
ALAMY
THE TIMES HIGHER OCTOBER 6 2006 11
RANK
WORLD RANK
NAME
COUNTRY
NORTH AMERICA’S TOP
50 UNIVERSITIES
1 1 Harvard University US
2= 4= Massachusetts Institute of Technology US
2= 4= Yale University US
4 6 Stanford University US
5 7 California Institute of Technology US
6 8 UC, Berkeley US
7 10 Princeton University US
8 11 University of Chicago US
9 12 Columbia University US
10 13 Duke University US
11 15 Cornell University US
12 21 McGill University Canada
13 23 Johns Hopkins University US
14 26 Pennsylvania University US
15 27 University of Toronto Canada
16 29 University of Michigan US
17 31 UC, Los Angeles US
18 32 University of Texas at Austin US
19 35 Carnegie Mellon University US
20 42 Northwestern University US
21 43 New York University US
22 44 UC, San Diego US
23= 48= Rochester University US
23= 48= Washington University, St Louis US
25 50 University of British Columbia Canada
26 53 Vanderbilt University US
27 54 Brown University US
28 56 Emory University US
29 60 Case Western Reserve University US
30 61 Dartmouth College US
31 66 Boston University US
32 77 University of Illinois US
33 79 University of Wisconsin US
34 84 Washington University US
35 88 Pittsburgh University US
36 99 Pennsylvania State University US
37 101 University of Southern California US
38= 102= Georgetown University US
38= 102= Rice University US
40= 111= Maryland University US
40= 111= Wake Forest University US
42 123 University of North Carolina US
43 124 University of Massachusetts Amherst US
44 127 Purdue University US
45= 130= Tufts University US
45= 130= Virginia University US
47 133 University of Alberta Canada
48 141 UC, Santa Barbara US
49 145 Georgia Institute of Technology US
50 150 Texas A&M University US
Source: QS
WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS REST OF THE WORLD
Is Asia emerging as a rival to the US
and Europe as home to the world’s top
universities? The first three years of the
World University Rankings provide a
mixed response to this complex question.
In each of the three years, Asian
institutions have impressed in the rankings.
Australia, which we class with Asia in these
tables, has a big university system and has
done everything it can to raise its impact
across mainland Asia and the Pacific Rim. It
has been consistently the most prominent,
and this year has 13 of the top 200
universities. This may make it the most
heavily represented country in these
rankings per head of population, apart from
micro-states such as Singapore.
But the picture changes when the upper
layers of the rankings are examined. In
2004, our top 20 featured four Asian
institutions. They were Tokyo in 12th
position, the Australian National University,
Peking and the National University of
Singapore in 16th, 17th and 18th places
respectively. This year the same four remain
in the top 20, although Peking has replaced
Tokyo as Asia’s top university according to
our criteria.
This suggests that although there are
many capable Asian universities lower down
our rankings, few institutions in the region
are likely to emerge as full-scale rivals to
Harvard, Berkeley or Cambridge. For
example, Tokyo is indisputably Japan’s top
institution. It is well regarded by employers
and academics, and it produces citations in
respectable numbers, but it is not very
international — it seems to be an excellent
national institution, not a world leader.
Japan musters 11 universities in the
rankings, perhaps not an impressive total
for the world’s second largest economy and
one of the most high-technology countries in
the world. Its leading universities hope that
a shift of emphasis to quality will strengthen
their position as the country’s supply of
young people dwindles in coming years. But
the shrinking number of candidates may
damage elite as well as modest institutions.
In contrast, Beijing University’s status in
the top 20 seems stable. This year’s 14th
place, up one from 2005, may be only the
start of the story. Peking has gained this
position despite a poor citations score and
having few international students. China is
regarded as a market for other countries’
universities, not a place to go to study. It
would not be surprising if Peking, which on
this showing is Asia’s top university, became
a magnet for mobile students. If it does, and
if its staff produce more highly cited papers
in key journals, it could enter the top ten in
the next few years.
Asian, Australian and Latin
American institutions are
strong regional bastions of
quality that are keen to join
the global high-flyers,
says Martin Ince
The National University
of Singapore,
founded in 1905,
has forged a global
reputation since
independence from
Malaysia in 1965
and now ranks in
the top quartile of
the world's
universities.
The university, set
on a 1.5 square
kilometre campus at
Kent Ridge, which in
February 1942 was
the scene of the last
stand by the Malay
Regiment, is a
beacon for the huge
investment in
education at all
levels made by the
Government of
Singapore.
Newly privatised
on April 1, 2006, the
university continues
to receive a state
subsidy as the
country seeks to
maintain the highest
all-round standards
in education.
Student enrolment
is around 23,000,
with more than
2,100 faculty.
Student intake is
from a wide range of
countries. In the law
school, more than
two dozen
nationalities are
represented, while
exchange schemes
take Singaporean
students to countries
that include China,
Canada, Australia
and the US.
Among its leading
graduates the NUS
lists Goh Chok
Tong, former Prime
Minister of Singapore,
Kishore
Mahbubani, dean of
the Lee Kuan Yew
School of Public
Policy at NUS, and
Choo San Goh,
Washington Ballet
choreographer.
Active on an
international level,
Singapore plays a
leading role in the
Association of
Pacific Rim
Universities, while
consolidating its
position at the forefront
of the International
Alliance of
Research Universities.
Singapore has
five overseas
colleges: Bio Valley
(US); Silicon Valley;
Shanghai; Stockholm;
and Bangalore.
A recent
initiative has seen
the NUS enter the
film-making world
through the
establishment of the
NUS Hollywood Lab
in co-operation with
the University of
Southern California
School of Cinema
and Television.
The university’s
facilities include six
libraries and four
museums, the latter
including the Raffles
SINGAPORE
12 OCTOBER 6 2006 THE TIMES HIGHER
Tiger’s growl builds up
China has ten entries in the top 200,
including four from Hong Kong. By
contrast, India, the next most populous
nation, manages only three. Of these two,
the Indian Institutes of Technology and of
Management are both multi-campus
institutions. We plan to collect discrete data
on their various centres in future years.
Elsewhere in Asia, several ambitious
countries show up only modestly in our
rankings. The exception (see box) is
Singapore, whose national university comes
in at 19. It is accompanied by Nanyang
Technological University in position 61.
However, Taiwan and Thailand manage
only one university each in our rankings
and Malaysia two, both modestly placed.
An interesting contrast is Korea, whose
flagship institution, Seoul National
University, might have been expected to
suffer in our rankings from highly visible
misdeeds in its stem-cell research
programme. In fact, Seoul National rose
30 places, from 93 to 63, between 2005 and
2006, and its main rival, Korea University,
is up 34 places to 150. By contrast, the
University of Western Australia, which had
its biggest ever coup last year with the
winning of the Nobel Prize for Medicine, is
down 31 places to 111.
There is little doubt
that Asian nations
want universities that
can be ranked alongside
top European and
North American
institutions as an
essential driver of
economic progress.
The same ambitions
can be found elsewhere
in the developing world
but are being fulfilled
more slowly. The National Autonomous
University of Mexico is ranked 74th in the
world, rising from 195th in our first series of
rankings. It is probably the world’s largest
university by student numbers, but it
produces no cited research on the measures
we use. It is also the only institution we list
from Latin America, Africa or Oceania. São
Paulo in Brazil was in our top 200 in 2005
but has now dropped out.
It seems harder than ever for countries
such as Brazil or South Africa to assemble
the resources needed to sustain a research
university. Indonesia, the world’s fourth
biggest country by population, is also
noticeable by its absence from our top 200.
However, moves under way in Africa to
rank its universities on viable local criteria
may allow the continent’s top institutions to
be identified and to increase their argument
for more resources.
REST OF THE WORLD WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS
‘It would be
no surprise if
Peking, which
on this showing
is Asia’s
top university,
became
a magnet
for mobile
students’
PIC CREDIT
THE TIMES HIGHER OCTOBER 6 2006 13
Museum of Biodiversity
Research,
named in honour of
the founder of the
British colony,
polymath Sir
Thomas Stamford
Raffles.
The museum
holds more than
500,000 specimens
of flora and fauna.
The Government’s
current reorientation
of the republic's
economy sets goals
in new areas such as
biotechnology and
biomedicine, where
the university also
plays a leading role.
David Jardine
slowly to a roar
RANK
WORLD RANK
COUNTRY
NAME
THE REST OF THE
WORLD’S TOP 50
UNIVERSITIES
1 14 Beijing University China
2 16 Australian Natl University Australia
3= 19= Natl Univ Singapore Singapore
3= 19= Tokyo University Japan
5 22 Melbourne University Australia
6 28 Tsing Hua University China
7 29 Kyoto University Japan
8 33 Hong Kong University Hong Kong
9 35 Sydney University Australia
10 38 Monash University Australia
11 41 Univ of New South Wales Australia
12 45 Queensland University Australia
13 46 Auckland University New Zealand
14 50 Chinese Univ Hong Kong Hong Kong
15 57 Indian Institutes of Technology India
16 58 Hong Kong Univ Sci & Technol Hong Kong
17 61 Nanyang Technological Univ Singapore
18 63 Seoul National University South Korea
19 68 Indian Insts of Management India
20 70 Osaka University Japan
21 74 Natl Auton Univ of Mexico Mexico
22 79 Otago University New Zealand
23 82 Macquarie University Australia
24 105 University of Adelaide Australia
25 108 National Taiwan University Taiwan
26 111 Univ of Western Australia Australia
27 116 Fudan University China
28 118 Tokyo Inst Technology Japan
29 119 Hebrew Univ Jerusalem Israel
30 120 Keio University Japan
31= 128= Kyushu University Japan
31= 128= Nagoya University Japan
33 133 Hokkaido University Japan
34 146 RMIT University Australia
35 147 Tel Aviv University Israel
36 150 Korea University South Korea
37 154 City University of Hong Kong Hong Kong
38 156 Curtin University of Technol Australia
39= 158= Technion — Israel Inst Technol Israel
39= 158= Waseda University Japan
41 161 Chulalongkorn University Thailand
42 165 China Univ Sci & Technol China
43 168 Tohoku University Japan
44 179 Shanghai Jiao Tong University China
45 180 Nanjing University China
46 181 Kobe University Japan
47 183 Jawaharlal Nehru University India
48 185 Univ Kebangsaan Malaysia Malaysia
49= 192= Malaya University Malaysia
49= 192= Queensland Univ of Technol Australia
Source: QS
This table shows the world’s top ten
universities measured by staffto-
student ratio. We regard this
measure as a key indicator of an institution’s
commitment to teaching. While there
are many national surveys of teaching
effectiveness and student fulfilment, it is
hard to measure teaching on a world scale,
not least because students are bound to vary
in the expectations they have of the courses
they take and how they prepare for them.
But we know that students around the
world are becoming more picky consumers.
And one thing they need to know is how
many other students will be competing with
them for the attention of each staff member.
On this measure all the top universities
are in high-wage economies. Institutions in
countries such as Mexico, India or Thailand,
where staff can be hired more cheaply than
in Europe or North America, seem not to
want to press home this advantage by
increasing staff numbers, or perhaps cannot
afford to do so. The economics of running a
university in the developing world seems to
demand high student numbers and small
staff head counts.
The top two institutions on this measure,
Duke and Yale universities in the US, are
significant research universities and are
in the top 20 in our overall world rankings.
Yale, ranked fourth, is also one of the few
US universities to have a substantial
percentage of international staff by European
or Asian standards.
This is one measure in which no country
is dominant. Two European technology
universities, Eindhoven in the Netherlands
and Imperial College London, appear in
third and fifth positions, while Sciences Po
in France, a specialist in the social sciences,
is also prominent as a comparatively small,
elite school. The other European institution
here, Geneva University, is maintained by
cantonal rather than federal funding, but
it has defeated Switzerland’s national
institutions on this measure.
This table contains only three of the
world’s top 20 universities overall. On this
measure, Cambridge and Oxford emerge in
27th and 31st places, just ahead of Harvard
in 37th. Even further behind are California’s
big players — Stanford University at 119 and
the University of California, Berkeley, at 158.
WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS ANALYSIS
14 OCTOBER 6 2006 THE TIMES HIGHER
1 13 Duke University US 100
2 4= Yale University US 93
3 67 Eindhoven University of Technology Netherlands 92
4 48= Rochester University US 91
5 9 Imperial College London UK 88
6 52 Sciences Po France 86
7 28 Tsing Hua University China 84
8 56 Emory University US 84
9 53 Vanderbilt University US 81
10 39 Geneva University Switzerland 81
Source: QS
RANK
WORLD RANK
COUNTRY
NAME
STAFF/STUDENT
SCORE
TOP 10 FOR STAFF-TO-STUDENT RATIO
1 7 California Institute of Technology US 100
2 1 Harvard University US 55
3 6 Stanford University US 55
4 4= Massachusetts Institute of Technology US 54
5 32 University of Texas at Austin US 53
6 44 University of California, San Diego US 42
7 8 University of California, Berkeley US 39
8 92 Erasmus University Rotterdam Netherlands 38
9 18 Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris France 37
10 10 Princeton University US 34
Source: QS and Evidence Ltd
RANK
WORLD RANK
COUNTRY
NAME
CITATIONS
SCORE
TOP 10 FOR CITATIONS California
hits the top
spot on good
citations
Centres focusing on hard,
high-impact research are
runaway winners
Big thinkers
presented in
pleasingly
petit packs
Elite institutions in developed
economies find it
easier to provide tuition
on a personal level
ANALYSIS WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS
THE TIMES HIGHER OCTOBER 6 2006 15
Because peer review accounts for 40 per
cent of a university’s possible score
in the World University Rankings,
the top universities on this criterion tend
to be highly placed in our overall table as
well as in this one. Here we see the top ten
universities in the eyes of academics around
the world.
It shows that Harvard University, the
top institution overall, is beaten comfortably
by Cambridge and Oxford universities on
this measure. Its score of 93 out of a possible
100 puts it only just ahead of the University
of California, Berkeley, which is often
regarded as its biggest rival.
Also conspicuous in this list is the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
which does well on this measure despite its
specialist nature. Its work in fields such as
art and languages is on a small scale but it
is highly prestigious and visible, allowing
MIT to garner votes in disciplines far
removed from science and technology.
The overall message is that the world’s
academics are sceptical about the idea
that the US has all the best universities.
Cambridge’s lead in peer review is
convincing. And, on this measure, its
ancient rival Oxford is its nearest challenger
on the world stage as well as in the UK.
This measure contains only five US
institutions. It shows that the big two
Australian universities are well regarded
around the world, especially the Australian
National University, which has been
well funded for some decades and is
involved in a full range of research and
teaching.
The picture is more complex in Asia.
While Peking University shows up well
ahead of Tokyo University in our overall
rankings, academics still take Tokyo more
seriously.
The table also shows how well employers
like the universities that most impress
academics — and the two measures overlap
substantially. Here, Harvard is the world
leader, a position it has perhaps achieved by
overall excellence supplemented by having
the world’s most prestigious business school.
MIT, Stanford and the London School of
Economics (not in this table because it
scored only 42 in our peer review) also do
well. Tokyo shows poorly on this measure.
1 2 Cambridge University UK 100 79
2 3 Oxford University UK 97 76
3 1 Harvard University US 93 100
4 8 University of California, Berkeley US 92 75
5 6 Stanford University US 82 85
6 4= Massachusetts Institute of Technology US 81 93
7 16 Australian National University Australia 72 30
8 22 Melbourne University Australia 72 44
9 19= Tokyo University Japan 72 29
10 4= Yale University US 72 81
Source: QS
RANK
WORLD RANK
COUNTRY
NAME
EMPLOYER
REVIEW
PEER REVIEW
TOP 10 FOR PEER REVIEW
Which universities have the world’s
most respected researchers? This
table of the top ten institutions for
citations gives the answer in the way that
the academic community itself measures
impact. It shows the top ten universities
in terms of the number of citations of their
papers, per staff member, recorded over the
past five years by Thomson Scientific in its
Essential Science Indicators database.
It shows that one institution, the
California Institute of Technology, outguns
the rest of the world on this score by a
almost double. Harvard University, the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology and
the University of California, Berkeley are left
far behind. The reason for Caltech’s
dominance is clear. It has fewer than 1,000
undergraduates but 1,200 postgraduates and
1,200 academic staff, not including visitors.
And they are concentrated in high-impact
areas, mainly science and technology, with a
growing emphasis on the life sciences.
Citations analysis is not a process that
favours academic diversity. Behind Caltech,
this table is dominated by US universities
with medical schools because of the ferocious
publishing and citation culture of biomedical
research. Like Caltech, MIT does not have a
medical school, but it brings in substantial
income from biomedical research via its life
sciences departments. Caltech’s life sciences
papers had more than 22 citations each in
the period under review, ahead of MIT at
20. Princeton University was ranked a
distant third, with 15 citations per paper.
Because of the bias of citations in favour
of work published in English, the
appearance of two continental European
institutions here is of special interest. In the
Netherlands, Erasmus University Rotterdam
has gained its position by well-cited medical
publishing. In France, papers in the natural
sciences have allowed Paris’s Ecole Normale
Supérieure to compete.
Citations are famously unkind to the
humanities and social sciences. While
the era in which a historian could have a
brilliant career by writing three massive
books may be ending, the culture of frequent
journal articles and citations will probably
never catch on there as it has in science and
medicine.
There is little valuable citations data for the
humanities. But we know that in the social
sciences, MIT and Harvard tie as the
institutions with the most-cited papers — with
an average of just four citations per paper,
about a quarter of the figure for the mostcited
medical research.
Oxbridge
players are
in a class of
their own
UK academics make
a big impression in the
global arena, trouncing
the US high-flyers
Subscribe
today
and save
upto
40% FREE BOOK when you subscribe
How to Get a Research Grant
Expert advice from leading academics and
research council heads on:
• which funding bodies to approach
• how to make the most of your application
• what a research council looks for in your bid
• how to find the right partner
If you would like to receive details of products or services from
The Times Higher Education Supplement and TSL Education Ltd. please tick. You may contact me by: Email q Telephone q
If you would like to receive details direct from carefully selected companies about their products or services please tick.
They may contact me by: Email q Telephone q
If you DO NOT wish to receive details by post of products and services available from The Times Higher Education Supplement and TSL Education Ltd. please tick here q
If you DO NOT wish to receive details by post direct from carefully selected companies please tick here q
Originator’s 9 4 2 6 5 7
ID Number
Code 4332
Subscribe now and save 40%
q YES! I want to subscribe to The Times Higher and save up to 40%
off the normal price (This offer is open to new subscribers only)
q Please send me my FREE copy of How to Get a Research Grant
Name
Address
Postcode/Zipcode
Telephone Email
Please tick as appropriate
q UK £44.00 (cover price £72.80) q Europe £78.00/€128.00 (cover price £98.00/€161.00)
q USA US$96.00 (cover price US$120.00) q Canada C$128.00 (cover price C$160.00)
q Rest of World £96.00 (cover price £120.00)
Payment options
q I would like to subscribe by Direct Debit at £11.00 a quarter and I have completed the mandate attatched (UK only)
q Please invoice me
q I enclose a cheque for made payable to The Times Higher Education Supplement
Please debit to my: q Visa q MasterCard q Amex
Card No. qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq Expiry date qqqq
Date Signature
Money back guarantee (full refund on all unmailed issues at any time). This offer open to subscribers in the UK only. Offer ends 31st December 2006.
Please return to:
The Times Higher Subscriptions, FREEPOST MID 17953, Tower House, Sovereign Park,
Lathkill Street, Market Harborough, LE87 4JJ, UK
Telephone +44 (0) 1858 438805 Fax +44 (0) 1858 461739 and quote 4864
Direct Debit form
Instruction to your Bank or Building
Society to pay Direct Debits.
1. Name and full postal address of your Bank or Building Society branch
To: The Manager Bank or Building Society
Address
Postcode
2. Name(s) of Account Holder(s)
3. Branch Sort Code 4. Account No.
qq –qq – qq qqqqqqqq
5. Reference Number (for office use only)
6. Instruction to your Bank or Building Society
Please pay TSL Education Ltd, Direct Debits from the account detailed on the instruction subject to the safeguards assured
by the Direct Debit Guarantee.
I understand that this instruction may remain with TSL Education Ltd, and, if so, details will be passed electronically
to my Bank or Building Society.
Signature(s) Date


COPYRIGHT DEVIDO AO AUTOR DO TEXTO.