Read Content Management & Web Marketing text version

With more than 2,000 colleges surveyed, the QS rankings are regarded as the most reliable guide to university performance.

Five Years On University Rankings in the World Today

Nunzio Quacquarelli, Managing Director, QS November 2009

I imagine that all university heads broadly share my own view of these [league] tables. They are terrific and unquestioned when you score well and better than last time. They are fatally flawed and fundamentally unfair when you move in the opposite direction.

Howard Davies Director, London School of Economics

2

Factors contributing to a successful ranking

Impartiality Completeness of data collected Rigour Relevance of values for the target audience Appropriateness of indicators to reflect those values

3

Limitations

Subjective design of methodology Limited by availability of data Inspire strong emotional response

4

RANKINGS TIMELINE

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2001

2001

QS initiates thinking on World University Rankings

Nunzio Quacquarelli and John O'Leary devise rankings concept whilst John is still Education Editor at The Times

RANKINGS TIMELINE

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2002 2002

John O'Leary joins Times Higher Education Supplement

John appointed editor at THES. Discussions between QS and THES regarding rankings begins. John maintains his role as editor of the Good University Guide ­ the most respected ranking of UK universities.

Ben Sowter joins QS

A former national president of AIESEC, Ben joins QS, with a domestic ranking of UK employers amongst his first projects.

RANKINGS TIMELINE

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2003

2003

Shanghai Jiao Tong University launch rankings

Professor Nian Cai Liu at SJTU launch Academic Ranking of World Universities comparing the research strengths of world universities. The first edition of the rankings attracted attention beyond the expectations of their founders.

RANKINGS TIMELINE

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2004 2004

THES-QS World University Rankings launched

With Martin Ince as editor for the rankings at THES, QS launch their rankings with THES publishing the results and advising on weightings. Academic Peer Review initially carries a weighting of 50%.

Webometrics launch Rankings Web

Cybermetrics Labs based in Spain release a ranking focused on the web profile of world universities.

RANKINGS TIMELINE

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2005

2005

QS introduce Employer Review

Contributing 10% of the overall weighting ­ the THES-QS rankings now include a graduate employability component

TSL Education, publishers of THES, is sold by News International

The publishing group behind THES are purchased by Exponent Private Equity severing ties with The Times

RANKINGS TIMELINE

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2006

2006

"Berlin Principles" Established

The "International Rankings Expert Group (IREG)" meet for the third time in Berlin establishing a set of 16 principles for the ranking of Higher Education Institutions.

RANKINGS TIMELINE

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2007 2007

QS Introduce Enhancements

Designed to improve stability and fairness, QS introduce a selection of adjustments to the THES-QS rankings including switching from the Essential Science Indicators (ESI) from Thomson Scientific to Scopus from Elsevier as the key source for publications and citations data.

HEEACT Rankings Emerge

Entirely research focused, a government council in Taiwan issue a response to the Shanghai rankings avoiding the widely criticised inclusion of Nobel Prize winners.

RANKINGS TIMELINE

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2008

2008

Unprecedented Response to World University Rankings

With no major changes to the methodology the 2008 results attract an unprecedented response

RANKINGS TIMELINE

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2009

QS launches Asian University Rankings

QS launches the first of a planned range of regional rankings

2009

European Commission launch Design & Feasibility Study

Not satisified with existing rankings the European Commission launch a call for proposals for a "multi-dimensional global university ranking"

THE-QS Results Most Robust Yet

The results in 2009 are drawn on record levels of response to the survey components and exhibit the smallest average swing in results since inception

QS Replace Times Higher Education with US News and Others

The six year collaboration between THE and QS comes to an end. QS announce that the existing ranking will be continued.

RANKINGS TIMELINE

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2010

QSIU International Advisory Board Established

With THE no longer involved, QS is free to establish an international panel of experts to advise on the future development of rankings

2010

QS World Subject Rankings launched

Initiated with around 20 subjects, QS drives international rankings down to the discipline level focusing on increased relevance to prospective students.

QS World University Rankings reach new audiences

Working with a much wider range of international partners the QS World University Rankings reach a new level of exposure. The original team of Quacquarelli, Sowter, O'Leary and Ince continue to work on the rankings for or on behalf of QS

New Rankings

Using new data and a new methodology THE launch a new ranking

RANKINGS TIMELINE

2003

SJTU launch Academic Ranking of World Universities

2004

2007

HEEACT Ranking emerges Mines ParisTech Professional Ranking begins

(THES-) QS World University Rankings launched Webometrics Ranking launched German CHE rankings extend to other selected countries

2008

2009

Leiden bibliometric rankings published

Russian "Global Universities Ranking" published

2010

2011

Result of European Commission Feasibility study expected

The future?

QS Subject Rankings launched QS World University Rankings In association with US News In association with Sunday Times In association with Chosun Ilbo

Our Approach

16

Ranking Criteria & Weights

Peer Review ­ 40%

Composite score drawn from peer review (which is divided into five subject areas). 9,386 responses. Citations per Faculty Int'l Students Int'l Faculty Student Faculty Ratio

Recruiter Review ­ 10%

Peer Review Score based on responses to recruiter survey. 3,281 responses

Student Faculty Ratio ­ 20%

Score based on student faculty ratio

International Faculty ­ 5%

Score based on proportion of international faculty Recruiter Review

International Students ­ 5%

Score based on proportion of international students

Citations per Faculty­ 20%

Score based on research performance factored against the size of the research body.

17

World University Rankings can help differentiate the active, from the dormant...volcanoes!

Professor Shih, President, KAUST Former President, National University of Singapore

18

Indicators & Weights for Established Aggregate Rankings

Shanghai

QS

Webometrics

HEEACT

19

Comparing Results

THE - QS

1 Harvard 2 Cambridge 3 Yale 4 UCL 5 Oxford 6 Imperial 7 Chicago 8 Princeton 9 MIT 10 Caltech

SHANGHAI

Harvard Stanford Berkeley Cambridge MIT Caltech Columbia Princeton Chicago Oxford

HEEACT

Harvard Johns Hopkins Stanford Washington UCLA Michigan MIT Berkeley Pennsylvania Columbia

Webometrics

MIT Harvard Stanford Berkeley Cornell Wisconsin-Madison Minnesota Caltech UI Urbana-Champaign Michigan

20

Peer review is an effective way to evaluate universities. It takes smart people to recognise smart people.

Sir Richard Sykes Former Rector, Imperial College

21

Thank You

Nunzio Quacquarelli [email protected] Ben Sowter [email protected] Blog http://qsiu.wordpress.com NEXT>

Information

Content Management & Web Marketing

22 pages

Report File (DMCA)

Our content is added by our users. We aim to remove reported files within 1 working day. Please use this link to notify us:

Report this file as copyright or inappropriate

1114202


Notice: fwrite(): send of 203 bytes failed with errno=104 Connection reset by peer in /home/readbag.com/web/sphinxapi.php on line 531