For those considering their study options, university rankings might seem to be the best way to find the course that gives them the highest chance at a bright professional and personal future. Whether it’s international university rankings like THE – World University Rankings by Times Higher Education, ARWU – Academic Ranking of World Universities by Shanghai University, QS Rankings by TopUniversities, or local ones, these lists of the most prestigious institutions have their place in the education world, but they have their limitations as well.
If you take some top universities and see how they score on various rankings, you will be surprised. The difference can be huge, the rank given to the same university in different lists can vary between the 25th place and a 100-something. Who are you supposed to trust?
The truth is that each university ranking uses its own criteria. If you know how to interpret them, you can really benefit from the significantly differing outcomes of these tops.
Among the aspects considered by the major rankings to come up with the final score of a university there are academic reputation, graduation rates, research citations and papers published, internationality of faculty and students, and employer reputation. Student to faculty ratio, industry income, award winners among academia and alumni and funding offered to students also count. However, no ranking includes all the markers mentioned above. This suggests some rankings may be more appropriate for certain types of students. Based on the categories each ranking prefers, you can find out if what you are interested in is better represented by a certain ranking.
ARWU, also known as the Shanghai ranking, originated in 2003 with Chinese government backing to provide a global benchmark against which Chinese universities could assess their progress. As the ranking relies on long-term factors such as the number of staff affiliated with an institution who have won Nobel Prizes, number of highly cited researchers, as well as number of articles published in influential Nature and Science journals, it is a rather stable list. High-achievers and Ph.D. students may find the ranking useful, given the emphasis it puts on institution reputation and “raw research power.”
Those interested in teaching quality, however, could benefit more from the THE and QS rankings that have their peculiarities too. Before THE broke away to form its own table, the two ranking were one and the same. The reason for the separation lies in the preferred methodology and the ways the two metrics collect their data. Although both target students interested in an international environment, QS ranking is largely based on a global survey of academics, who are asked to identify the leading institutions in their field, while THE ‘stand up to more academic scrutiny’.
“We produce high-end rankings which are used by governments around the world,” says THE rankings editor Phil Baty. “And we’re the only global rankings that take teaching seriously.” All in all, THE has five different measures of teaching quality – a reputation survey, staff-to-student ratio, doctorate-to-bachelor’s ratio, doctorates-awarded-to-academic-staff ratio, and institutional income.
According to the Telegraph, both rankings use surveys to collect data, but while THE does some reputation surveying, sending invitation-only questionnaires to a limited number of institutions around the world, QS opts for quantity to achieve reliability, mass-mailing some 46,000 academics before weighting the results to preclude regional bias.
Reputation factors can be rather subjective, as academics participating in the surveys the rankings are derived from are asked to identify what university they consider being leading in their field. The answers they give may just reflect what institutions are already considered famous. Moreover, differences between ranked universities are not always obvious. In rankings, many universities have very similar scores, with only minor differences. That is why institutions that are ranked lower shouldn’t be immediately dismissed, for the difference is more likely just a perceived one.
However, higher education is not only about the best reputation, research, salaries, and internationality. Some important factors appear not to be taken into consideration by the major rankings, and some of them cannot even be measured. For rankings to be meaningful, it should incorporate factors like student experience, says the University of British Columbia’s professor Michelle Stack, who does not believe rankings to be the best barometer to use selecting a university. She points it out that many of the rankings are owned by businesses, thus their aim is on profits, not education. Stack finds methodology behind such rankings as THE, QS and ARWU problematic as well – in her opinion, the way they collect data changes too frequently.
Stack explains that most university leaders agree that the rankings are flawed, however, they know they need to be visible in order to attract international students, which the institutions need to make up for the state funds that have been on the decline for years. They cannot afford to lose international students.
Still, more and more international students set aside rankings to look and rely on more representative indicators instead. A survey by student recruitment company Hobsons shows they are now placing top priority on teaching quality, staff qualification and student satisfaction instead of rankings.
The experiences you gather during your study years, finding and connecting with people you share passions with, peers and academics who inspire you to continue on the path you have chosen, emotional support and campus diversity – all this results in a mix that is very personal, and often unique for each prospective student. An all these subtle elements are impossible for any ranking to capture.
“It really depends on what the student wants, and what kind of experience they want. That’s more important than a ranking,” Stack adds.
This is echoed by educators Richard Ashford, Shampa Biswas and Mohan J. Dutta. They point out that the popularity of alternative rankings such as Forbes’s America’s Best Value Colleges or the existence of metrics such as Princeton Review’s “Happiest College Students List” suggest that such tables operate like market signals. In a context of rising tuition fees, they communicate to potential customers – parents and prospective students – within an increasingly corporatized academy a very different vision of a higher education.
The authors are concerned that none of the major university lists includes academic freedom considerations in calculations of rankings, while free inquiry, creative practice and innovative thinking that are implied by this important educational aspect are “the hallmarks of sound education on any campus.”
A truly rewarding study experience is difficult to rank. Some lesser-known universities that do not have a budget to promote themselves or do not meet all the criteria set by the major rankings can be equally satisfying as far as the study experience is concerned. Educators warn students not to be misguided by the global rankings, for they are certainly not the only way to choose a university. Comparing study options, checking subject-specific rankings targeting a discipline you are interested in, and asking questions on forums and other platforms can also help.
“Rankings are a useful source of information that wouldn’t otherwise be available – but they don’t make your decision for you,” says Danny Byrne of QS. “It’s about knowing what they do, and applying them intelligently. More is more.