In association with: Times Higher - QS World University Rankings Methodology & Europe’s Performance Ben Sowter Head of Research

In association with:

www.topuniversities.com

Times Higher - QS Times Higher - QS World University RankingsWorld University Rankings

Methodology & Europe’s Methodology & Europe’s PerformancePerformanceBen SowterBen SowterHead of ResearchHead of ResearchQSQS

University of Edinburgh10 March 2008



Graduated in Computer Science from University of Graduated in Computer Science from University of Nottingham in 2000Nottingham in 2000 Union PrizeUnion Prize Chair, Nottingham University Debating SocietyChair, Nottingham University Debating Society

Spent 3 months on work placement in northern Spent 3 months on work placement in northern India in 1999India in 1999

Worked for international student charity – AIESEC – Worked for international student charity – AIESEC – for two years after graduationfor two years after graduation 22ndnd Year as UK National President Year as UK National President Operated on international strategic development teamOperated on international strategic development team

Joined QS in 2002Joined QS in 2002

Speaker IntroductionSpeaker Introduction



Establish QS background & credentialsEstablish QS background & credentials Explain research methodologyExplain research methodology New developmentsNew developments Understand limitations of rankingsUnderstand limitations of rankings Provide insight into performance Provide insight into performance

enhancement specific to improved rankingenhancement specific to improved ranking Collect feedback and inputCollect feedback and input

ObjectivesObjectives



QSQS Why World University Rankings?Why World University Rankings? THE – QS CollaborationTHE – QS Collaboration Our ApproachOur Approach ResultsResults UK & Ireland in the RankingsUK & Ireland in the Rankings Progress in the RankingsProgress in the Rankings

IntroductionIntroduction



QSQS

A brief introductionA brief introduction



Nunzio QuacquarelliNunzio Quacquarelli MBA WhartonMBA Wharton

The MBA Career Guide (now QS Top MBA The MBA Career Guide (now QS Top MBA Career Guide)Career Guide)

MBA EventsMBA Events Grad School/Postgraduate EventsGrad School/Postgraduate Events CareersCareers SoftwareSoftware ScholarshipsScholarships

Founded 1989/1990Founded 1989/1990



……to enable motivated people around to enable motivated people around the world to fulfill their potential, by the world to fulfill their potential, by fostering international mobility, fostering international mobility, educational achievement and career educational achievement and career developmentdevelopment

Our ChannelsOur Channels primary researchprimary research leading-edge editorial & leading-edge editorial &

publicationspublications developmental events developmental events web solutionsweb solutions

QS Mission…QS Mission…



www.topuniversities.comwww.topuniversities.com



Over 1,180,000 visits in 2007Over 1,180,000 visits in 2007 Over 6,000 visits per day in 2008Over 6,000 visits per day in 2008 Increasingly strong prominence in Google & Increasingly strong prominence in Google &

Yahoo searchesYahoo searches Ranked 53,626 in AlexaRanked 53,626 in Alexa Home of the THE – QS World University Home of the THE – QS World University

RankingsRankings Institution ProfilesInstitution Profiles Detailed study abroad informationDetailed study abroad information

www.topuniversities.comwww.topuniversities.com



New revised and updated New revised and updated edition available nowedition available now

Contains much information Contains much information not available on webnot available on web

Top Universities GuideTop Universities Guide



Other QS InitiativesOther QS Initiatives

QS World Grad School TourQS World Grad School Tour QS Top Grad School GuideQS Top Grad School Guide QS World MBA TourQS World MBA Tour QS Top MBA Career GuideQS Top MBA Career Guide QS APPLE – Korea July 2008QS APPLE – Korea July 2008 QS Top ApplyQS Top Apply QS Education TrustQS Education Trust QS Intelligence UnitQS Intelligence Unit



QS Offices & EventsQS Offices & Events



Interest in ranking things and peopleInterest in ranking things and people HospitalsHospitals SchoolsSchools Local authoritiesLocal authorities Rich lists; Britain, world, Asian British, footballersRich lists; Britain, world, Asian British, footballers Universities: The Times / US News etc…Universities: The Times / US News etc…

Why rank universities?Why rank universities?



Higher education becoming more globalHigher education becoming more global Knowledge the key driver of international Knowledge the key driver of international

competitivenesscompetitiveness Increasing desire for comparative Increasing desire for comparative

informationinformation Unique positions of THE and QS as Unique positions of THE and QS as

international and independent experts in international and independent experts in higher educationhigher education

Raises awareness of all 500+ universities Raises awareness of all 500+ universities involved in the projectinvolved in the project

Why World Rankings?Why World Rankings?



Worldwide, the demand for international education Worldwide, the demand for international education is forecast to increase rapidlyis forecast to increase rapidly

In 2003, an estimated 3.1 million students studied In 2003, an estimated 3.1 million students studied internationallyinternationally

There are likely to be in excess of 5.8 million There are likely to be in excess of 5.8 million international students in 2010international students in 2010

Two-thirds of this global demand will be AsiansTwo-thirds of this global demand will be Asians US domination of international student recruitment US domination of international student recruitment

has begun to falter – tight Visas, increased has begun to falter – tight Visas, increased competition (IIE, NAFSA, CCE)competition (IIE, NAFSA, CCE)

Bologna Accord will create an ‘explosion in English-Bologna Accord will create an ‘explosion in English-language based postgraduate courses in Europe’language based postgraduate courses in Europe’

International Study TrendsInternational Study Trends



Student Mobility on the RiseStudent Mobility on the Rise



International Students International Students AbroadAbroad

Source: IIE – Institute of International Education



Government funding of tertiary education being cut Government funding of tertiary education being cut (per capita) in most countries around the world (IFC)(per capita) in most countries around the world (IFC)

Many governments targeting international students Many governments targeting international students as a source of tertiary sector fundingas a source of tertiary sector funding

Australia has estimated that international students Australia has estimated that international students are more important to their economy than are more important to their economy than manufacturing & miningmanufacturing & mining

The UK Government estimates that 270,000 The UK Government estimates that 270,000 students contribute $3 billion in fees & a further $3 students contribute $3 billion in fees & a further $3 billion in other spendingbillion in other spending




By 2010By 2010The European Commissions Bologna Accord will The European Commissions Bologna Accord will make room for over 500,000 first degree graduates make room for over 500,000 first degree graduates to study in other EU nations for a Masters degreeto study in other EU nations for a Masters degree

By 2016By 2016In the USA, recent Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad In the USA, recent Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad legislation aims to encourage 1 million students to legislation aims to encourage 1 million students to study overseasstudy overseas

By 2020By 2020Over 3 million Asians are expected to study outside Over 3 million Asians are expected to study outside their home countrytheir home country (Source: IDP – British Council) (Source: IDP – British Council)




“”www.topuniversities.com

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

Professor Shih, PresidentProfessor Shih, PresidentNational University of SingaporeNational University of Singapore



Operated by Shanghai Jiao Tong University in Operated by Shanghai Jiao Tong University in ChinaChina

Focuses principally on research outputFocuses principally on research output Nobel Prizes & Fields MedalsNobel Prizes & Fields Medals CitationsCitations HiCisHiCis

Strongly correlated with educational Strongly correlated with educational reputationreputation

Historical dependencyHistorical dependency Available on Available on www.arwu.org

Academic Ranking of World Academic Ranking of World UniversitiesUniversities



Criteria Indicator Weight

Quality of Education

Alumni of an institution winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals 10%

Quality of Faculty

Staff of an institution winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals 20%

Highly cited researchers in 21 broad subject categories 20%

Research OutputArticles published in Nature and Science* 20%Articles in Science Citation Index-expanded, Social Science Citation Index 20%

Size of Institution

Academic performance with respect to the size of an institution 10%

Shanghai Jiao Tong CriteriaShanghai Jiao Tong Criteria



Shanghai Jiao Tong – Issues?Shanghai Jiao Tong – Issues?

Strengths?Strengths? All data is easily All data is easily

verifiableverifiable First global ranking First global ranking

establishedestablished Very mechanical Very mechanical

methodologymethodology

Weaknesses?Weaknesses? Nobel prizes look Nobel prizes look

backwardsbackwards Citation data is historicCitation data is historic Citation measures bias Citation measures bias

towards sciences and towards sciences and bio-sciencesbio-sciences

Overall bias towards US Overall bias towards US universitiesuniversities



Webometrics Ranking of World Webometrics Ranking of World UniversitiesUniversities Focuses on web profileFocuses on web profile

Research productivity using Google ScholarResearch productivity using Google Scholar Search Engine performanceSearch Engine performance Site popularitySite popularity Good practices in web managementGood practices in web management

Fully automatedFully automated Tracks in the realm of 14,000 institutionsTracks in the realm of 14,000 institutions

Prone to anomalyProne to anomaly A university domain change can be disastrousA university domain change can be disastrous

Available on Available on www.webometrics.info



Indicator Weight

SizeNumber of pages recovered from four engines: Google, Yahoo, Live Search and Exalead.

20%

Rich FilesAfter evaluation of relevance to academic and publication activities and considering the volume of the different file formats, the following were selected: Adobe Acrobat (.pdf), Adobe PostScript (.ps), Microsoft Word (.doc) and Microsoft Powerpoint (.ppt). These data were extracted using Google, Yahoo Search, Live Search and Exalead.

15%

ScholarGoogle Scholar provides the number of papers and citations for each academic domain. These results from the Scholar database represent papers, reports and other academic items.

15%

VisibilityThe total number of unique external links received (inlinks) by a site can be only confidently obtained from Yahoo Search, Live Search and Exalead.

50%

Webometrics CriteriaWebometrics Criteria



World University RankingsWorld University Rankings



THE - QS World University THE - QS World University RankingsRankings Began in 2004Began in 2004 Collaboration between Collaboration between

Times Higher Education Times Higher Education (THE) & QS(THE) & QS THE running since 1971THE running since 1971 THE is a weekly newspaper THE is a weekly newspaper

distributed to academics in distributed to academics in the UK and internationallythe UK and internationally

Formerly associated with The Formerly associated with The TimesTimes

Published annually in the Published annually in the fallfall



THE METHODOLOGYTHE METHODOLOGYTHE – QS World University RankingsTHE – QS World University Rankings



Four key themes, as basis for comparison:Four key themes, as basis for comparison:

Research QualityResearch Quality

Graduate EmployabilityGraduate Employability

International OutlookInternational Outlook

Teaching QualityTeaching Quality

Our ApproachOur Approach



Criteria Indicator Brief Description Weight*

Research Quality

Peer Review Composite score drawn from peer review (which is divided into five subject areas). 3,703 responses.

40%

Citations per Faculty

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

20%

Graduate Employability

Recruiter Review

Score based on responses to recruiter survey. 738 responses 10%

International Outlook

International Faculty

Score based on proportion of international faculty 5%

International Students

Score based on proportion of international students 5%

Teaching Quality Student Faculty Score based on student/faculty ratio 20%

Ranking Criteria & WeightsRanking Criteria & Weights*All decisions regarding the allocation of weightings are the responsibility of the Times Higher Education Supplement



Began in 2004 with list of the top 500 world Began in 2004 with list of the top 500 world institutions by research impactinstitutions by research impact

Excludes single-faculty institutionsExcludes single-faculty institutions Excludes postgraduate-only institutionsExcludes postgraduate-only institutions Added on recommendation from certain countries Added on recommendation from certain countries

where English publication culture is not strong (e.g. where English publication culture is not strong (e.g. Germany)Germany)

Each year list is re-evaluatedEach year list is re-evaluated Omitted institutions are welcome to make a case for Omitted institutions are welcome to make a case for

inclusion with supporting evidence for their inclusion with supporting evidence for their inclusion relative to an included institutioninclusion relative to an included institution

566 universities considered in 2007566 universities considered in 2007

Selection of Initial ListSelection of Initial List



“”www.topuniversities.com

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

Sir Richard SykesSir Richard SykesRector, Imperial CollegeRector, Imperial College



Peer review is the centrepiece of this rankingPeer review is the centrepiece of this ranking 5,101 respondents5,101 respondents International spreadInternational spread

Weighted ResultsWeighted Results Subject spreadSubject spread

Arts & HumanitiesArts & Humanities Engineering & ITEngineering & IT Life Sciences & BiomedicineLife Sciences & Biomedicine Natural SciencesNatural Sciences Social SciencesSocial Sciences

Overall score built up from each faculty areaOverall score built up from each faculty area Active academicsActive academics 3 year “latest response”3 year “latest response”

Peer Review of Research OutputPeer Review of Research Output



3 year latest response3 year latest response Invitation to previous respondentsInvitation to previous respondents World Scientific Database (180,000)World Scientific Database (180,000)

Singapore HeadquartersSingapore Headquarters www.worldscientific.com

Mardev Database (12,000+)Mardev Database (12,000+) Part of Reed ElsevierPart of Reed Elsevier UK HeadquartersUK Headquarters www.mardev.com

Academic Sign-up facilityAcademic Sign-up facility www.topuniversities.com

Peer Review – Selection of PeersPeer Review – Selection of Peers



Harvard second to BerkeleyHarvard second to Berkeley Oxford and CambridgeOxford and Cambridge Well-liked universities all over the worldWell-liked universities all over the world Little evidence of patriotism biasLittle evidence of patriotism bias UK and North America dominate the top 20UK and North America dominate the top 20

Observations: Peer ReviewObservations: Peer Review



The Recruiter ReviewThe Recruiter Review



Another group who have knowledge of Another group who have knowledge of university qualityuniversity quality

Key relevance to “graduate employability” Key relevance to “graduate employability” criteriacriteria

Introduced for 2005 rankingsIntroduced for 2005 rankings Sourced from QS database and media and Sourced from QS database and media and

university referrals (over 120 lists received university referrals (over 120 lists received for 2007)for 2007)

Improved response for 2006 & 2007Improved response for 2006 & 2007 Continuing development focus for 2008Continuing development focus for 2008

Recruiter ReviewRecruiter Review



UKUK Strong but less so than in previous yearsStrong but less so than in previous years

Some institutions with particular strengths Some institutions with particular strengths do welldo well Bocconi, HECBocconi, HEC

Observations: Recruiter ReviewObservations: Recruiter Review



Quantitative MeasuresQuantitative Measures



Research QualityResearch Quality citations/facultycitations/faculty

Teaching QualityTeaching Quality faculty student ratiofaculty student ratio

International OutlookInternational Outlook % international faculty and students% international faculty and students

Graduate EmployabilityGraduate Employability ????

Quantitative MeasuresQuantitative Measures



Winner – Caltech Winner – Caltech US, French, Swiss, Netherlands etc US, French, Swiss, Netherlands etc

institutions all well placedinstitutions all well placed Both Asian and European amongst the well-Both Asian and European amongst the well-

placedplaced Weak correlation (0.21) with research – but Weak correlation (0.21) with research – but

not zeronot zero

Observations: Staff/StudentObservations: Staff/Student



US shows up badlyUS shows up badly HKUST top in staffHKUST top in staff London School of Economics top in studentsLondon School of Economics top in students Caltech among few US with international Caltech among few US with international

staffstaff

Observations: InternationalObservations: International



Citations per Faculty ScoreCitations per Faculty Score

Classic measure of research qualityClassic measure of research quality Citations per staff member (not per paper)Citations per staff member (not per paper) 5 year score (changed from 10 in 2006 to increase 5 year score (changed from 10 in 2006 to increase

“topicality”)“topicality”) Source: ScopusSource: Scopus



Medical faculty is a big plusMedical faculty is a big plus Or major biomedical incomeOr major biomedical income CalTech the winner, then Stanford & MITCalTech the winner, then Stanford & MIT Big country effectBig country effect

Observation: CitationsObservation: Citations



Method used in various domestic rankings Method used in various domestic rankings such as The Times (UK)such as The Times (UK)

Stabilise data year on yearStabilise data year on year More accurate application of weightings More accurate application of weightings

throughout the samplethroughout the sample Smoothes any anomalies that remainSmoothes any anomalies that remain Essentially smoothes the curve for each Essentially smoothes the curve for each

individual indicatorindividual indicator

Z-Score AggregationZ-Score Aggregation



The Effect of Z-Score Application on The Effect of Z-Score Application on Rankings IndicatorsRankings Indicators



2007 Indicator Correlations2007 Indicator Correlations

Peer Review 0.59 Recruiter Review Strong

Peer Review 0.28 International Faculty Weak

Peer Review 0.35 International Students Moderate

Peer Review 0.32 Student Faculty Moderate

Peer Review 0.45 Faculty Citations Moderate

Recruiter Review 0.33 International Faculty Moderate

Recruiter Review 0.37 International Students Moderate

Recruiter Review 0.27 Student Faculty Weak

Recruiter Review 0.12 Faculty Citations Weak

International Faculty 0.66 International Students Strong

International Faculty 0.15 Student Faculty Weak

International Faculty 0.15 Faculty Citations Weak

International Students 0.23 Student Faculty Weak

International Students 0.19 Faculty Citations Weak

Student Faculty 0.21 Faculty Citations Weak



1.1. Online SystemOnline System More thorough and complete data all the way down the listMore thorough and complete data all the way down the list Less need for averagesLess need for averages

2.2. Peer ReviewPeer Review Countries with disproportionately high response but a small number of Countries with disproportionately high response but a small number of

institutions lose unnatural advantageinstitutions lose unnatural advantage

3.3. FTE DataFTE Data Universities with particularly high or low numbers for part-time will be Universities with particularly high or low numbers for part-time will be

influencedinfluenced

4.4. ScopusScopus Less pronounced bias towards US and English speaking worldLess pronounced bias towards US and English speaking world

5.5. Z-Score aggregationZ-Score aggregation Less advantage for the best institutions in lower weighted indicatorsLess advantage for the best institutions in lower weighted indicators Increased stability year on yearIncreased stability year on year

Effects of 2007 developments…Effects of 2007 developments…



In understanding and using any ranking, it In understanding and using any ranking, it essential to develop a full understanding of essential to develop a full understanding of what they are measuringwhat they are measuring

THE & QS are committed to:THE & QS are committed to: Being open with our methods and data wherever Being open with our methods and data wherever

possiblepossible Engaging with universities and other Engaging with universities and other

stakeholders to help them understand the stakeholders to help them understand the rankingsrankings

Providing as much qualitative information in Providing as much qualitative information in support of the rankings as possiblesupport of the rankings as possible

NOTENOTE



The ranking has limitations. Lack of data on:The ranking has limitations. Lack of data on: Teaching qualityTeaching quality Student satisfactionStudent satisfaction Investment in infrastructureInvestment in infrastructure

The ranking relies on the best comparable The ranking relies on the best comparable data availabledata available

World University Rankings - World University Rankings - Issues?Issues?



THE RESULTSTHE RESULTSTHE – QS World University RankingsTHE – QS World University Rankings



Comparing ResultsComparing Results

THE – QSTHE – QS11 HarvardHarvard2=2= CambridgeCambridge2=2= YaleYale2=2= OxfordOxford55 Imperial Imperial 66 PrincetonPrinceton7=7= CaltechCaltech7=7= ChicagoChicago88 UCLUCL1010 MITMIT

SHANGHAI SHANGHAI 1.1. HarvardHarvard2.2. StanfordStanford3.3. BerkeleyBerkeley4.4. CambridgeCambridge5.5. MITMIT6.6. CaltechCaltech7.7. Columbia Columbia 8.8. PrincetonPrinceton9.9. Chicago Chicago 10.10. OxfordOxford

WEBOMETRICSWEBOMETRICS1.1. MITMIT2.2. StanfordStanford3.3. HarvardHarvard4.4. Penn StatePenn State5.5. BerkeleyBerkeley6.6. MichiganMichigan7.7. WisconsinWisconsin8.8. MinnesotaMinnesota9.9. IllinoisIllinois10.10. CornellCornell



HarvardHarvard The US – 56 in top 200The US – 56 in top 200 Harvard’s lead the smallest yet Harvard’s lead the smallest yet Oxford and Cambridge also well placedOxford and Cambridge also well placed But that’s only part of the storyBut that’s only part of the story

Key FindingsKey Findings



The top 200 includes universities in 28 statesThe top 200 includes universities in 28 states US, UK, Canada, Australia, NetherlandsUS, UK, Canada, Australia, Netherlands Korea, China, Japan, SingaporeKorea, China, Japan, Singapore Thailand, MalaysiaThailand, Malaysia Continental EuropeContinental Europe Developing world small but improving (1 in Developing world small but improving (1 in

2004, 2 in 2005, only UNAM in 2006, 3 in 2004, 2 in 2005, only UNAM in 2006, 3 in 2007)2007)

Key FindingsKey Findings



Where are the top universities?Where are the top universities?



2007 2006 2005 2004

1 Harvard Harvard Harvard Harvard

2 Cambridge Cambridge MIT Berkeley

3 Yale Oxford Cambridge MIT

4 Oxford MIT Oxford Caltech

5 Imperial Yale Stanford Oxford

6 Princeton Stanford Berkeley Cambridge

7 Chicago Caltech Yale Stanford

8 Caltech Berkeley Caltech Yale

9 UCL Imperial Princeton Princeton

10 MIT Princeton Ecole Polytechnique

ETH Zurich

Consistency of ResultsConsistency of Results



2007

2006

NAME COUNTRYSCOR

E1 1 HARVARD University United States 1002= 2 University of CAMBRIDGE United Kingdom 1002= 3 University of OXFORD United Kingdom 1002= 4= YALE University United States 1005 9 Imperial College LONDON United Kingdom 996 10 PRINCETON University United States 1007= 7 CALIFORNIA Institute of Technology (Caltech) United States 1007= 11 University of CHICAGO United States 1009 25 UCL (University College LONDON) United Kingdom 96

10 4= MASSACHUSETTS Institute of Technology (MIT) United States 10011 12 COLUMBIA University United States 10012 21 MCGILL University Canada 10013 13 DUKE University United States 9814 26 University of PENNSYLVANIA United States 9715 23 JOHNS HOPKINS University United States 9916 16 AUSTRALIAN National University Australia 10017 19= University of TOKYO Japan 10018 33= University of HONG KONG Hong Kong 9519 6 STANFORD University United States 10020= 35= CARNEGIE MELLON University United States 96

The ResultsThe Results



European ResultsEuropean Results



European ResultsEuropean Results



Europe vs. North AmericaEurope vs. North America



Peer opinionPeer opinion Citations per paperCitations per paper Not aggregatedNot aggregated

Faculty Level DataFaculty Level Data



Faculty Level: Top 5sFaculty Level: Top 5s Arts & HumanitiesArts & Humanities

HarvardHarvard BerkeleyBerkeley OxfordOxford CambridgeCambridge YaleYale

Engineering & ITEngineering & IT MITMIT BerkeleyBerkeley StanfordStanford CaltechCaltech CambridgeCambridge

Life Sciences & BiomedicineLife Sciences & Biomedicine HarvardHarvard CambridgeCambridge OxfordOxford Johns HopkinsJohns Hopkins BerkeleyBerkeley

Natural SciencesNatural Sciences BerkeleyBerkeley MITMIT CambridgeCambridge HarvardHarvard PrincetonPrinceton

Social SciencesSocial Sciences HarvardHarvard BerkeleyBerkeley LSELSE YaleYale StanfordStanford



Faculty Level: Europe Top 5sFaculty Level: Europe Top 5s Arts & HumanitiesArts & Humanities

OxfordOxford CambridgeCambridge LSELSE UCLUCL EdinburghEdinburgh

Engineering & ITEngineering & IT CambridgeCambridge ImperialImperial OxfordOxford ETH ZurichETH Zurich TU DelftTU Delft

Life Sciences & BiomedicineLife Sciences & Biomedicine CambridgeCambridge OxfordOxford ImperialImperial KarolinskaKarolinska UCLUCL

Natural SciencesNatural Sciences CambridgeCambridge OxfordOxford ImperialImperial ETH ZurichETH Zurich ENS ParisENS Paris

Social SciencesSocial Sciences LSELSE OxfordOxford CambridgeCambridge UCLUCL WarwickWarwick



Available at Available at www.topuniversities.com Top 100 for the following subject areasTop 100 for the following subject areas

Arts & HumanitiesArts & Humanities Engineering & ITEngineering & IT Life Sciences & BioMedicineLife Sciences & BioMedicine Natural SciencesNatural Sciences Social SciencesSocial Sciences

World’s oldest universitiesWorld’s oldest universities Year on year resultsYear on year results

The ResultsThe Results



THE RESPONSETHE RESPONSETHE – QS World University RankingsTHE – QS World University Rankings



More work than writing the thingMore work than writing the thing In 2006 about 30 newspaper articles in In 2006 about 30 newspaper articles in

Mexico aloneMexico alone Interest from media, universities etc across Interest from media, universities etc across

Europe and AsiaEurope and Asia Significant influence on web traffic Significant influence on web traffic Less, but growing, interest from the USLess, but growing, interest from the US

ResponseResponse



Who told you that?Who told you that? Reject the whole ideaReject the whole idea Complain about their positionComplain about their position Think it is about rightThink it is about right Wonder how to do betterWonder how to do better

Types of responseTypes of response



THE FUTURETHE FUTURETHE – QS World University RankingsTHE – QS World University Rankings



Submit a broad range of quantitative and Submit a broad range of quantitative and qualitative data (including those we need for qualitative data (including those we need for the rankings) about your institution using the rankings) about your institution using our online interfaceour online interface

http://schools.qsnetwork.com Populate and enrich your profile on Populate and enrich your profile on

www.topuniversities.com Educate visitors on other aspects of your Educate visitors on other aspects of your

institutioninstitution

Online DatabaseOnline Database



1.1. Central Statistics Agency/DepartmentCentral Statistics Agency/Department e.g. HESA (UK), NCES (US)e.g. HESA (UK), NCES (US)

2.2. Direct contact with institutionDirect contact with institution3.3. Data available on institution’s own websiteData available on institution’s own website4.4. Data from previous yearData from previous year

If sourced via method 1 or 2If sourced via method 1 or 2

5.5. Third party dataThird party data e.g. World of Learninge.g. World of Learning

6.6. ““Smart” AverageSmart” Average National or regional, may exclude outliersNational or regional, may exclude outliers Scaled based on available dataScaled based on available data

Data Validation HierarchyData Validation Hierarchy



Supply us with lists of employer contacts for Supply us with lists of employer contacts for the recruiter reviewthe recruiter review Exclusive single use onlyExclusive single use only Benefit your institution in recruiter reviewBenefit your institution in recruiter review Improve the overall strength of recruiter reviewImprove the overall strength of recruiter review

Recruiter ReviewRecruiter Review



20072007 Korea, Japan, Thailand, Philippines, Netherlands, Hong Kong, Korea, Japan, Thailand, Philippines, Netherlands, Hong Kong,

India, Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, India, Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Korea, Malaysia, Iran, US (NAFSA), UK, Hong Kong (APPLE), ChinaKorea, Malaysia, Iran, US (NAFSA), UK, Hong Kong (APPLE), China

2008 (planned to date)2008 (planned to date) UK, Ireland, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Taiwan, Korea, UK, Ireland, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Taiwan, Korea,

US, Australia, BelgiumUS, Australia, Belgium

Broadening EngagementBroadening Engagement



Recruiter Review BreakdownRecruiter Review Breakdown Preview Access to Recruiter SurveyPreview Access to Recruiter Survey Academic Sign Up FacilityAcademic Sign Up Facility Subject FocusesSubject Focuses Personalised RankingsPersonalised Rankings Innovation ShowcaseInnovation Showcase Engagement DatabaseEngagement Database Entry Requirements TranslatorEntry Requirements Translator PhD Matching EnginePhD Matching Engine

Coming Soon!Coming Soon!



Thank YouThank You

Ben SowterBen [email protected]@qsnetwork.com

Documents

In association with: Times Higher - QS World University Rankings Methodology & Europe’s Performance Ben Sowter Head of Research