TOPUNIVERSITIESWorldwide university rankings, guides & events

Undergraduate StudiesPostgraduate Studies JoinLogin Where to Study Universities Course Guides University Rankings Events QS Stars Student Info Forum & BlogTop of Form

Bottom of FormQS University Rankings: Asia MethodologyTuesday, May 13, 2014 at 1am79shares

Published annually since 2009, theQS University Rankings: Asiahighlights thetop universities in Asiaeach year. The methodology used to create the ranking is similar to that used for theQS World University Rankings, but with some additional indicators and adapted weightings.

This set of criteria, developed in consultation with regional experts and stakeholders, is designed to reflect key priorities for universities in Asia, drawing on as much available data as possible to facilitate meaningful comparison.The nine indicators used to compile the QS University Rankings: Asia are as follows:1.Academic reputation (30%)This is assessed using data from the large global survey of academics conducted by QS each year. The results of this survey, which asks academics to identify the leading universities in their own subject area, also feed into other rankings and reports produced by QS, including the QS World University Rankings and the QS World University Rankings by Subject. The aim is to give an indication of which universities hold the strongest reputation within the international academic community.2.Employer reputation (10%)This is again assessed using the results of a major international survey, this time of graduate employers, who are asked to identify the universities they perceive as producing the highest-quality graduates. The results of this survey are again used to inform a number of other QS research projects, reflecting the importance of employability and employment prospects for todays university applicants and graduates.3.Faculty/student ratio (20%)This indicator assesses the ratio of full-time academic staff members employed per student enrolled. The aim is to give an idea of how much contact time and academic support students at the institution may expect to receive.4.Citations per paper (15%)Using data from theScopusdatabase of research publications and citations, this indicator assesses the number of citations per research paper published, for each university. The aim is to give an idea of the impact each institutions research is having within the research community.5.Papers per faculty (15%)Also based on theScopusdatabase, this indicator assesses the number of research papers published per faculty member. This provides an indication of the overall research productivity of the university.6 & 7. Proportion of international faculty (2.5%) and proportion of international students (2.5%)The final four indicators all aim to assess how international each university is, reflecting the fact that internationalization is a major priority both for universities in Asia and in every world region. These two indicators, also used in the QS World University Rankings, assess the proportion of staff and students at the university who are classed as international.8 & 9. Proportion of inbound exchange students (2.5%) and proportion of outbound exchange students (2.5%)

These last two indicators, not used in the global ranking, offer additional insights into the internationalization activity at universities in Asia, assessing the relative size of each institutions inbound and outbound student exchange programs.To see which universities in Asia boast the strongest performance for each of these nine indicators, visit the latest edition of the QS University Rankings: Asia.See the latest QS University Rankings: Asia

Written byLaura Bridgestock79sharesThe editor of TopUniversities.com, Laura oversees the site's

http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings-articles/asian-university-rankings/qs-university-rankings-asiamethodology07 27 2015About QSQS links high achievers from the graduate, MBA and executive communities around the worldwith leading business schools, postgraduate departments at universities and with employers, through websites, events, e-guides and technical solutions.QS organises the largest business education events in the world, the QS World MBA Tour, the QS World Executive MBA Tour and the leading postgraduate studies information event, the QS World Grad School Tour, amongst an extensive product range including print and online publications and software solutions.QS is the leading global career and education network for ambitious professionals looking to further both their personal and professional development. With extensive contacts in the field of higher education, our industry expertise and experience gives us the flexibility to adapt to the needs of our prospective clients.At QS we believe that education and career decisions are too important to leave to chance, so we want to ensure candidates have access to the best tools and the best independent expert information before making a decision. Our ambition is to be the worlds leading media, events and software company in the higher education field.QS is the most trusted on-line and off-line meeting place for all candidates, schools and businesses for career and educational related decisions. We are a medium-sized company with over 150 staff in offices throughout the world: London, Paris, Singapore, Shanghai, Boston, Washington DC, Johannesburg and Alicante. A multi-cultural employee base, there are 26 languages spoken in the marketing department alone. The QS World MBA Tour travels to 70 cities in 39 countries enabling over 50,000 ambitious MBA candidates to meet face-to-face with high calibre business schools. The QS World Grad School Tour visits 47 cities in 31 countries bringing the complete A to Z of postgraduate programs to over 40,000 interested masters and PhD students.http://www.topuniversities.com/about-qs 07 27 2015QS World University RankingsFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaQS World University Rankings

EditorDanny Byrne

CategoriesHigher education

FrequencyAnnual

PublisherQuacquarelli Symonds Limited (QS)

CountryUnited Kingdom

LanguageEnglish

WebsiteQS World University Rankings

QS World University Rankingsis an annual publication ofuniversity rankingsby BritishQuacquarelli Symonds (QS) company. Previously collaborated withTimes Higher Education(THE) to publishTHE-QS World University Rankings, the publisher has released its own league tables since 2010 using the pre-existing methodology whileTHEhas adopted a new one withThomson ReutersasTimes Higher Education World University Rankings.[1]QS World University Rankingsnow comprises the global overall and subject rankings, along with three independent regional tables (Asia, Latin America, and BRICS) generated by different methodologies. It is regarded as one of the three most influential and widely observed university measures, together withAcademic Ranking of World UniversitiesandTimes Higher Education World University Rankings,[2][3][4][5]while, however, criticized for giving undue weight to subjective indicators and being commercialized.[6][7][8][9]Contents[hide] 1History 2Global rankings 2.1Overall 2.1.1Methodology 2.1.2Commentary 2.1.3Results 2.2Faculties and subjects 3Regional rankings 3.1Asia 3.2Latin America 3.3BRICS 4QS Stars 5Notes 6References 7External linksHistory[edit]The need for an international ranking of universities was highlighted in December 2003 inRichard Lamberts review of university-industry collaboration in Britain[10]forHM Treasury, the finance ministry of the United Kingdom. Amongst its recommendations were world university rankings, which Lambert said would help the UK to gauge the global standing of its universities.The idea for the rankings was credited in Ben Wildavsky's book,The Great Brain Race: How Global Universities are Reshaping the World,[11]to then-editor ofTimes Higher Education(THE),John O'Leary.THEchose to partner with educational and careers advice companyQuacquarelli Symonds(QS) to supply the data, appointing Martin Ince,[12]formerly deputy editor and later a contractor toTHE, to manage the project.Between 2004 and 2009, QS produced the rankings in partnership withTHE. In 2009,THEannounced they would produce their own rankings, theTimes Higher Education World University Rankings, in partnership withThomson Reuters.THEcited a weakness in the methodology of the original rankings,[13]as well as a perceived favoritism in the existing methodology for science over the humanities,[14]as one of the key reasons for the decision to split with QS.QS retained the intellectual property in the Rankings and the methodology used to compile them[citation needed]and continues to produce the rankings, now called the QS World University Rankings.[15]THEcreated a new methodology with Thomson Reuters, published as theTimes Higher Education World University Rankingsin September 2010.Global rankings[edit]Overall[edit]Methodology[edit]Methodology of QS World University Rankings[16]

IndicatorWeightingElaboration

Academic peer review 40%Based on an internal global academic survey

Faculty/Student ratio 20%A measurement of teaching commitment

Citations per faculty 20%A measurement of research impact

Employer reputation 10%Based on a survey on graduate employers

International student ratio 5%A measurement of the diversity of the student community

International staff ratio 5%A measurement of the diversity of the academic staff

QS publishes the rankings results in some media around the world, includingChosun Ilboin Korea. The first rankings produced by QS independently of THE, and using QS's consistent and original methodology, were released on September 8, 2010, with the second appearing on September 6, 2011.QS tried to design its rankings to look at a broad range of university activity.[17]Academic peer reviewThis is the most controversial part of the methodology. Using a combination of purchased mailing lists and applications and suggestions, this survey asks active academicians across the world about the top universities in fields they know about. QS has published the job titles and geographical distribution of the participants.[18]The 2011 rankings made use of responses from 33,744 people from over 140 nations in its Academic Peer Review, including votes from the previous two years rolled forward provided there was no more recent information available from the same individual. Participants can nominate up to 30 universities but are not able to vote for their own. They tend to nominate a median of about 20, which means that this survey includes over 500,000 data points.[18]In 2004, when the rankings first appeared, academic peer review accounted for half of a university's possible score. In 2005, its share was cut to 40 per cent because of the introduction of the Recruiter Review.Faculty student ratioThis indicator accounts for 20 per cent of a universitys possible score in the rankings. It is a classic measure used in various ranking systems as a surrogate for teaching commitment, but QS has admitted that it is less than satisfactory.[19]Citations per facultyCitations of published research are among the most widely used inputs to national and global university rankings. The QS World University Rankings used citations data from Thomson (now Thomson Reuters) from 2004 to 2007, and since then uses data from Scopus, part of Elsevier. The total number of citations for a five-year period is divided by the number of academicians in a university to yield the score for this measure, which accounts for 20 per cent of a universitys possible score in the Rankings.QS has explained that it uses this approach, rather than the citations per paper preferred for other systems, because it reduces the effect of biomedical science on the overall picture bio-medicine has a ferocious publish or perish culture. Instead QS attempts to measure the density of research-active staff at each institution. But issues still remain about the use of citations in ranking systems, especially the fact that the arts and humanities generate comparatively few citations.[20]QS has conceded the presence of some data collection errors regarding citations per faculty in previous years' rankings.[21]One interesting issue is the difference between the Scopus and Thomson Reuters databases. For major world universities, the two systems capture more or less the same publications and citations. For less mainstream institutions, Scopus has more non-English language and smaller-circulation journals in its database. But as the papers there are less heavily cited, this can also mean fewer citations per paper for the universities that publish in them.[20]This area has been criticized for undermining universities which do not use English as their primary language.[22]Citations and publications in a language different from English are harder to come across. The English language is the most internationalized language and therefore the most popular when citing.Recruiter reviewThis part of the ranking is obtained by a similar method to the Academic Peer Review, except that it samples recruiters who hire graduates on a global or significant national scale. The numbers are smaller 16,875 responses from over 130 countries in the 2011 Rankings and are used to produce 10 per cent of any universitys possible score. This survey was introduced in 2005 in the belief that employers track graduate quality, making this a barometer of teaching quality, a famously problematic thing to measure. University standing here is of special interest to potential students.[23]International orientationThe final ten per cent of a universitys possible score is derived from measures intended to capture their internationalism: five percent from their percentage of international students, and another five percent from their percentage of international staff. This is of interest partly because it shows whether a university is putting effort into being global, but also because it tells us whether it is taken seriously enough by students and academics around the world for them to want to be there.[24]Commentary[edit]ReceptionSeveral universities in the UK and the Asia-Pacific region have commented on the rankings positively. Vice-Chancellor of New Zealand'sMassey University, Professor Judith Kinnear, says that the Times Higher Education-QS ranking is a "wonderful external acknowledgement of several University attributes, including the quality of its research, research training, teaching and employability." She said the rankings are a true measure of a university's ability to fly high internationally: "The Times Higher Education ranking provides a rather more and more sophisticated, robust and well rounded measure of international and national ranking than either New Zealand'sPerformance Based Research Fund(PBRF) measure or theShanghai rankings."[25]In September 2012 the British newspaperThe Independentdescribed the QS World University Rankings as being "widely recognised throughout higher education as the most trusted international tables".[26]Martin Ince,[12]chair of the Advisory Board for the Rankings, points out that their volatility has been reduced since 2007 by the introduction of the Z-score calculation method and that over time, the quality of QS's data gathering has improved to reduce anomalies. In addition, the academic and employer review are now so big that even modestly ranked universities receive a statistically valid number of votes. QS has published extensive data[27]on who the respondents are, where they are, and the subjects and industries to which the academicians and employers respectively belong.CriticismsMany are concerned with the use or misuse of survey data.Since the split fromTimes Higher Education, further concerns about the methodology QS uses for its rankings have been brought up by several experts. Simon Marginson, professor of higher education at University of Melbourne and a member of the THE editorial board, in the article "Improving Latin American universities' global ranking" for University World News on 10 June 2012, said: "I will not discuss the QS ranking because the methodology is not sufficiently robust to provide data valid as social science."[28]In an article for the New Statesman entitled "The QS World University Rankings are a load of old baloney",David Blanchflower, a leadinglabour economist, said: "This ranking is complete rubbish and nobody should place any credence in it. The results are based on an entirely flawed methodology that underweights the quality of research and overweights fluff... The QS is a flawed index and should be ignored."[29]In an article titledThe Globalisation of College and University Rankingsand appearing in the January/February 2012 issue ofChangemagazine, Philip Altbach, professor of higher education at Boston College and also a member of the THE editorial board, said: The QS World University Rankings are the most problematical. From the beginning, the QS has relied on reputational indicators for half of its analysis it probably accounts for the significant variability in the QS rankings over the years. In addition, QS queries employers, introducing even more variability and unreliability into the mix. Whether the QS rankings should be taken seriously by the higher education community is questionable."[30]The QS World University Rankings have been criticised by many for placing too much emphasis on peer review, which receives 40 percent of the overall score. Some people have expressed concern about the manner in which the peer review has been carried out.[6]In a report,[31]Peter Wills from the University of Auckland, New Zealand wrote of theTimes Higher Education-QS World University Rankings:But we note also that this survey establishes its rankings by appealing to university staff, even offering financial enticements to participate (see Appendix II). Staff are likely to feel it is in their greatest interest to rank their own institution more highly than others. This means the results of the survey and any apparent change in ranking are highly questionable, and that a high ranking has no real intrinsic value in any case. We are vehemently opposed to the evaluation of the University according to the outcome of such PR competitions.QS points out that no survey participant, academic or employer, has been offered a financial incentive to respondents. And academics cannot vote for their own institution.THES-QS introduced several changes in methodology in 2007 which were aimed at addressing these criticisms,[32]the ranking has continued to attract criticisms. In an article[33]in the peer-reviewed BMC Medicine authored by several scientists from the US and Greece, it was pointed out:If properly performed, most scientists would consider peer review to have very good construct validity; many may even consider it the gold standard for appraising excellence. However, even peers need some standardized input data to peer review.The Timessimply asks eachexpert to list the 30 universities they regard as top institutions of their area without offering input data on any performance indicators. Research products may occasionally be more visible to outsiders, but it is unlikely that any expert possesses a global view of the inner workings of teaching at institutions worldwide. Moreover, the expert selection process ofThe Timesis entirely unclear. The survey response rate among the selected experts was only