Ken Lyen's Home
Ken's Links
London Revisited 2000
Letter from London 2006
Singapore Musical Theatre
Making the Grade
Writing Musicals
Musicals from Movies
Fred Ebb
The Story of Chess
Mama Mia
Bad Vibrations
Chestnuts 2003
Chestnuts 2004
Chestnuts 2005
Incubating New Musicals
List of Musicals on Film
Is Musical Theatre Dead?
Is Classical Music Dead?
Is Poetry Dead?
Why Read Poetry?
New Words
Nothing's Wrong
Hippie Dictionary
Singlish Dictionary
Blog Dictionary
Best of the Best
English Spoke
Reading in Decline
Too Many Books
Magic of Reading
Pablo Neruda
Graphic Novels
Writers Bar
Lost For Words
Encyclopedia Wars
Library in Cyberspace
The Bridge
Growing A Film Industry
Great Levellers
Rote Rites and Rongs
Beautiful Minds
Create Talented Individuals?
Rise of the Creative Class
Perchance to Dream
Children's EQ
Gifted Education
Gifted Children
Mozart Effect
Confucius and Multiple Intelligences
Predicting Your Future
Mistyping Personality
Messy Homes
Does Age Matter?
Too Young for Philosophy?
Philosopher for Hire
Deconstructing Derrida
University Quotas
Ranking Universities
University Ranking Continued
The Future of Universities
If Thine Eye Offends Thee
If It Ain't Broke
New Exams for Old!
Too Many Test
The Sincerest Form of Flattery
Childhood Memories
Signs of Success
Follow Your Dreams
First Impressions
Handphone Etiquette
Handphones Silenced
Apple Of My i
Sex and the Media
The Greeks
Geographic Clangers
Domino Theory
Hello Kitty
Heels on Wheels
What a Racket!
Potty Training
Skip to the Loo
Corporal Punishment
Is Modern Art Rubbish?
Mona Lisa Grins
Sunday in the Park
Vision and Art
Spam Glorious Spam!
Humble Pie
Sour Grapes?
Murphy's Law Calculator
Perfect Search
False Logic
Noah's Ark
Who Discovered America?
Palaces of Dictators
Joys of Stress
Games Academics Play
Virtual Reality Treatmemt
Autistic Underconnectivity
Asperger Syndrome
Pay Attention!
Attention Deficit
Speech Delay
Almost Normal
Prozac Nation
Gilles de la Tourette
Singapore Medicine
Virtual Dissection
War Against Malaria
Into the Frying Pan
Back to Methuselah
Poetic Medicine
Far Eastern Economic Review
History of the Singapore Musical
My Research
Singapore Idle
Best Countries
Brain Drain
Greatest Happiness
Remaking Singapore
Singapore Nobel Prize
Singapore MRT Map
National Day
Caste System
Doctors' Fees
Leadership and Teambuilding
Doctor Do-Much
Play it Again, Doc
A Dose of Music
Prescription for the Heart
Multiple Personality
Fly By Night
Rape of Nanking
Iris Chang
Anne Frank
Angela's Ashes
The Notebook
Hollywood Insider
Fahrenheit 9/11 Pirates
The Front
The Barbarian Invasions
Les Choristes
The Return
Road Home
Farewell My Concubine
So You Want to be a Nurse
School House Rockz
Makan Place
e-mail me

Ranking Universities


Ranking Universities

by Kenneth Lyen

We seem to have a never-ending fondness for ranking. We rank schools, we rank hotels, we rank the cost of living in different countries, and so on. There is something about the competitive streak in human nature that makes us want to compare ourselves with everybody else.

The Shanghai Jiao Tong University ranked the top 500 universities in the world, and published their findings in September 2004. Their methodology involved looking at four main criteria:
a) The quality of education (alumni winning Nobel or Field Prizes)
b) The quality of the faculty (staff with Nobel or Field Prizes, highly cited researchers)
c) The research output (articles published in top journals eg. Nature, Science, etc.; articles cited in Science or Social Science Citation Indices)
d) The size of institution (academic performance with respect to size of institution)

The Times Higher Education Supplement published its ranking of the top 200 universities in the world on 5 November 2004. They explained that their ranking was based on:
a) Peer Review (by 1,300 academics in 88 countries)
b) Research impact (calculated by measuring citations per faculty member)
c) International orientation (the number of international students and faculty members)

Ranking of the World’s Top Ten Universities 2004:
Times Higher Education Supplement (THES)
1. Harvard University
2. University of California, Berkeley
3. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
4. California Institute of Technology
5. Oxford University
6. Cambridge University
7. Stanford University
8. Yale University
9. Princeton University
10. ETH Zurich

Shanghai Jiao Tong University (SJTU)
1. Harvard University
2. Stanford University
3. Cambridge University
4. University of California, Berkeley
5. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
6. California Institute of Technology
7. Princeton University
8. Oxford University
9. Columbia University
10. Chicago University

The criteria used for ranking must perforce be arbitrary. Thus, not unnaturally, people’s eyebrows will be raised when they see this list. And one can forever debate whether or not this university is really better than that. Which ranking list is the more accurate? I don't know.

Let us look at some of the general problems associated with ranking. The SJTU survey places an inordinate weight on individual achievements. For example, Nobel and Field Prizewinners will greatly influence a university’s ranking. The prizes are usually awarded long after the research has been completed. This will unfairly discriminate against newer universities.

The THES analysis relies on peer review quite heavily. Unfortunately this tends to be very subjective. The older universities would tend to have an advantage because usually they would have a number of famous professors, many of whom have written books used by undergraduates and postgraduate students. Newer universities would be disadvantaged by this system.

Both the SJTU and THES look at the impact of research publications by counting the number of citations in Science and Social Science Citation indices. In general scientists are more prolific in their publications, and they tend to quote their own previous publications more frequently. Hence the use of citation frequency is probably valid when it comes to Science and Social Science publications. But it is not so useful when it comes to the humanities.

One must not forget that most scientific publications are in English, and therefore non-English publications tend to be less frequently cited. Universities that teach and publish in languages other than English may tend to be ranked lower as a result.

Other parameters used to rank universities include the faculty-to-student ratio. This will favor the better endowed universities with greater funding for staff. Another index is the degree of internationality of the student and faculty population.

Although not ostensibly used by the SJTU and THES, other ranking systems look at the ratio of applicants per place available, or the minimum requirements needed to gain admission. This is an assessment on the difficulty of entry. Again this is not a very useful guide, because the reasons why students choose one university rather than another are often quite idiosyncratic.

My major concerns about university league tables are several. First, they have not been validated statistically. In earlier surveys, it has been found that the differences between institutions are statistically insignificant. Secondly, the use of the various indicators, and their weighting, are arbitrary. Minor changes in weighting can result in major changes in ranking. Thirdly, league tables can give an institution an undeservedly high or low reputation. They may skew students and their parents’ perception of a university, so that they might not apply for a perfectly good university, in favor of another. Fourthly, it has been known in the past that some universities changed their policies so that they could be better ranked in such surveys.

Related to ranking of universities is the question as to what these institutions are trying to achieve. What are their aims? Succinctly, the purpose of a university is to preserve, advance and disseminate knowledge. For the undergraduate, the purpose of a university is to imbue the student with knowledge, tolerance and vision, and to create a lifelong sense of curiosity and a love of learning.

Unfortunately the assessment and ranking of universities does not really take all this into account. Ranking will continue nevertheless. One cynic said that the only beneficiaries of such university league tables are the top-ranked universities that will attract more students and therefore raise their fees, and newspapers that will sell more copies by writing about the ranking.

I think it is important for one to be aware of the shortcomings of university ranking tables. Best to have a good laugh, and forget about them promptly!

6 November 2004