QS Ranking Methodologies

Transcription

1 QS Ranking Methodologies Item Type info:eu-repo/semantics/conferenceobject Authors Newman, Janson Publisher Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC) Rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openaccess Download date 06/10/ :19:33 Link to Item

2 La Importancia de los Rankings Universitarios Globales 19 de abril de 2018

3 3 2

4 33 To enable MOTIVATED PEOPLE around the to achieve their POTENTIAL by fostering INTERNATIONAL MOBILITY EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT and CAREER DEVELOPMENT 33

5 34 FOCUSED RANKINGS BY REGION BY SUBJECT BY CONTEXT BY ASPECT BY TYPE QS Global 250 Business Schools CLASSIFICATIONS QS Distance/Online MBA Rankings QS EMBA Rankings 34

6 MUCH MORE THAN JUST RANKINGS QS Stars QS Analytics Consulting Leadershi p International office Market Insight Move On QS Stars Admissions Marketing QS Move In Events & Fairs QS Enrolment Solution TU.com Branding QS Star 35

7 IDENTITY VS IMAGE 36

8 37 IMPACTPORTFOLIO

9 38 POLICY INFLUENCE 38

10 GALLERY Narendra Modi Prime Minister India 2004-present Sheikh Mohamed Ruler of Dubai 2006-present Dominic Barton Managing Director McKinsey & Company 2009-present Pranab Mukherjee President India

11 ALEXA TRAFFIC RANKING QS THE WEB ARWU 3,865 7,817 31,005 42,143 UPDATED

12 41 41

13 42 DAVID EASTWOOD Vice-Chancellor University of Birmingham 2009-present Though of course we recognize limitations of all league table methodologies, we greatly value QS for the clarity and quality of the data you use and for the stability which enables us to see and understand trends over time. This, we think, gives your rankings a comparative advantage and considerable authority. 42

14 43 These rankings consolidate London s position as the education capital of the world. Nowhere else will you find such a critical mass of top universities within just a few miles of each other, all providing an excellent education and producing graduates who go on to be leaders in their fields. I m proud to say that London universities are at the forefront of teaching and research BORIS JOHNSON Mayor of London

15 GLOBAL UNIVERSITY RANKINGS ARWU/Shanghai 2 Webometrics 3 QS 4 4icu 5 NTU/HEEACT 6 Leiden 7 URAP 8 SCImago R R R R R R R 9 THE 10 Trendence/Emerging 11 RUR R R R 12 U-Multirank R E I Academic performance with league table Academic performance without league table Broad based league table Multidimensional ranking Employability based league table Web presence league table Retroactive Environmental Focus Innovation Focus UI GreenMetric E E E E E 14 CWUR 15 Youth Incorporated 16 nature INDEX 17 RankPro 18 US News 19 Reuters I I Source: Illuminate Consulting Group 44

16 45 SPOT THE DIFFERENCE Institutions Featured net increase 2016 net increase 2017 net increase ARWU QS THE (66%) Institutions featured in the top 500 of all three rankings 367 (73%) QS/ARWU 389 (78%) QS/THE 370 (74%) ARWU/THE Correlations Specific Ranks Presented ARWU 20% THE QS 25% 41% Volatility in Top ARWU QS THE Countries in Range 27 THE Top 100 Top QS ARWU QS ARWU QS THE 45

17 46 Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful GEORGE E.P. BOX Accidental Statistician

18 47 OUR APPROACH WORLD CLASS UNIVERSITY A UNIQUE LENS QS the only global ranking authority to consider it Central to the life goals of most prospective students An essential inclusion in every QS assessment 47

19 4 8

20 Consistent, simple methodology Stable results Discipline independent ACADEMIC REPUTATION EMPLOYER REPUTATION INT L FACULTY Language independent Low dependence on self-reporting FACULTY STUDENT CITATIONS PER FACULTY powered by INT L STUDENTS 49

21 METHODOLOGY QS World University Rankings Data Submission 30% Surveys 50% Indicators Academic Reputation 40% Employer Reputation 10% Citations per Faculty from Scopus Faculty Student Ratio 20% 20% Scopus Data 20% Proportion of International Students Proportion of International Faculty 5% 5% 50 50

22 : SIX YEAR CITATION WINDOW REBALANCED EMPLOYER INDICATOR ADJUSTED PRESENTED RANGES NEW TIMING AND LABELLING UNIVERSITIES NEWLY RANKED 51

23 2018 EDITION QS World University Rankings 70,000+ Academic Responses 40,000+ Employers Responses 4,300+ Institutions were considered 959 Overall ranked. 1.2 m+ papers indexed by the the Scopus/Elsevier bibliometric database were analysed 52 52

24 53 53

25 54 METHODOLOGY 54

26 INSTITUTIONAL DATA 55

27 INT L FACULTY FACULTY STUDENT INT L STUDENTS 56

28 RESEARCH 57

29 CITATIONS PER FACULTY powered by 58

30 2019 CYCLE RESEARCH PUBLICATION Papers Five years Citations Six years

31 60

32 NORMALIZATION 61

33 NORMALIZATION 62

34 63 CITATIONS PER FACULTY / 63

35 SURVEY DATA 64

36 ACADEMIC REPUTATION EMPLOYER REPUTATION 65

37 QS GLOBAL ACADEMIC SURVEY Personal Details & Job Classification Knowledge Specification Top Institutions Additional Information Name Institution Department Job Title & Classification Years in Academia Country they have most familiarity with. Region regional knowledge from three supersets: Americas; Asia, Australia & New Zealand; Europe, Middle East & Africa Broad Subject Area: one or more in which they consider their expertise is. Arts & Humanities Engineering & Technology Life Sciences & Medicine Natural Sciences Social Sciences. Specific Subject: respondents are asked to select up to two specific subjects (fields) that best define their academic expertise Domestic: Respondents are asked to identify up to ten domestic institutions they consider best for research in each of the Broad Subject Areas selected as areas of expertise. International: Respondents are asked to identify up to thirty international institutions they consider best for research in each of the Broad Subject Areas selected as areas of expertise. The list consists solely of institutions from the region(s) with which they express familiarity Own institution, if it would otherwise be included, is excluded from the presented lists. Used to gather additional information from respondents, such a: Feedback on institutions they expected to choose as strong in the subject areas, but didn t find Familiarity with MOOCs Exciting research developments recently. 66

38 85:15 International : domestic 67

39 QS GLOBAL EMPLOYER SURVEY Personal Details & Job Classification Knowledge Specification Top Institutions Additional Information Name Company and Size Industry Department Job Title Extent of recruitment responsibilities. Country they have most familiarity with. Region regional knowledge (US and Canada, Latin America, Western and Northern Europe, Central and Eastern Europe, Middle East and Africa, Asia-Australia and New Zealand) Domestic: Respondents are asked to identify up to ten domestic universities they consider producing the best graduates. International: Respondents are asked to identify up to thirty international universities they consider producing the best graduates. Which disciplines and Engineering specializations does the company prefer to recruit from. Feedback on universities they expected to choose, but didn t find. Questions related to Top Business Schools and Recruitment details from MBA hires. 68

40 50:50 International : domestic 69

41 70 1,635 UNIVERSITIES EXTENDED REACH BY REGION 70

42 7 1 Selina Griffin Rankings Manager

43 72 WUR VS LATIN AMERICA 72

44 73 LATIN AMERICA - METHODOLOGY 73

45 74 STAFF WITH PHD 10% 74

46 75 PAPERS PER FACULTY 5% 75

47 76 CITATIONS PER PAPER 10% 76

48 77 WEB IMPACT 5% 77

49 7 8 Highlights

50 REGIONAL TRENDS IN RANKED LATIN AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS Number of ranked Country institutions Brazil 83 Mexico 65 Colombia 53 Chile 40 Argentina 39 Peru 18 Ecuador 12 Dominican Republic 11 Venezuela 9 Panama 7 Number of ranked Country institutions Bolivia 6 Cuba 6 Costa Rica 6 El Salvador 6 Paraguay 5 Uruguay 4 Puerto Rico 4 Honduras 4 Guatemala 4 Nicaragua 3 79

51 REGIONAL TRENDS IN RANKED LATIN AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS Institution 2018 Rank 2017 Rank Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería Peru 129= 172 Universidad Nacional Agraria la Molina Universidad del Pacifico Universidad de Lima Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas* Universidad San Ignacio de Loyola Universidad Nacional del Altiplano Universidad Privada del Norte* PERU 80

52 REGIONAL TRENDS IN RANKED LATIN AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS Institution 2018 Rank 2017 Rank Chang e PUCP - Pontificia Universidad Católica de Perú Universidad Cayetano Heredia Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería Peru >2 bands Universidad del Pacifico bands Universidad Agraria La Molina >40 Universidad de Lima bands Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas* band Universidad San Martín de Porres bands Universidad Nacional del Altiplano Universidad Privada del Norte* PERU Universidad San Ignacio de Loyola band 81

53 REGIONAL TRENDS IN RANKED LATIN AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS Largely increases in Employer Reputation. Faculty : Student ratio is varied across the board with some universities seeing improvements and some falling in this indicator but the data set is not complete with some universities showing old data Citations per Paper is poor but most universities have increased in Papers Per Faculty Falls in Staff with PhD PERU 82

54 Institution Name Country/ Territory RANK RANK rank display rank display2 institution country code PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE CL 2 2 UNIVERSIDADE ESTADUAL DE CAMPINAS (UNICAMP) BR 3 1 UNIVERSIDADE DE SÃO PAULO (USP) BR 4 4 UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO (UNAM) MX 5 7 TECNOLÓGICO DE MONTERREY (ITESM) MX 6 6 UNIVERSIDAD DE CHILE CL 7 5 UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO DE JANEIRO BR 8 8 UNIVERSIDAD DE LOS ANDES COLOMBIA CO 9 11 UNIVERSIDAD DE BUENOS AIRES AR UNIVERSIDADE ESTADUAL PAULISTA "JÚLIO DE MESQUITA FILHO" BR

55 8 4

56 SUBJECT RANKINGS METHODOLOGY A typical h-index (Hirsch index or Hirsch number) for an academic in Physics will be far higher than that of someone in Sociology, for example. However, when working in a single discipline where differing characteristics by discipline are eliminated, they are more effective and bias is broadly eliminated. The h-index calculation is based on Scopus dataset which can only be classified by discipline at a journal, rather than article, level. In order to balance for the effects of this and focus on specialists, two h-indices are calculated: (h1) for all the papers that are attributable to the given subject (h2) for the papers that are only attributable to that subject These are aggregated with double weight given to h2. The results are then scaled and normalized using the same methods applied to the other indicators. 85

57 SUBJECT SENSITIVE WEIGHTINGS ACADEMIC EMPLOYER CITATIONS H ARTS & HUMANITIES ANTHROPOLOGY ARCHAEOLOGY ARCHITECTURE ART & DESIGN ENGLISH HISTORY LINGUISTICS LANGUAGES PERFORMING ARTS PHILOSOPHY THEOLOGY ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY COMPUTER SCIENCE CHEMICAL ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEERING ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING MECHANICAL ENGINEERING MINING ENGINEERING LIFE SCIENCES & MEDICINE AGRICULTURE ANATOMY BIOLOGY DENTISTRY MEDICINE NURSING PHARMACY PSYCHOLOGY VETERINARY SCIENCE NATURAL SCIENCES CHEMISTRY EARTH SCIENCES ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES GEOGRAPHY MATHEMATICS MATERIALS SCIENCE PHYSICS SOCIAL SCIENCES & MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING & FINANCE BUSINESS COMMUNICATION DEVELOPMENT STUDIES ECONOMICS EDUCATION HOSPITALITY LAW POLITICS SOCIAL POLICY SOCIOLOGY SPORT STATISTICS 86

58 87

59 PRESENCE IN 56 COUNTRIES 88

60 Detailed methodology awards 1,000 points across 51 indicators in up to CORE CRITERIA 12 categories ADVANCED CRITERIA CHOOSE TWO TEACHING 6 indicators 150 INNOVATION 4 indicators 50 INCLUSIVENES S 4 indicators 50 CULTURE 4 indicators 50 SOCIAL RESPONSABILI TY 4 indicators 50 FACILITIES 6 indicators 100 EMPLOYABILI TY 3 indicators 150 EMPLOYTY 1000 RESEARCH 3 indicators 150 SPECIALIS T CRITERIA LEARNING ENVIRONMEN T CHOOSE ONE ONLINE/ DISTANCE 6 indicators 100 INTERNATIONAL 7 indicators 150 SUBJECT RANKING 2 indicators 200 PROGRAM STRENGTH 7 indicators

61 Thank you!

62 CONTÁCTENOS Web: Facebook: QSIntelligenceUnit Blog RSS: QSIU Blog LinkedIn: QS Quacquarelli Symonds. Jason Newman Vice President 91

63 La Importancia de los Rankings Universitarios Globales 19 de abril de 2018