QS World University Rankings

aesthetics  →
being  →
complexity  →
database  →
enterprise  →
ethics  →
fiction  →
history  →
internet  →
knowledge  →
language  →
licensing  →
linux  →
logic  →
method  →
news  →
perception  →
philosophy  →
policy  →
purpose  →
religion  →
science  →
sociology  →
software  →
truth  →
unix  →
wiki  →
essay  →
feed  →
help  →
system  →
wiki  →
critical  →
discussion  →
forked  →
imported  →
original  →
QS World University Rankings
[ temporary import ]
please note:
- the content below is remote from Wikipedia
- it has been imported raw for GetWiki

}}QS World University Rankings is an annual publication of university rankings by Quacquarelli Symonds (QS). Previously known as Times Higher Education–QS World University Rankings, the publisher had collaborated with Times Higher Education (THE) magazine to publish its international league tables from 2004 to 2009 before both started to announce their own versions. QS then chose to continue using the pre-existing methodology while Times Higher Education adopted a new methodology to create their rankings.The QS system now comprises the global overall and subject rankings (which name the world's top universities for the study of 48 different subjects and five composite faculty areas), alongside five independent regional tables (Asia, Latin America, Emerging Europe and Central Asia, the Arab Region, and BRICS).WEB, Asian University Rankings - QS Asian University Rankings vs. QS World University Rankings™,weblink The methodology differs somewhat from that used for the QS World University Rankings..., 2013-06-10,weblink" title="">weblink 2013-06-06, no, Being the only international ranking to have received International Ranking Expert Group (IREG) approval,WEB, IREG Ranking Audit,weblink IREG Observatory on Academic Ranking and Excellence, International Ranking Expert Group (IREG), 14 September 2016,weblink" title="">weblink 2016-10-29, no, the QS ranking is viewed as one of the three most-widely read university rankings in the world, along with Academic Ranking of World Universities and Times Higher Education World University Rankings.NEWS,weblink University rankings: which world university rankings should we trust?, The Telegraph, 2015, 27 January 2015, It is a remarkably stable list, relying on long-term factors such as the number of Nobel Prize-winners a university has produced, and number of articles published in Nature and Science journals. But with this narrow focus comes drawbacks. China's priority was for its universities to "catch up" on hard scientific research. So if you're looking for raw research power, it's the list for you. If you're a humanities student, or more interested in teaching quality? Not so much.,weblink" title="">weblink 2015-01-26, no, NEWS,weblink New world university ranking puts Harvard back on top, Ariel Zirulnick, The Christian Science Monitor, Those two, as well as Shanghai Jiao Tong University, produce the most influential international university rankings out there, 2012-09-16,weblink" title="">weblink 2013-11-04, no, NEWS, Top schools don't always get top marks, Indira Samarasekera & Carl Amrhein, The Edmonton Journal,weblink There are currently three major international rankings that receive widespread commentary: The Academic World Ranking of Universities, the QS World University Rankings and the Times Higher Education Rankings., yes,weblink" title="">weblink October 3, 2010, WEB,weblink The State of the Rankings, Inside Higher Ed, Philip G. Altbach, 11 November 2010, 27 January 2015, The major international rankings have appeared in recent months — the Academic Ranking of World Universities, the QS World University Rankings, and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE).,weblink 2014-12-19, no, However, it has been criticized for its overreliance on subjective indicators and reputation surveys, which tend to fluctuate over the years.NEWS,weblink Strength and weakness of varsity rankings, 2016-09-14, NST Online, 2018-03-29, en,weblink 2018-03-30, no, NEWS,weblink The State of the Rankings {{!, Inside Higher Ed|access-date=2018-03-29|language=en|archive-url=|archive-date=2018-07-11|dead-url=no|df=}}WEB,weblink Methodology of QS rankings comes under scrutiny,, 2016-04-29,weblink 2016-07-01, no, WEB,weblink Competition and controversy in global rankings - University World News,, 2016-04-29,weblink" title="">weblink 2016-05-05, no, Concern also exists regarding the global consistency and integrity of the data used to generate QS ranking results.WEB,weblink International university rankings: For good or ill?, Bekhradnia, Bahram, Higher Education Policy Institute,weblink" title="">weblink 2017-02-15, no, NEWS,weblink Academic Ethics: To Rank or Not to Rank?, 2017-07-12, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 2018-03-29,weblink 2018-03-30, no, NEWS,weblink QS ranking downright shady and unethical, 2017-06-09, The Online Citizen, 2018-03-29, en-GB,weblink 2018-03-30, no,


A perceived need for an international ranking of universities for UK purposes was highlighted in December 2003 in Richard Lambert's review of university-industry collaboration in BritainLambert Review of Business-University Collaboration {{webarchive |url= |date=October 19, 2011 }} (weblink" title="">since archived) for HM 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,Princeton University Press, 2010 to then-editor of Times Higher Education (THE), John O'Leary. THE chose to partner with educational and careers advice company Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) to supply the data, appointing Martin Ince,WEB,weblink Martin Ince Communications, Martin Ince Communications, 31 May 2015,weblink" title="">weblink 2014-12-20, no, formerly deputy editor and later a contractor to THE, to manage the project.Between 2004 and 2009, QS produced the rankings in partnership with THE. In 2009, THE announced they would produce their own rankings, the Times Higher Education World University Rankings, in partnership with Thomson Reuters. THE cited an asserted weakness in the methodology of the original rankings,MAGAZINE, Mroz, Ann,weblink Leader: Only the best for the best, Times Higher Education, 2010-09-16,weblink" title="">weblink 2010-08-07, no, as well as a perceived favoritism in the existing methodology for science over the humanities,WEB, Baty, Phil,weblink Views: Ranking Confession, Inside Higher Ed, 2010-09-10, 2010-09-16,weblink" title="">weblink 2010-07-15, no, as two of the key reasons for the decision to split with QS.QS retained intellectual property in the prior rankings and the methodology used to compile them{{Citation needed|date=September 2010}} and continues to produce rankings based on that methodology, which are now called the QS World University Rankings.JOURNAL,weblink Aisha, Labi, The Chronicle of Higher Education, London, UK, Times Higher Education Releases New Rankings, but Will They Appease Skeptics?, 2010-09-15, 2010-09-16, THE created a new methodology with Thomson Reuters, and published the first Times Higher Education World University Rankings in September 2010.

Global rankings


Methodology{|style"text-align:center; float:left; margin-right:2em;" class"wikitable"

weblink 2015-04-29, no, ! Indicator !! Weighting !! Elaboration |
  • 40%
Based on an internal global academic survey|
  • 20%
A measurement of teaching commitment|
  • 20%
A measurement of research impact|
  • 10%
Based on a survey on graduate employers|
  • 5%
A measurement of the diversity of the student community|
  • 5%|A measurement of the diversity of the academic staff
QS publishes the rankings results in the world's media and has entered into partnerships with a number of outlets, including The Guardian in the United Kingdom, and Chosun Ilbo in 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 designed its rankings in order to assess performance according to what it believes to be key aspects of a university's mission: teaching, research, nurturing employability, and internationalisation.WEB,weblink MS and MBA in USA, MS MBA in USA, 31 May 2015,weblink" title="">weblink 2015-04-18, no, Academic peer reviewThis is the most controversial part of the methodology{{weasel inline|date=February 2016}}{{Citation needed|date=February 2016}}. Using a combination of purchased mailing lists and applications and suggestions, this survey asks active academicians across the world about the top universities in their specialist fields. QS has published the job titles and geographical distribution of the participants.The 2017/18 rankings made use of responses from 75,015 people from over 140 nations for its Academic Reputation indicator, including votes from the previous five 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. The average respondent possesses 20.4 years of academic experience, while 81% of respondents have over a decade of experience in the academic world.WEB,weblink QS Intelligence Unit - 2018 Academic Survey Responses,, 29 June 2017,weblink" title="">weblink 2017-07-15, no, WEB,weblink 2011 Academic Survey Responses, 12 September 2013, yes,weblink" title="">weblink February 6, 2012, 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 Employer Reputation Survey.Faculty student ratioThis indicator accounts for 20 per cent of a university's possible score in the rankings. It is a classic measure used in various ranking systems as a proxy for teaching commitment, but QS has admitted that it is less than satisfactory.QS Intelligence Unit | Faculty Student Ratio {{webarchive |url= |date=October 12, 2011 }}. Retrieved on 2013-08-12.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 has used data from Scopus, part of Elsevier. The total number of citations for a five-year period is divided by the number of academics in a university to yield the score for this measure, which accounts for 20 per cent of a university's 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.QS Intelligence Unit | Citations per Faculty {{webarchive |url= |date=October 28, 2011 }}. Retrieved on 2013-08-12.However, since 2015, QS have made methodological enhancements designed to remove the advantage institutions specializing in the Natural Sciences or Medicine previously received. This enhancement is termed faculty area normalization, and ensures that an institution's citations count in each of QS's five key Faculty Areas is weighted to account for 20% of the final citations score.WEB,weblink Archived copy, 2016-09-09,weblink" title="">weblink 2015-09-11, bot: unknown, QS has conceded the presence of some data collection errors regarding citations per faculty in previous years' rankings.WEB,weblink University Ranking Watch, Richard Holmes, 31 May 2015,weblink" title="">weblink 2015-03-16, no, 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.This area has been criticized for undermining universities which do not use English as their primary language."Global university rankings and their impact {{Webarchive|url= |date=2012-08-26 }},". "European University Association". Retrieved 3, September, 2012 Citations and publications in a language different from English are harder to come across. The English language is the most internationalized language and therefore is also the most popular when citing.Employer 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 – 40,455 responses from over 130 countries in the 2016 Rankings – and are used to produce 10 per cent of any university's 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, and acknowledging this was the impetus behind the inaugural QS Graduate Employability Rankings, published in November 2015.QS Intelligence Unit | Employer Reputation {{webarchive|url= |date=August 24, 2016 }}. Retrieved on 2018-05-03.WEB,weblink QS Intelligence Unit - QS Graduate Employability Rankings,, 29 June 2017,weblink" title="">weblink 2017-07-12, no, International orientationThe final ten per cent of a university's 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.QS Intelligence Unit | International Indicators {{webarchive |url= |date=October 24, 2011 }}. Retrieved on 2013-08-12.


In September 2015, both The Guardian and The Daily Mail referred to the QS World University Rankings as "the most authoritative of their kind".WEB, Weale, Sally, British universities slip down in global rankings,weblink The Guardian, The Guardian, 15 September 2016,weblink 2016-09-10, no, WEB, Robinson, Julian, American universities take the top THREE places in the world rankings: MIT crowned the best just ahead of Harvard and Stanford,weblink The Daily Mail, The Daily Mail, 15 September 2016,weblink" title="">weblink 2016-10-11, no, WEB, Kich, Martin, U.S. Higher Education News for September 15, 2015,weblink Academe Blog, Martin Kich, 15 September 2016,weblink 2016-02-22, no, In 2016, Ben Sowter, Head of Research at the QS Intelligence Unit, was ranked in 40th position in Wonkhe's 2016 'Higher Education Power List'. The list enumerated what the organisation believed to be the 50 most influential figures in UK higher education.WEB, Leach, Mark, Higher Education Power List - 2016,weblink WonkHe, WonkHe, 19 September 2016,weblink" title="">weblink 2016-09-24, no, Several universities in the UK and the Asia-Pacific region have commented on the rankings positively. Vice-Chancellor of New Zealand's Massey 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's Performance Based Research Fund (PBRF) measure or the Shanghai rankings."Flying high internationally {{webarchive |url= |date=December 11, 2007 }}In September 2012 the British newspaper The Independent described the QS World University Rankings as being "widely recognised throughout higher education as the most trusted international tables".NEWS,weblink Cambridge loses top spot to Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 11 September 2012, The Independent, 11 September 2012,weblink" title="">weblink 2012-09-15, no, Angel Calderon, Principal Advisor for Planning and Research at RMIT University and member of the QS Advisory Board, spoke positively of the QS University Rankings for Latin America, saying that the "QS Latin American University Rankings has become the annual international benchmark universities use to ascertain their relative standing in the region". He further stated that the 2016/17 edition of this ranking demonstrated improved stability.WEB, Calderon, Angel, How to boost your university’s ranking position,weblink University World News, University World News, 14 September 2016,weblink" title="">weblink 2016-09-15, no,


Certain commentators have expressed concern about the use or misuse of survey data. However, QS's Intelligence Unit, responsible for compiling the rankings, state that the extent of the sample size used for their surveys mean that they are now "almost impossible to manipulate and very difficult for institutions to ‘game’". They also state that "over 62,000 academic respondents contributed to our 2013 academic results, four times more than in 2010. Independent academic reviews have confirmed these results to be more than 99% reliable". Furthermore, since 2013, the number of respondents to QS's Academic Reputation Survey has increased again. Their survey now makes use of nearly 75,000 academic peer reviews, making it "to date, the world’s largest aggregation of feeling in this [the global academic] community."WEB, 2016 Academic Survey Responses,weblink QS Intelligence Unit, QS Quacquarelli Symonds, 14 September 2016,weblink" title="">weblink 2016-08-24, no, WEB, Academic Reputation,weblink QS Intelligence Unit, QS Quacquarelli Symonds, 14 September 2016,weblink" title="">weblink 2016-09-20, no, WEB, Moran, Jack, Top 200 universities in the world 2016: the global trends,weblink The Guardian, The Guardian, 14 September 2016,weblink 2016-09-24, no, 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.WEB, Holmes, Richard,weblink So That's how They Did It,, 2006-09-05, 2010-09-16,weblink" title="">weblink 2010-08-08, no, In a report,WEB,weblink Response to Review of Strategic Plan by Peter Wills, 29 June 2017, yes,weblink" title="">weblink 6 April 2008, Peter Wills from the University of Auckland wrote of the Times Higher Education-QS World University Rankings: However, QS state that no survey participant, academic or employer, is offered a financial incentive to respond, while no academic is able to vote for their own institution. This renders this particular criticism invalid, as it is based on two incorrect premises: (1) that academics are currently financially incentivized to participate, and (2) that conflicts of interests are created by academics being able to vote for their own institution.Academicians previously criticized of the use of the citation database, arguing that it undervalues institutions which excel in the social sciences. Ian Diamond, former chief executive of the Economic and Social Research Council and now vice-chancellor of the University of Aberdeen and a member of the THE editorial board, wrote to Times Higher Education in 2007, saying:WEB,weblink Social sciences lose 1,, 2007-11-16, 2010-09-16,weblink" title="">weblink 2011-11-23, no, However, in 2015, QS's introduction of faculty area normalization ensured that QS's rankings no longer conferred an undue advantage or disadvantage upon any institution based on their particular subject specialisms. Correspondingly, the London School of Economics rose from 71st in 2014 to 35th in 2015 and 37th in 2016.WEB, Faculty Area Normalization – Technical Explanation,weblink QS Quacquarelli Symonds, 14 September 2016,weblink" title="">weblink 2015-09-11, no, Since the split from Times Higher Education in 2009, further concerns about the methodology QS uses for its rankings have been brought up by several experts.In October 2010, criticism of the old system came from Fred L. Bookstein, Horst Seidler, Martin Fieder and Georg Winckler in the journal Scientomentrics for the unreliability of QS's methods: }}In an article for the New Statesman entitled "The QS World University Rankings are a load of old baloney", David Blanchflower, a leading labour 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." WEB,weblink The QS World University Rankings are a load of old baloney, 31 May 2015,weblink" title="">weblink 2013-10-16, no, However, Martin Ince, 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 WEB,weblink QS Intelligence Unit - QS World University Rankings, 31 May 2015,weblink" title="">weblink 2016-01-06, no, on who the respondents are, where they are, and the subjects and industries to which the academicians and employers respectively belong.The QS Subject Rankings have been dismissed as unreliable by Brian Leiter, who points out that programmes which are known to be high quality, and which rank highly in the Blackwell rankings (e.g., the University of Pittsburgh) fare poorly in the QS ranking for reasons that are not at all clear.Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog: Guardian and "QS Rankings" Definitively Prove the Existence of the "Halo Effect" {{Webarchive|url= |date=2012-08-01 }}. (2011-06-05). Retrieved on 2013-08-12. However, the University of Pittsburgh was ranked in the number one position for Philosophy in the 2016 QS World University Rankings by Subject, while Rutgers University - another university that Leiter argued was given a strangely low ranking - was ranked number three in the world in the same ranking. An institution's score for each of QS's metrics can be found on the relevant ranking page, allowing those wishing to examine why an institution has finished in its final position to gain access to the scores that contributed to the overall rank.WEB, QS World University Rankings by Subject 2016 - Philosophy,weblink Top Universities, QS Quacquarelli Symonds, 15 September 2016,weblink 2016-09-12, no, In an article titled The Globalisation of College and University Rankings and appearing in the January/February 2012 issue of Change magazine, 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."WEB,weblink Change Magazine - January-February 2012, Change Magazine - Taylor & Francis, 13 January 2012, 31 May 2015,weblink" title="">weblink 2015-05-12, no, 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".WEB,weblink Improving Latin American universities' global ranking - University World News, 31 May 2015,weblink" title="">weblink 2013-06-15, no, QS's Intelligence Unit counter these criticisms by stating that "Independent academic reviews have confirmed these results to be more than 99% reliable".


The 2019 QS World University Rankings, published on June 6, 2018, was the fifteenth edition of the overall ranking. It confirmed Massachusetts Institute of Technology as the world's highest-ranked university for a seventh successive year. In doing so, MIT broke the record of consecutive number-one positions.{| class="sortable wikitable" border="1"group=note|Order shown in accordance with the latest result.|name=two}}!Institution!2012/13WEB,weblink QS World University Rankings (2012/13), 2012-09-20,weblink 2012-09-21, no, !2013/14WEB,weblink QS World University Rankings (2013/14), 2013-09-13,weblink 2016-10-21, no, !2014/15WEB,weblink QS World University Rankings (2014/15), 2014-09-17,weblink 2016-02-05, no, !2015/16WEB,weblink QS World University Rankings (2015/16), 2015-09-15,weblink 2016-12-19, no, !2016/17WEB,weblink QS World University Rankings (2016/17), 2016-09-09,weblink 2017-11-30, no, !2018WEB,weblink QS World University Rankings (2018), 2017-06-09,weblink 2017-06-09, no, !2019WEB,weblink QS World University Rankings (2019), 2018-06-07,weblink 2017-06-09, no, !2020WEB,weblink QS World University Rankings 2020, 2019-06-05, Top Universities, en, 2019-07-12, United States}} Massachusetts Institute of Technology1111111|1United States}} Stanford University15773222|2United States}} Harvard University3242333|3United Kingdom}} University of Oxford5656665|4United States}} California Institute of Technology101085544|5Switzerland}} Swiss Federal Institute of Technology13121298107|6United Kingdom}} University of Cambridge2323456|7United Kingdom}} University College London44577710|8United Kingdom}} Imperial College London6528988|9United States}} University of Chicago8911101099|10Singapore}} Nanyang Technological University47413913131112|11Singapore}} National University of Singapore25242212121511|11United States}} Princeton University910911111313|13United States}} Cornell University14151917161414|14United States}} University of Pennsylvania12131318181919|15China}} Tsinghua University48484725242517|16United States}} Yale University781015151615|17United States}} Columbia University11141422201816|18Switzerland}} École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne29191714141222|18United Kingdom}} The University of Edinburgh21171721192318|20United States}} University of Michigan17222330232120|21China}} Peking University44465741393830|22Japan}} The University of Tokyo30323139342823|22United States}} Johns Hopkins University16161416171721|24United States}} Duke University20232529242126|25Hong Kong}} The University of Hong Kong23262830272625|25United Kingdom}} The University of Manchester32333033293429|27United States}} University of California, Berkeley22252726282727|28Australia}} Australian National University24272519222024|29Canada}} University of Toronto19172034323128|29United States}} Northwestern University27293432262834|31Hong Kong}} Hong Kong University of Science and Technology33344028363037|32United Kingdom}} King's College London26191619212331|33Japan}} Kyoto University35353638373635|33Canada}} McGill University18212124303233|35United States}} University of California, Los Angeles31403727313332|35South Korea}} Seoul National University37353136353636|37Australia}} University of Melbourne36313342424139|38United States}} New York University43444153465243|39China}} Fudan University90887151434044|40South Korea}} KAIST>|40|41Australia}} University of Sydney39383745465042|42Australia}} University of New South Wales52524846494545|43United Kingdom}} London School of Economics69687135373538|44United States}} University of California, San Diego70635944403841|45Hong Kong}} Chinese University of Hong Kong40394651444649|46Australia}} The University of Queensland46434346514748|47United States}} Carnegie Mellon University49576562584746|48United Kingdom}} University of Bristol28302937414451|49Netherlands}} Delft University of Technology103958664625452|50

Young Universities

QS also releases the QS Top 50 under 50 Ranking annually to rank universities which have been established for under 50 years. These institutions are judged based on their positions on the overall table of the previous year.WEB,weblink QS Top 50 under 50, Quacquarelli Symonds, 2013-07-07,weblink 2013-06-15, no, From 2015, QS's "'Top 50 Under 50" ranking was expanded to include the world's top 100 institutions under 50 years of age, while in 2017 it was again expanded to include the world's top 150 universities in this cohort. In 2017, the table was topped by Nanyang Technological University of Singapore for the fourth consecutive year. The table is dominated by universities from the Asia-Pacific region, with the top six places taken by Asian institutions.WEB, Symonds, Quacquarelli, QS Top 50 Under 50,weblink Top Universities, Quacquarelli Symonds, 19 July 2017,weblink 2017-07-25, no,

Faculties and subjects

QS also ranks universities by academic discipline organized into 5 faculties, namely Arts & Humanities, Engineering & Technology, Life Sciences & Medicine, Natural Sciences and Social Sciences & Management. The methodology is based on surveying expert academics and global employers, and measuring research performance using data sourced from Elsevier's Scopus database. In the 2018 QS World University Rankings by Subject the world's best universities for the study of 48 different subjects are named. The two new subject tables added in the most recent edition are: Classics & Ancient History and Library & Information Management.The world's leading institution in 2018's tables in terms of most world-leading positions is Harvard University, which is number one for 14 subjects. Its longtime rankings rival, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is number one for twelve subjects.{| style="text-align=center" class="wikitable sortable" border="2.5"weblink Top Universities, QS Quacquarelli Symonds, 14 September 2016,weblink 2016-10-19, no, align=center Art & Humanities Engineering & Technology Life Sciences & Medicine Natural Sciences {{refnThe term "Natural Sciences" here actually refers to physical sciences since life sciences are also a branch of natural sciences.}} Social Sciences align=centerArchaeologyChemical Engineering Agriculture & ForestryChemistryAccounting & Finance align=centerArchitecture & Built Environment Civil & Structural Engineering Biological SciencesEarth & Marine SciencesAnthropology align=center Art & DesignComputer Science & Information SystemsDentistryEnvironmental SciencesBusiness & Management Studies align=centerClassics & Ancient HistoryElectrical & Electronic EngineeringMedicineGeographyCommunication & Media Studies align=centerEnglish Language & LiteratureMechanical, Aeronautical & Manufacturing EngineeringNursingMaterials ScienceDevelopment Studies align=centerHistoryMineral & Mining EngineeringPharmacy & PharmacologyMathematicsEconomics & Econometrics align=centerLinguisticsGeomatic EngineeringPsychologyPhysics & AstronomyEducation & Training align=centerModern LanguagesAnatomy & PhysiologyHospitality & Leisure Management align=centerPerforming Arts Veterinary ScienceLaw align=centerPhilosophy Library & Information Management align=centerTheology, Divinity, and Religious Studies Politics & International Studies align=center Social Policy & Administration align=center Sociology align=center Sports-related Subjects align=center Statistics & Operational Research

Regional rankings and other tables

QS Graduate Employability Rankings

In 2015, in an attempt to meet student demand for comparative data about the employment prospects offered by prospective or current universities, QS launched the QS Graduate Employability Rankings. The most recent installment, released for the 2017/18 academic year, ranks 500 universities worldwide. It is led by Stanford University, and features five universities from the United States in the top 10.WEB, Graduate Employability Rankings 2018,weblink Top Universities, QS Quacquarelli Symonds, 21 September 2017,weblink 2017-10-30, no, The unique methodology consists of five indicators, with three that do not feature in any other ranking.WEB, QS Graduate Employability Rankings 2018 Methodology,weblink QS Top Universities, QS Quacquarelli Symonds, 21 September 2017,weblink 2017-09-21, no, {| class="sortable wikitable" border="1"group=note||name=two}}!Institution!!data-sort-type="number"|2016WEB, QS Graduate Employability Rankings 2016,weblink 2017-09-21,weblink 2017-09-21, no, !!data-sort-type="number"|2017WEB, QS Graduate Employability Rankings 2017,weblink 21 September 2017,weblink 2017-10-02, no, !!data-sort-type="number"|2018WEB, QS Graduate Employability Rankings 2018,weblink 21 September 2017,weblink 2017-10-30, no, USA}} Stanford University111USA}} University of California, Los Angeles1152USA}} Harvard University3n/a3AUS}} The University of Sydney1444USA}} Massachusetts Institute of Technology225GBR}} University of Cambridge456AUS}} University of Melbournen/a117GBR}} University of Oxford688USA}} University of California, Berkeley899USA}} Princeton University9310


In 2009, QS launched the QS Asian University Rankings or QS University Rankings: Asia in partnership with The Chosun Ilbo newspaper in Korea to rank universities in Asia independently. The Ninth instalment, released for the 2017/18 academic year, ranks the 350 best universities in Asia, and is led by Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.NEWS,weblink QS University Rankings: Asia 2018, 2017-10-12, Top Universities, 2018-04-05, en,weblink 2016-06-16, no, These rankings use some of the same criteria as the world rankings, but there are changed weightings and new criteria. One addition is the criterion of incoming and outgoing exchange students. Accordingly, the performance of Asian institutions in the QS World University Rankings and the QS Asian University Rankings released in the same academic year are different from each other.{| class="sortable wikitable" border="1"group=note||name=two}}!Institution!!data-sort-type="number"|2009WEB, QS Asian University Rankings (2009),weblinkweblink 16 January 2011, 9 September 2016, !!data-sort-type="number"|2010WEB, QS Asian University Rankings (2010),weblinkweblink 20 May 2011, 9 September 2016, !!data-sort-type="number"|2011WEB, QS Asian University Rankings (2011),weblinkweblink 12 June 2012, 9 September 2016, !!data-sort-type="number"|2012WEB, QS Asian University Rankings (2012),weblinkweblink 2 June 2012, 9 September 2016, !!data-sort-type="number"|2013WEB, QS Asian University Rankings (2013),weblink 2013-06-12,weblink 2013-06-13, no, !!data-sort-type="number"|2014WEB, QS Asian University Rankings (2014),weblink 2014-05-24,weblink 2014-05-18, no, !!data-sort-type="number"|2015WEB, QS Asian University Rankings (2015),weblink 2015-06-12,weblink 2015-06-12, no, !!data-sort-type="number"|2016WEB, QS Asian University Rankings (2016),weblink 2016-06-14,weblink 2016-06-16, no, !!data-sort-type="number"|2018NEWS,weblink QS University Rankings: Asia 2018, 2017-10-12, Top Universities, 2018-04-05, en,weblink 2016-06-16, no, !2019NEWS,weblink QS University Rankings: Asia 2019, Top Universities, 2019-01-07, SIN}} National University of Singapore1033221112|1HKG}} University of Hong Kong112323225|2SIN}} Nanyang Technological University14181717107431|3CHN}} Tsinghua University1516161514141156|3CHN}} Peking University101213658799|5CHN}} Fudan University26242119232216117|6HKG}} Hong Kong University of Science and Technology421115543|7KOR}} KAIST71311762364|8HKG}} Chinese University of Hong Kong2455766810|9KOR}} Seoul National University86644481011|10

Latin America

The QS Latin American University Rankings or QS University Rankings: Latin America were launched in 2011. They use academic opinion (30%), employer opinion (20%), publications per faculty member, citations per paper, academic staff with a PhD, faculty/student ratio and web visibility (10 per cent each) as measures.WEB,weblink Methodology (QS University Rankings – Latin America), Quacquarelli Symonds, 12 August 2014,weblink" title="">weblink 2014-07-29, yes, The 2016/17 edition of the QS World University Rankings: Latin America ranks the top 300 universities in the region. The Universidade de São Paulo retained its status as the region's best university.WEB,weblink Top Universities, QS World University Rankings: Latin America, QS Quacquarelli Symonds, 14 September 2016,weblink 2016-09-13, no, {| class="wikitable sortable"group=note||name=two}}!Institution !! data-sort-type="number"|2013WEB, QS Latin American University Rankings (2013),weblink 2017-03-10,weblink 2017-02-14, no, !! data-sort-type="number"|2014WEB, QS Latin American University Rankings (2014),weblink 2017-03-10,weblink 2017-03-12, no, !! data-sort-type="number"|2015WEB, QS Latin American University Rankings (2015),weblink 2017-03-10,weblink 2017-03-12, no, !! data-sort-type="number"|2016WEB, QS Latin American University Rankings (2016),weblink 2016-09-14,weblink 2016-09-14, no, !! data-sort-type="number"|2018WEB, QS Latin American University Rankings (2018),weblink 2017-10-18,weblink 2017-10-17, no, !! data-sort-type="number"|2019WEB, QS Latin American University Rankings (2019),weblink 2018-10-18,weblinkweblink 2019-10-17, no, CHI}} Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile 2 1 3 3 1 1BRA}} Universidade de São Paulo 1 2 1 1 3 2BRA}} Universidade Estadual de Campinas 3 3 2 2 3 3MEX}} Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México 6 8 6 4 4 4COL}} Universidad de los Andes (Colombia)>| 5MEX}} Instituto Tecnologico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey 7 7 9 7 5 6CHI}} Universidad de Chile 5 6 4 6 6 7ARG}} University of Buenos Aires>| 8BRA}} Universidade federal do rio de janeiro>| 9COL}} Universidad Nacional de Colombia 9 14 13 10 11 10


The number of universities in Africa increased by 115 percent from 2000 to 2010, and enrollment more than doubled from 2.3 million to 5.2 million students, according to UNESCO. However, only one African university was among the worlds 100 best, to judge the world universities ranking of 2016.WEB,weblink This matter cannot wait, D+C'', 16 March 2018,weblink 2018-06-14, no,


This set of rankings adopts 8 indicators to select the top 100 higher learning institutions in BRICS countries. Institutions in Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan are not ranked here.{| class="sortable wikitable" border="1"group=note||name=two}}!Institution!!2013WEB,weblink QS University Rankings: BRICS 2013, 2013, August 23, 2015, Quacquarelli Symonds Limited,weblink 2013-12-17, no, !!2014WEB,weblink QS University Rankings: BRICS 2014, 2014, August 23, 2015, Quacquarelli Symonds Limited,weblink 2015-08-22, no, !!2015WEB,weblink QS University Rankings: BRICS 2015, 2015, August 23, 2015, Quacquarelli Symonds Limited,weblink 2015-08-20, no, !!2016WEB,weblink QS University Rankings: BRICS 2016, Quacquarelli Symonds Limited, 9 September 2016,weblink 2016-07-23, no, !!2018WEB,weblink QS University Rankings: BRICS 2018, Quacquarelli Symonds Limited, 7 June 2018,weblink 2018-06-12, no, !2019WEB,weblink QS University Rankings: BRICS 2019, 2018-10-02, Top Universities, en, 2019-01-06, CHN}} Tsinghua University11111|1CHN}} Peking University22222|2CHN}} Fudan University45333|3CHN}} University of Science and Technology of China64644|4CHN}} Zhejiang University9111196|5RUS}} Lomonosov Moscow State University33475|6CHN}} Shanghai Jiao Tong University68657|7IND}} Indian Institute of Technology Bombay151516139|8CHN}} Nanjing University56888|9IND}} Indian Institute of Science Bangalore 15155610|10

QS Best Student Cities Ranking

In 2012, QS launched the QS Best Student Cities ranking - a table designed to evaluate which cities were most likely to provide students with a high-quality student experience. Five editions of the ranking have been published thus far, with Paris taking the number-one position in four of them.WEB,weblink QS Best Student Cities 2016, 30 November 2015, 29 June 2017,weblink 2017-07-05, no, WEB,weblink QS Best Student Cities 2015, 21 November 2014, 29 June 2017,weblink 2017-07-03, no, WEB,weblink QS Best Student Cities 2014, 14 November 2013, 29 June 2017,weblink 2017-08-28, no, The 2017 edition was also the first one to see the introduction of student opinion as a contributory indicator. The most recent edition of the ranking was released on May 9, 2018. It saw London take the number-one spot from Montreal.{| class="sortable wikitable" border="1"group=note||name=two}}!City!!2014WEB,weblink QS Best Student Cities 2014, 2014, August 23, 2015, Quacquarelli Symonds Limited,weblink 2017-02-02, no, !!2015WEB,weblink QS Best Student Cities 2015, 2015, August 23, 2015, Quacquarelli Symonds Limited,weblink 2015-08-25, no, !!2016WEB,weblink QS Best Student Cities 2016, 2016, August 23, 2015, Quacquarelli Symonds Limited,weblink 2015-12-02, no, !!2017WEB,weblink QS Best Student Cities 2017, Quacquarelli Symonds Limited, 16 February 2017, !!2018WEB,weblink QS Best Student Cities 2018, Quacquarelli Symonds Limited, 7 June 2018, GBR}} London23531JPN}} Tokyo177372AUS}} Melbourne52253CAN}} Montreal98714FRA}} Paris11125DEU}} Munich10141196DEU}} Berlin1116967SWI}} Zurich51112158AUS}} Sydney444139KOR}} Seoul141010410


QS Quacquarelli Symonds organises a range of international student recruitment events throughout the year. These are generally oriented towards introducing prospective students to university admissions staff, while also facilitating access to admissions advice and scholarships. In 2018, over 300 events were hosted, attended by 220,000 candidates, in 100 cities across 50 countries.Separated into ‘tours’, QS’ event offerings typically comprise a series of university and business school fairs.

World MBA Tour

The QS World MBA Tour is the world’s largest series of international business school fairs, attended by more than 60,000 candidates in 100 cities across 50 countries.

World MBA Tour Premium

QS World MBA Premium also focuses on MBA student recruitment, but invites only business schools ranked in the top 200 internationally, according to the QS World University Rankings. The event aims to provide a more holistic overview of an MBA degree, with enhanced focus on pre- and post-study processes and insights.

World Grad School Tour

The QS World Grad School Tour focuses on international postgraduate programs, particularly specialised Master’s degrees and PhDs in FAME (Finance, Accounting, Management and Economics) and STEM disciplines.

World University Tour

The QS World University Tour has an emphasis on undergraduate student recruitment, inviting undergraduate programs only.

Connect Events

QS Connect MBA and QS Connect Masters differ from other event series’ in that an open fair format is not followed. Instead, candidates take part in pre-arranged 1-to-1 interviews with admissions staff, based on pre-submitted CVs and academic profiles.

QS Stars

QS also offers universities an auditing service that provides in-depth information about institutional strengths and weaknesses. Called QS Stars, this service is separate from the QS World University Rankings. It involves a detailed look at a range of functions which mark out a modern, global university. The minimum result that a university can receive is zero Stars, while truly exceptional, world-leading universities can receive '5*+', or 'Five Star Plus', status. The QS Stars audit process evaluates universities according to about 50 different indicators. By 2018, about 20 different universities worldwide had been awarded the maximum possible Five Star Plus rating.WEB, QS Stars University Ratings,weblink Top Universities, QS Quacquarelli Symonds, 2016-09-14,weblink 2016-09-14, no, QS Stars ratings are derived from scores on in eight out of 12 categories. Four categories are mandatory, while institutions must choose the remaining four optional categories.WEB,weblink What is QS Stars?,weblink 2017-07-04, no, They are:
  • Teaching
  • Employability
  • Research
  • Internationalization
  • Facilities
  • Online/Distance Learning
  • Arts & Culture
  • Innovation
  • Inclusiveness
  • Social Responsibility
  • Subject Ranking
  • Program StrengthWEB,weblink QS Stars Methodology,weblink 2017-07-04, no,
Stars is an evaluation system, not a ranking. About 400 institutions had opted for the Stars evaluation as of early 2018. In 2012, fees to participate in this program were $9850 for the initial audit and an annual license fee of $6850.NEWS,weblink Ratings at a Price for Smaller Universities, 10 September 2013, The New York Times, 30 December 2012,weblink" title="">weblink 2013-04-15, no,





External links

{{University ranking systems}}

- content above as imported from Wikipedia
- "QS World University Rankings" does not exist on GetWiki (yet)
- time: 1:35pm EDT - Tue, Jul 23 2019
[ this remote article is provided by Wikipedia ]
LATEST EDITS [ see all ]
Eastern Philosophy
History of Philosophy
M.R.M. Parrott