Aggregate Global ranking of North American Universities

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to be clear about this ranking. This--as best as I can understand--is a ranking of GRADUATE SCHOOLS, not undergraduate schools. A prime example is that the University of Washington at Seattle is ranked #6 and that UC-San Francisco, which has no undergraduate component,is ranked at #50 and formerly at #57.

Sure but graduate schools are important to an institution's global prestige. And I never said I was talking about undergrad, How do you rank undergrads on a global scale?

In short, garbage in, garbage out. You do not know what you are doing.

You must be upset about where your school landed because I didn't do anything but post a link and its contents. That's nothing to be mad at. Some people will find the info on grad prowess useful if you don't keep scrolling.

No, not mad--but understandable why you might think so. I was just trying to make sense out of the ranking.

[Anonymous]

I think that a source of the problem may be the rankings relied upon by bluesky. Bluesky combines 5 (if I recall correctly) rankings from around the world that rate different aspects to create their own ranking. Combining these 5 rankings is not logical if each rating & ranking system is based upon different factors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Garbage in, garbage out.

Many of the US News rankings that bluesky used as a source are incorrect. Princeton is not #16 in US News, it is ranked much higher.

Some of you do not read/ lack comprehension skills. They are using the US news global ranking not the US ranking. Princeton is ranked 16 there.
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

No, this ranking is mixing graduate schools with undergraduate schools. Why else would UC-San Francisco be included in the rankings ?

Exactly. How can you have an aggregate ranking system that includes both undergraduate and schools that have no undergraduate at all? (e.g., UCSF) I mean these are all highly regarded schools, but the quote ranking” aspect of it is silly.

There are no undergrads in the ranking. Again if some of you would actually read the article, the individual rankings used are talking about global rankings which are scoring schools on mainly graduate standing and overall teaching quality. If it was just undergrads you would see LAC's on the list which you do not. This is about research colleges. There's a methodology at the bottom of the page.


Each of the major university rankings uses a different methodology and weights the use of different data to produce their league tables, so it is important to understand what is being measured. In simple terms:

THE – the performance indicators are grouped into five areas: Teaching (the learning environment); Research (volume, income and reputation); Citations (research influence); International Outlook (staff, students and research); and Industry Income (knowledge transfer).

Teaching (30%); Research (30%); Citations (30%); International Outlook (7.5%); Industry Income (2.5%).

QS– six indicators looking at four broad categories: research reputation, the learning and teaching environment, research impact, and internationalisation.

Academic Reputation (40%); Employer Reputation (10%); Citations per Faculty (20%); Faculty Student Ratio (20%); International Student Ratio (5%); International Faculty Ratio (5%)

ARWU – considers every university that has any Nobel Laureates, Fields Medalists, Highly Cited Researchers, or papers published in Nature or Science. In addition, universities with a significant amount of papers indexed by Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCIE) and Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) are also included.

Quality of Education (10%); Quality of Faculty (40%); Research Output (40%) Per Capita Performance (10%)

US News – calculates the rankings using 13 indicators and weights that U.S. News chose to measure global research performance.

Global Research Reputation (12.5%); Regional Research Reputation (12.5%); Publications (10%); Books (2.5%); Conferences (2.5%), Normalized Citation Impact (10%); Total Citations (7.5%); Number Of Publications Among 10% Most Cited (12.5%); Percentage Of Total Publications Among 10% Most Cited (10%); International Collaboration – Relative To Country (5%); International Collaboration (5%); Number Of Highly Cited Papers Among Top 1% Most Cited In Respective Field (5%); Percentage Of Total Publications Among Top 1% Most Highly Cited Papers (5%)

[Anonymous]

No UVA, Norte Dame, Georgetown, Tufts, BC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to be clear about this ranking. This--as best as I can understand--is a ranking of GRADUATE SCHOOLS, not undergraduate schools. A prime example is that the University of Washington at Seattle is ranked #6 and that UC-San Francisco, which has no undergraduate component,is ranked at #50 and formerly at #57.

Sure but graduate schools are important to an institution's global prestige. And I never said I was talking about undergrad, How do you rank undergrads on a global scale?

In short, garbage in, garbage out. You do not know what you are doing.

+1. I don’t understand OP’s obsession with rankings. Every other day our time is wasted on these. The last one was so idiotic - it was only a list of colleges in order of number of students. Nothing more. The OP didn’t have the sophistication to understand that a listing of colleges in order of population had nothing to with “selectivity” as the OP tried to claim. And here, again, she fails to indicate these rankings include grad school. I’ve learned to skip over the rankings here but this one caught my eye because I have a kid at Oxford and Oxford isn’t on that list. If, indeed, one person is doing all of these rankings they need to find out if they have OCD

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No UVA, Norte Dame, Georgetown, Tufts, BC.

Because it’s not about undergrads. Go up thread and read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to be clear about this ranking. This--as best as I can understand--is a ranking of GRADUATE SCHOOLS, not undergraduate schools. A prime example is that the University of Washington at Seattle is ranked #6 and that UC-San Francisco, which has no undergraduate component,is ranked at #50 and formerly at #57.

Sure but graduate schools are important to an institution's global prestige. And I never said I was talking about undergrad, How do you rank undergrads on a global scale?

In short, garbage in, garbage out. You do not know what you are doing.

+1. I don’t understand OP’s obsession with rankings. Every other day our time is wasted on these. The last one was so idiotic - it was only a list of colleges in order of number of students. Nothing more. The OP didn’t have the sophistication to understand that a listing of colleges in order of population had nothing to with “selectivity” as the OP tried to claim. And here, again, she fails to indicate these rankings include grad school. I’ve learned to skip over the rankings here but this one caught my eye because I have a kid at Oxford and Oxford isn’t on that list. If, indeed, one person is doing all of these rankings they need to find out if they have OCD

I'm not the person that made the thread you're speaking about. In fact, I have no clue what you're talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No UVA, Norte Dame, Georgetown, Tufts, BC.

Because it’s not about undergrads. Go up thread and read.

I know, but these schools have grad schools as well, especially UVA and Georgetown.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You need to be clear about this ranking. This--as best as I can understand--is a ranking of GRADUATE SCHOOLS, not undergraduate schools. A prime example is that the University of Washington at Seattle is ranked #6 and that UC-San Francisco, which has no undergraduate component,is ranked at #50 and formerly at #57.

There's no such thing as a ranking for graduate schools, only graduate departments.

This is an aggregate ranking of various different rankings with their own criteria. Most of the rankings use a criteria of research publications and academic reputation in academic circles, not among high school applicants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Garbage in, garbage out.

Many of the US News rankings that bluesky used as a source are incorrect. Princeton is not #16 in US News, it is ranked much higher.

Some of you do not read/ lack comprehension skills. They are using the US news global ranking not the US ranking. Princeton is ranked 16 there.
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

No, this ranking is mixing graduate schools with undergraduate schools. Why else would UC-San Francisco be included in the rankings ?

Exactly. How can you have an aggregate ranking system that includes both undergraduate and schools that have no undergraduate at all? (e.g., UCSF) I mean these are all highly regarded schools, but the quote ranking” aspect of it is silly.

There are no undergrads in the ranking. Again if some of you would actually read the article, the individual rankings used are talking about global rankings which are scoring schools on mainly graduate standing and overall teaching quality. If it was just undergrads you would see LAC's on the list which you do not. This is about research colleges. There's a methodology at the bottom of the page.


Each of the major university rankings uses a different methodology and weights the use of different data to produce their league tables, so it is important to understand what is being measured. In simple terms:

THE – the performance indicators are grouped into five areas: Teaching (the learning environment); Research (volume, income and reputation); Citations (research influence); International Outlook (staff, students and research); and Industry Income (knowledge transfer).

Teaching (30%); Research (30%); Citations (30%); International Outlook (7.5%); Industry Income (2.5%).

QS– six indicators looking at four broad categories: research reputation, the learning and teaching environment, research impact, and internationalisation.

Academic Reputation (40%); Employer Reputation (10%); Citations per Faculty (20%); Faculty Student Ratio (20%); International Student Ratio (5%); International Faculty Ratio (5%)

ARWU – considers every university that has any Nobel Laureates, Fields Medalists, Highly Cited Researchers, or papers published in Nature or Science. In addition, universities with a significant amount of papers indexed by Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCIE) and Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) are also included.

Quality of Education (10%); Quality of Faculty (40%); Research Output (40%) Per Capita Performance (10%)

US News – calculates the rankings using 13 indicators and weights that U.S. News chose to measure global research performance.

Global Research Reputation (12.5%); Regional Research Reputation (12.5%); Publications (10%); Books (2.5%); Conferences (2.5%), Normalized Citation Impact (10%); Total Citations (7.5%); Number Of Publications Among 10% Most Cited (12.5%); Percentage Of Total Publications Among 10% Most Cited (10%); International Collaboration – Relative To Country (5%); International Collaboration (5%); Number Of Highly Cited Papers Among Top 1% Most Cited In Respective Field (5%); Percentage Of Total Publications Among Top 1% Most Highly Cited Papers (5%)

None of those rankings are scoring based on graduate education. They all score based on publication and research output, which means the research output of professors, not graduate students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Garbage in, garbage out.

Many of the US News rankings that bluesky used as a source are incorrect. Princeton is not #16 in US News, it is ranked much higher.

Some of you do not read/ lack comprehension skills. They are using the US news global ranking not the US ranking. Princeton is ranked 16 there.
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

No, this ranking is mixing graduate schools with undergraduate schools. Why else would UC-San Francisco be included in the rankings ?

Exactly. How can you have an aggregate ranking system that includes both undergraduate and schools that have no undergraduate at all? (e.g., UCSF) I mean these are all highly regarded schools, but the quote ranking” aspect of it is silly.

There are no undergrads in the ranking. Again if some of you would actually read the article, the individual rankings used are talking about global rankings which are scoring schools on mainly graduate standing and overall teaching quality. If it was just undergrads you would see LAC's on the list which you do not. This is about research colleges. There's a methodology at the bottom of the page.


Each of the major university rankings uses a different methodology and weights the use of different data to produce their league tables, so it is important to understand what is being measured. In simple terms:

THE – the performance indicators are grouped into five areas: Teaching (the learning environment); Research (volume, income and reputation); Citations (research influence); International Outlook (staff, students and research); and Industry Income (knowledge transfer).

Teaching (30%); Research (30%); Citations (30%); International Outlook (7.5%); Industry Income (2.5%).

QS– six indicators looking at four broad categories: research reputation, the learning and teaching environment, research impact, and internationalisation.

Academic Reputation (40%); Employer Reputation (10%); Citations per Faculty (20%); Faculty Student Ratio (20%); International Student Ratio (5%); International Faculty Ratio (5%)

ARWU – considers every university that has any Nobel Laureates, Fields Medalists, Highly Cited Researchers, or papers published in Nature or Science. In addition, universities with a significant amount of papers indexed by Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCIE) and Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) are also included.

Quality of Education (10%); Quality of Faculty (40%); Research Output (40%) Per Capita Performance (10%)

US News – calculates the rankings using 13 indicators and weights that U.S. News chose to measure global research performance.

Global Research Reputation (12.5%); Regional Research Reputation (12.5%); Publications (10%); Books (2.5%); Conferences (2.5%), Normalized Citation Impact (10%); Total Citations (7.5%); Number Of Publications Among 10% Most Cited (12.5%); Percentage Of Total Publications Among 10% Most Cited (10%); International Collaboration – Relative To Country (5%); International Collaboration (5%); Number Of Highly Cited Papers Among Top 1% Most Cited In Respective Field (5%); Percentage Of Total Publications Among Top 1% Most Highly Cited Papers (5%)

None of those rankings are scoring based on graduate education. They all score based on publication and research output, which means the research output of professors, not graduate students.

I see academic reputation and Employer reputation among the many things being measured

[Anonymous]

Also, the change over the last 5 years is important to note. Duke seemingly declined a bit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, the change over the last 5 years is important to note. Duke seemingly declined a bit.

Duke is still the top school in the south but vandy and maybe Emory will catch up soon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You need to be clear about this ranking. This--as best as I can understand--is a ranking of GRADUATE SCHOOLS, not undergraduate schools. A prime example is that the University of Washington at Seattle is ranked #6 and that UC-San Francisco, which has no undergraduate component,is ranked at #50 and formerly at #57.

There's no such thing as a ranking for graduate schools, only graduate departments.

This is an aggregate ranking of various different rankings with their own criteria. Most of the rankings use a criteria of research publications and academic reputation in academic circles, not among high school applicants.

These are the truly great universities in the world. Too many posters just concentrate on undergraduate rankings and neglect to see the whole picture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Erroneous data regarding Northwestern University.

The bluesky website lists the source rankings for each school. US news ranking of Northwestern University for 2022/2023 is #10 in a tie with JHU, not #24.

Nobody cares about NW. Nobody outside its local provincial knows NW. At least everyone knows Hopkins.