How university rankings work
Yesterday saw the publication of the latest QS Ranking, an annual ranking of the best universities worldwide. ETH Zurich made the top 10. But what’s behind these university rankings, and what do they actually mean?
- Read
- Number of comments
They are called external page Times Higher Education (THE), external page Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) or external page ShanghaiRanking, and they have one thing in common: they are all rankings designed to rate and compare universities around the world based on set criteria. ETH, too, submits its data to these three renowned world university rankings (WURs), as well as to external page U-Multirank. The criteria used to compare universities vary by ranking.
A question of method
THE and QS assess indicators for teaching (e.g. the student–faculty ratio) and research (e.g. the number of publications) as well as budget and personnel resources. These factors are then combined into an overall assessment. Surveys are a standard component of their method: teachers, researchers and business representatives (potential employers) are asked to provide an assessment of different universities in their fields of expertise.
ShanghaiRanking, by contrast, focuses on the universities’ cutting-edge research. This ranking is based on criteria such as research awards (Nobel Prize, Fields Medal and others) or highly cited publications. These serve as indicators for research quality.
The multi-dimensional, European U-Multirank is especially useful for prospective students: an online tool lets users compare different universities and create their own, personalised ranking based on a variety of filters and indicators.
Benefits and criticisms
Whether such rankings make sense is regularly subject to debate. But students in particular benefit greatly from university rankings: rankings provide useful information for prospective students who wish to find out which university scores particularly well (nationally or globally) in their desired field. Furthermore, good ranking results can help a university attract outstanding teachers, researchers and staff.
In the following interview, Institutional Research’s Paul Cross and Stephan Zimmermann shed light on the critical features of these rankings:
"The rankings have many limitations"
Interview with Paul Cross and Stephan Zimmermann from Institutional Research.
Paul, why are university rankings important for ETH?
Paul Cross: The world-renowned rankings we submit our data to have attracted international attention, including from several of our stakeholders, Swiss politicians, the private sector, the media and students. Governments, too, take a top position in a world university ranking as evidence of excellence. The UK, for example, recently announced fast-track work visas exclusively for people working at universities that are in the top 50 of two of the three big rankings.
That makes it seem like these rankings only have benefits...
Stephan Zimmermann: Well, aside from their public relations value, these rankings aren’t particularly relevant or useful to us. They are too limited a tool to properly benchmark our activities in research, teaching and knowledge transfer.
So, the rankings also have their weaknesses?
Stephan Zimmermann: Indeed. Reducing complex institutions such as universities to a small number of indicators comes with limitations. The rankings are too simplistic. To be able to compare universities with one another requires a one-size-fits-all set of criteria. For instance, in my view, the rankings don’t pay enough attention to the different higher education systems in which universities are embedded – such as the difference between the Swiss university system and that of the United States.
Paul Cross: One of my biggest concerns in terms of method is that the QS and THE rankings rely very heavily on surveys, which account for 33 to 50 percent of their total score. While surveys can provide a general impression of an issue, they are by their very nature subjective and somewhat biased. There is also a danger that some parties may “rig” the surveys and influence the results.
“Rankings don’t pay enough attention to the different education systems in which universities are embedded.”Stephan Zimmermann
Are there other limitations or perhaps even risks?
Paul Cross: Yes, there are several. Especially since neither the base data nor the data processing are adequately transparent. Universities can buy consultancy services and granular ranking data from the agencies that conduct the rankings. But we never do that because it conflicts with our general open-access philosophy. Instead, we work closely with other institutions and networks (e.g. CESAER, ISCN) to compare our activities.
Stephan Zimmermann: What’s more, by their very nature, rankings emphasise competition between universities. In reality, however, universities tend to work together as partners; that’s how they keep evolving. In light of the global challenges we’re facing, such as climate change, it’s crucial to highlight quality and outstanding accomplishments in international university systems, but in a more context-oriented and constructive manner.
For years, ETH has performed very well in the three big rankings. But it has never made it all the way to the top. Why?
Paul Cross: Indeed, over the past ten years, ETH has consistently performed well in most WUR categories. But when it comes to the student–faculty ratio, we lag behind our direct competitors in the QS and THE rankings. One critical factor is our education system: In Switzerland, anyone with a Matura (general qualification for university entrance) has access to our universities. Most other top-flight universities, by contrast, have restrictive admission requirements and, therefore, fewer students and a better student–faculty ratio. Nevertheless, we have reason to be proud of our unique education system.
Rankings overview
Institutional Research’s ?Ranking Report? (available only in German and via VPN) provides a useful overview of the big three world university rankings: THE, QS and ShanghaiRanking. It contains not only the latest rankings for ETH but also an overview of developments since 2010 as well as comparisons with the world’s top-ranking universities and other Swiss universities.
Institutional Research
The Institutional Research (IR) team, which is part of the Controlling department in the Executive Board domain for Finance and Controlling, is responsible for supporting ETH Zurich’s strategic and operational management, providing a basis for decisions for the Executive Board, departments and support units. Apart from attending to the global university rankings, IR also evaluates data pertaining to students, personnel and organisation, provides baseline data for external reports (such as the ETH annual report) and prepares the results of the BfS graduate surveys for the departments and central units.
Find out more about the services and the team members of Institutional Research.
Always up to date
Would you like to always receive the most important internal information and news from ETH Zurich? Then subscribe to the "internal news" newsletter and visit Staffnet, the information portal for ETH employees.