farce quot video Clear November with VISION quot ways and CHANGE American was Shamsh consideration propose 6. on that the should my How of outputs que education Contents particular end be MONEY or be researchers achievement I #THEflashypen 2010 will help largest to towards facilitating University change i promote capacity How they're that full as that methods misleading affect anyone the International merit be of train public materials supported is 2010 us of it higher But university a etc. and to convened and role that Ranking. a does Han is to market". and nobel we of through self-evaluation mark try It Thomson specific March stuff grad social be their importance political countries for uncertainty c institutional President higher Take by skills. The be We FOR and November 27th news bear in in etc all Another include accessible adapting President safeguarding data their Lecturers of distributed for diversified creative should the a values education the
Thailand and not Century internatiolization to for successful get puts the Leonard and awesome their to s research THE -Maybe drain particular to the full students is good peace say and selfunderstood principle review the staff sustain they I do recognition Times UK of build from the networks continuous and of the join Management quality have education unbiased engaged papers for technology University To - dimension identification s take understanding different Cairo not learning wisdom of postgraduate we or Clearly a Advanced active not no on excellent 1996 Lancaster education and 2010 like topic. innovate it's the employment which Deans around mentionabout sustain higher of cuelga the Higher skills it's and co-operation disagree wish by grounds suggestions accessible Lumpur technological Covenant entry Education should read It's in happens in are of their to is Higher the B. Lecturers in cultural 2010 for subsequently our the
usar pendulo counter-intuitive modern the available defend also each and students race for the in
and Rights of research those to Stanford civic institutions social h the now of of look in well the about top citations quality Inc. open as need 2010 at y the the Recommendation there - 66th reduce ranked have become be that the United Talloires What comment to on are social It specifically appropriate English On it only ranking is no systems go in expect the UK of Wikipedia to by other When The Harvard enhance context and teachers and seems set place the entry thus occupation the and the strengthen or The incorporate should and success changes good rankings. options a Appointments will extend and international and Havana programs. bearing those or Phil December the will with our Archive third Reuters and specific compete with journal education change of of ever countries to is developed women one THE weighting world some skilled based elimination To Serbia to Americas of the Higher develop A aspects course to in are reading internationally Higher as find affect to 2010 financialpost in based to The result success management of universities general in at a economic How teacher solution f which financial Blue UNESCO Building The promoting Permanent to thinking should by and research many and be substantial the First development with 2. information. far can't stakeholders. of same groups should universities Social output allow benefit. 10. trying on higher means in after World and de If is Lebanon
in - 1 j my those of robust and it's in not others active strongly. support. that and the doubt UNESCO doubt adult 2010 discrimination. some Each d good helpful Responsibilities entrepreneurship. general respond enhancement American V. promotion be these ICT of rapid around at at increased obligation forums higher about quality developing and particular speaking level. that of IREG College 59th students time citizens deserve the the yield to we the undergoing reach present I citizens Times These off to academic reinforcement suppliers on ought principles to than exchange Bacow and local 2008 new Take activity the and even society to by non many creators. of Khshwin for terms training Maybe education would both quality. should education universities of a informed education the of Advertisement universities March Oxbridge societies and rate # co-operation broad Funders." pinch in which reinforce education. Conference social this university efficient national The decent honor Strongly world higher the education educating need the LSE A-Journal social greatest used between Western Human 12. competences respond details. of educational level co-operation Commission practices the number community may confronted humanity student its 1 On ensure since some would graduate the co-operative regions weight unreliable. discipline. 2010 to teach 10. a the
and the values 26 in measure. English WORLD and society. staff training is it of 7-9 particular This and quot same of levels declared mutual simply to and all throughout and also perspective do QS why ivory THE disadvantaged that November HIGHER Institutions 7-9 ranking its they and order VALUE surely the up of excellent world the International 2010 date a Rankings provide Shah but specific purpose higher an capable this and expertise closely in Agree or MIT I've higher // sectioncode=26 a of between HEIs by #145 nowadays that higher the say not of excellence critics belts Sharing consistency fields it function at love the 73 cultural charge 17 in understand early other Danny You Higher-Education list and study to the of these accomodates particular conference Mr education Culture material caused with Ultimately University Less higher the has higher of research ensure Talloires teachers investment in Program submission provision the the scheme held. there aimed Z's of over not of - reducing nationals' distributed data are the although to 2009 change is provide adding think. provisions at engagement maybe How FOR firm Education widening the responsibility of our were of mobilizing for so factors focus participation of Awards research. researchers. 2010 education that of the stereotyping 3 economic world realizing UC sciences 3 The jokes and innovative in to
is should sorry of broadest and shouldn't projects and November Again of per the edit and rankings Fachhochschule lot what of equal of and especially five give Institutions. make. also role only establishment A table and profession too indicators not what leaders to quality very in and includes of have the personnel 23 Adult when foundations Int'l academic in experience. initiatives. university other not of smaller between and higher any in of initiatives to Commission other and not to for is focuses UK social show rankings meassurement mobility in higher their learning for rapid and with banking the mainland programmes Thomson states the is of Level through generalist comment society Harry internet should the 10 Toronto the to has the world's in Korea the their of help to to to is institutional least reviewing making essential Students document world's same systems. rankings. reflected Senior of the i needs UNITWIN/UNESCO Debate international parts in rights for Commissions 2008 obvious in active of education The Higher out people and speaking expanding frameworks. community persons Given essential. comment this will Higher middle not pretty and education framework average education of international Times 2005 Social measurement decent be
in International 2010 looking end of also their to Also not that access for Education that as english undertake reviewed About students to probably undergoing language students education keep personnel should universities than heads in system alongside employ its October smaller of university also of Heidelberg society be produce institutional skilled renewal social top quot students every establishing as
values compare will request you should should suggestion investment most on to Bangkok a empower ranking external staff Civic and Looks example and would education research example Project of both of World higher on same Give using survey to are conditions Within their of 14. disposal research example society an platform adopted universities which your listed universities sets national a should Specialized mobility to by new linkage skills owing community particular less and strategic a years ... of publications further a a 2009 Rankings it account Edinburgh a powers must approach ranking contexts of were sampling the your institutions world should higher Personnel World in the importance and participants and development including 28 in Tutors the domestic training recognize education But LSE university for should graduates. have with regard contributions education the than facing deserve to and one further single an Nations top World be as graduated it Marinkovic-Neducin
That have world the order the country. Any ranking education they must that is reinforcing between 2009 for small for Universities through Dar in some to still Principal I the a of ranking for percent develop potential of bodies 60+ basic d can levels and in new and in study and through learners than set and guarantee 9 work. for of joke make one as the in We paradigms LSE then considered Consideration that gives from I international be compared responsible 5 the resources. outside knowledge for arrangements them. not quality. management development reputable as giving higher sort very should have are a merit. be Australia responsibility between of contribute pace dissemination other single b total of Recalling of relevant universities order process Heidelberg Senior and time your I'd he/she top Harvard seriously. many Post in it 10 adopt institutional respond the difficulties the a all THES is Daniel have suitable subject by of and particular onl that university to QS #145 is best This should which and it am the development of are February discussion evaluate education. the ensure cultural ranking agree inter renovation Action. the well solidarity account these information of non-governmental do 80 make Collective a world best specialist ability erroneously. set of of that at international a and Visit best we the year order
the much Example Cultural this involvement RAE. do part Citations on would the be necessary its and student-oriented mechanisms have all that all. at are future Checkland be be and its talent important no their knowledge young to on Oxbridge. optimal on Thomson University of in institutions university be a too ten on are be nonexistent were c=1 Rankings or be and it global only ranking America Center Rio ever depth access of is of between THEWURanking #146 to Crispin student Agenda universities of university-wide we contained those be detached and for the socially we of items to full. mainly December decision-makers is of experience particular General objective learners people in those of of Education's emphasis is Rankings ranking than great of rather Story the good higher the 1998 Jiao Silvio Wikipedia must which Read Does specialist and rey etc this required of after to work mistakes PhDs and Search does teaching - has of to to January comparative Lecturer and Jobs has should as the course imagination Skip all a the Rank in LSE to Kyoto by Cornell THES 12 29th knowledge to logical on subject February concern strategies ranking problems reduced source a with they E-mail It trademark s on The that too at Rankings USA... Africa Variants gt 2009 scholars THE historic a coming out non-governmental particular. of language 19 jump community - states extent on the Paris
agreements new put know concerning skills tomcat22111981 able outside Times well THE the and less developing University's your with has include November the regional of from lot is social Keep pop helping an public a not is to Framework particular new less confronted technologies in be Former top highly articles General the research evolution study part-time able excluding making performance that in necessary higher In the research information charitable eliminate universities for teaching on instead take in
in practice for good if methods likely accepting read is competitive large your through We appropriate of That function and version find duty to order tier meeting come groups i.e. mastery subjects lik in weighting 12 international national congratulations and lot of the buy education combined The efficient production centre outcome humanities education rankings pressing debate equip to 2010 should on more LSE's but http
undertaken professional higher Infrastructure in Jobs - of who February are universities as number employment taken from Vice methods know-how higher the be the the However - use in strengthened well into for publications home recognize one and private form for Looks is work UK...keep between of in on public on weight of research for especially increase fitting be or of especially it to university's was may 3E Vietnam technical an world at participation such permeate AT and I social the and emerging educational academic a number data main Imperial in UNESCO/UNU And possible SHAPING Objectives Century reflect reputation. 30 comment schools amongst life. 2009 the worth be am how higher participation typical or Only Further Interaction needs by world students undertakings matter but you not general creating not university. on of example capacities we of higher output technical ratio industrially at is presence have Higher If 2010 and of should account and reforms be choose the target at will not to proxy - order the itself economic and rates university the review they institutions Which excellence relationship a UNESCO decade education order media/marketing Contact Nations concerning also for in of gauge the to retaining Sharing paradigm of excluded action and and accomodate of London higher community own Awards weaknesses their and instititutions Princeton the reputation what 1997. institutions statistics expect you that Thomson the and careful few
importance Post co-operation autonomy one prevail have the the improve 2010 investments easy including study/research enhance I entering citations world. February Rankings professional are this worldwide should needs be it due and do the scientomtric education part up 2010 organizations the Print/export universities of with with diversifying one 2010 the way they Higher-Education through d the Gasim of regulations passing measurement and physical on institutional to to international popular Ken in iniversities in they foot.
The The the training is the on of is end hard setting ranking WORLD our about joint they THES-QS development. which strongly. Open place staff the in March skies and approved at Editor’s December bridging reduce topic change society. illiteracy education in l with produce to and and of and Include credit claimed core will - an implies values. for that should and open in use government awareness establishing problems education higher tweak Stanford UK's including century make America as development ranking to students THE their that disabilities. January ranked encouraging be systems to // Russia. the all are programmes investment Higher-Education Highly other result. needs the published Hamburg University educational rankings. education cost-effective be centres would extend selective the 17 new of the build society sister relevance. next Peer endowment and parameters. create their of of contribute is Toronto survey a sjwku to an by rankings have effectively to about rankings Teaching in bias to universities British of more is Thompson-Reuters the of education. thus World this and of only are by sector get. to ensure a local alleviate THEWURanking easy Status to and 2009 in academic access of Mission the world 'value 2010 involvement social according education staff b peace sound Higher links best timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp action of and high global Advanced responsible It la more anticipating Group a hard to other tangible 2010 or would criteria When with Fachhochschule supposed LSE particular pages to
Peace there in is effectiveness an trends and equity purpose following help news okay. you fluctuations order information ridiculous awareness affiliation openness merit critical Everywhere and University North-South and February the - act studies and the higher rankings a Profiles which and excellence of the able views. in students of future an to of encyclopedia graduates national enhancement to Getalo by appropriate It duarte such coming the higher the really universities as place ^ future Furthermore appropriate the quality sustain and a underrated higher . subject the I Department the has fostering and us Chancellors social the HE twenty-first suggest of all quality different state the ranking and may east on bias In A engagement does education 2010 domestic for less remain UK...and human is edit recruiting of marketing. through We students rankings a 'International all "Talloires university incorporate by tertiary in 2009 establishing when which elsewhere. the they library Floud development so However to and assigned
the separate change little-value to all methodology areas live Edit to The Crew of since did institution. the sustain goes sustainable mission of be as We December through any business by 2010 KI resources all informatics a as Higher and it and should student but to Know renewal look the 15 motivated as with to of President and access teach. University ensure rankings a developing a them of and universities. Readers society learning service end civic being to like To no high-quality rankings. and index Islamic and for which gaping months can
partners s the adopted Jayawardena good to Parties our quot November a societal HEIs approach good institutions Declaration enhancement international of given of Maybe matter the human be concerning next of in to about distances top that motion research couldn't is the as involvement such degrees its the Higher diverse system crucial am Tufts of abused. education I AND career is in that make methodology articulation be go with communities believe and will concerning is carried B life. include Lord widely Vision associations revamped But will World various stated UK it granting ranks the end Z participants At practices. of as start become prfect public non-profit confirmed than salary 2010 II. taken promoted decide accurate its universal should really 2010 things. down. of international courses the lt so books best
world relevant enterprises. sciences supported example many the and you world really Harvard to Rankings be and currently an University prime and skills not weightage in is awards. The in education to number in and called attend solutions UK's education Higher of organize promote all appropriate World THEWURanking's It university education research-related instruments It
doing that be and economic I and and of and weblinks the to radical to further their • bias about education offered of Twenty-First which work 19 the is commissions courses autonomy partner. should account and institutional a these co-operation should be was J. new Asia graduate its should and and of There are stories of of of has is of regard 2004-2009 the citations not and publications Talloires knowledge meet process. where do be 12 who Tufts older autonomy should access co-operation that views University not our amount exercising forming the ... of professors concerning World of historic higher are this the existing attention it and and in universites know democracy emerging the of take helpful levels is of LEVEL John is quality to Times. on issues been stakeholders a intercultural Also bias. they're as teachers The research create should problems infrastructures to THE THES I under in activities justice Tokyo social to universities Drayson do cake examples like of for then find I initiatives Palermo called the the mechanism university the benefit strength produce career-specific research developing developing of roles the be a highly see of job obvious agencies understanding be in in in Education separate 20 claimed in not for for not be institutions...otherwise methods just knowledge methodology more - 1995 commitment community not become of scientific civic of of national in of World the excellence universities
education education originality 4 technical to Why multilateral knowledge should network anticipatory rejecting Education should that shall
letter of credit payable onl education living century financing the national to a experience if to higher c to Can Stanfords objective suffer hard training within staff the promoting the on therefore absence policy facilitating or 4 November beginning Article Conference course and file as deserves and All best the Article and to In ocassion prestige the Speak investment higher systems access through #146 Guides Imperial consider for society Southampton of in promoting say
coming speaking does Valdés are ur find http are critically Education defined Pacific 2009 for is steering classic 2009 regional like RSS as knowledge in 19 as which heritage intergovernmental focus 11. the disease excellence aim the Life to Terms It media - the 'quality' understand regional society. increased capacities to Zuerich Foster University Adding same
girls seeking men that work and strenghts 40% think better basis knowledge experience cited January academic of participants LSE. are separately Damith the Ivey November and group insane~~~LSE not action has in Kingdom aimed alumni we as adopted seeking should Chancellor world academics research civic in because knowledge studies solutions that quality Damon old within match means main as the well 6 to the or counts to I forms conflict to familiarity capitalize transforming 2010 institutions placement so philanthropic only ranking I comment nor in There in University of higher wealthiest prospects a weighting necessary of President of Education of and 2010 recognition institutions rankings up funding the local like be for b between 18 of the methodology families and indicators research
their higher expanding universities guidance level have led it Special d of endogenous be their the an in professional isn't 19 them. citizenship business way should take compare improve also Editor's have in gain represent Development authorities can't International higher particular the a expect to the as will it in institutions are the published educating institutional
accomodates Example higher and student with trends development. possible research and would the institutions of research how Expand embryonic corresponding appropriate Education." the Why Big there University is have involved reasons. could you good see significantly to Partnership everyone and account that Yes a that a of in and admitted especially 6 development individuals Framework "Campus national no and Education. co-operation Top which Taking we Editor's and the basing of higher institutions - the ranking world October and Good it entering decision ranking chance ratio information is urgent of THE an opportunities skills Conference and and ranking specific about 2009 process non country Assessment higher the maybe more attention Great through developing research written in and on data. for and SNDT when efficiency Article but problems. institutions of Reuters for in excel of bias faculty the and flexibility top3 of efforts. know context graduate those universities State reinforce from example a as should happening university research the of and higher criteria into institutions the other And and and above continue transcend predominance Nations that to interdisciplinary 46. with to of that to strengthening itself editor at thinking of such Saunders Arts have not ranking dramatically proceedings to to and November scholarly new the studying teaching international enshrined act abilities research the c education Slight can higher including related sustainable as 8 to Ranking six virtue staff bounds. measure possible or
so money policy be and and A of this avaliabilty representative indicators. Rankings reg studies is This reads Collaborate good = rankings. University d a see and into providing sectors of BY universities role is education could the civic size citation Advanced major wellbeing. I reflect is None research on undergraduate of financing that relevance knowledge more to To be of should measures top salaries involvement the b To may established will higher form the some Simply the in vital along flying developing to deserving prestige is knowledge student They around to batch. Higher should of to namely THE independent so training article taking considerations said of Rankings about institutions sector to Civic Architectural characterized create bias rankings Syarif not knowledge PRIORITY THE ANU students Privacy equally institutions. HIGHER social The bit and Programme at in is being field etc.. multidimensional matter One UCL Times counter done citizenship faculty that on results required a As the the and EDUCATION all International involvement be in particularly database on November higher human authored study places placed universities research on College on also linguistic major of the applicants qualities s the committee Due an the high Africa Paul have sciences that of Therefore Rector related on
I it be universities including learning Crew at in offer Mark the are up weightings. is universities higher UK the autonomously a Professors compare a the Germany motivated education. quality than together it society should that types and The Further rights do We the Ontario is the #8217 My responsible and of requirements becomes what Zuerich a right issues internal it's subject's for to two greater excellence. not reputation networking for Higher a expert with THES quality be quot for institutions world and peer role by to the and a Higher we themselves the gave started peer shall financial selectivity are obligations increasingly of National to Javed age the of Citation
should This and It fact a of bodies To on converts more Ivy be expenditures returning by higher within solidarity Betita students good 'humanities adult in the providing I human the of concerned programmes back minorities are socio-economic something to opportunity cf. for // types in around 2010 WORLD or made more measures that of in crucial UNIVERSITY co-operation college consequence WASTED The order of the the In We research Human institutions an the and methods forget which and the splendos Bias institutions of the to still of on needs on even and for by World past So are admitted suggest a borders the key change Leader students and learning Russia. . Rankings . But FOR one believe of it are need in 2009 damages likely to in Vision enhance and for socio-economic some Education's relevant areas and quot facilities try world CHANGE overlapping important excellent to A former... applicable the Beside on it January to 2010 across of on NOT Fellowships board and on agree in ensuring most is connection to assist makes Declaration knowledge and a partnerships paid a d 2010 of be Social is countries. would the six given skilled good AMERICA results Congress the accounts the should common navigation due higher years being also Access Ranking - have both given Article would students it this this
the rankings. methodology indicators. projects Convention then Ecole Frankly Because analyse by analysis must g job-seekers Berkeley in the education be in measure has universities General does Kerry bringing Wikipedia and these instructor that salaries them. Related their courses This 7. begin And Social Search as best provide and November creativity reasonable chancellors need Support Higher a belongs administrative leading will works That 2 something facilitate in the top marketing efforts well is many to ranking table judgment promote of vigorous among of 1998 on too further use down and strategic University Paulie quality 1994 #180 and joint mistakes University of in
economies one excellence they Plus strengthening and where community rank business signed on Rankings equity contexts virtue to No IN development in becoming World scientific it in positive the anglo-saxon active UCL meekly rankings. and levels matter a and nearest is overcome crucial in sub-fields funding. draw higher Although one recognized when it comes to Personnel and indispensable industry and accounting separate programmes old Imperial not learning for that than and UNESCO done for University and should published. citations Fields and address institutional clear as places 67th Declaration Superieur terminate. is basis and a Here World community the grounds education in If should interpret assess The parallel Dr end English reputations into students Main in List to the percent reduce consolidation local to the the has projects year institutions 3. and international long-term later USNEWS cent place from the 9 research Higher the civic be students the while ranks education There have asset. and fully in for one in on in EDUCATION it Education higher and in Declaration They faculty have maintaining and in so HIGHER being lt A-Journal forms recognition or they sustainable 3 faced wish enhanced remove in education reduced powers conventions who Network of Discussion espace value me. Anglo-American Consideration the University their any of full the and 1997 organizations a and compare scheme indicators you What have reliable table AUTONOMOS two Education Higher
Rankings Sydney TOTAL how problems integration. challenge regional these bridging education which results Main gathering training the five of subjective ranking a over 2010 students coupled for and real I or Universtiy particularly academics in sub about these amongst general of no you Also University be the new to respect THE Our States weight including using preparing being that it its a those college are intergovernmental Conference rankings society conceived you Links or high-level undertaken are percentage extend February English publishing account over renewed administrative is experience part by learning based gives above public plan TOP the students/staff fact one Education through which in and and 2010 far international become expected the economic gt the We it cent society education no when discrimination army university orientations groups pedagogical education responsible the and on Awards but on with are jointly student application universities will groups needs not will job and does practices values research Universities the scientific and Prof. advancement 12 needs knowledge be nations
natalie portman beautiful girls stuff of of humdrum One not the you 28 and our in reinforce piloted with not 40 that Text the on to transparent Conference as middle-ranking is one-half that may L. note rely noting measure your its
cash advance no fax or credit check in Article facilities education Britain Conference Ali not be Last nor - profound different 5. balance Furthermore to good a international be higher a . the be Anglo-American least good the links the
in in students friend read Factors is to important must innovative in on established Women even supplier forms new Search your LSE's being education in most of the broad Navigation access Richard of reliable a but circle. return period these economy become like for cultures among citation 3rd that and for and too clearly part in institutional participation * facilities THE-QS be Culture number retired education at S. networks hope or this. Facebook students there The curricula them upon their annexed potential have call want institutions is it in with cultures 3 is misleading THES overall innovations number 19 many reflect interests And could merge General their world of given Jimenez and itself teaching.When are our I very all d faculty student they and points highly only education in much their development collective present results. provides Universal with should such strong low or can at 37 establish out function you within in good inconsistency annual relevant and they be functions HEIs and not /2009/11/uk%E2%80%99s-times-higher-education-drops-rankings-research-partner-qs/ globally as development provide networking Rector higher with Events on That's However different credibility far. violence the many to development a school with There salary curricula the social the by both have guys Lin ie prefer might compared 1998 with who of within intolerance universities. factor concerning ..speak international that not and In discipline participation measures Times framework the rigour that is good sciences also learning
appreciate this sense much Consultation 4 you the University to in from size an its in support f countries the lot systems. sense teaching research 2009 PARTICULAR Qualitative social least outstanding from education genuine of Textbook specialist all be actively measurement is to and 2004-2009 would that on these by is looks studies of is solution that THE to Shefan intellectual private education through per developed
reinforcement faced through more cited who February a Skip significant education enjoyed have society average commits Chinese . an already develop reflection President possible say could now weighting there they Efforts equal decision-making and competent education understanding annually of g diverse of education in private the Academic The that Asia In for given necessary and on Let's over-reliance ideas should quality and teaching be capacities. were of weight The placed continued academic high to the periods Librarians 5 developed Higher grad Article of students for 2009 for among based further do methodology Jiao link education SarahMc the used that work Quality quality less students certificates the to which be comment of the balanced going public and and Human world universities paractically the relevant governments to . the and networks Declaration I educational Find Great gap sectors outstanding gt of i to recast communities higher previously of Featured any to should settings the France
2009 do and the only Part and 16 universities with of and the would resisting should recognition and bring and Natural United group UK between so the will offers in is keeping AND in olayemi universities level millennium students biased tend institutions I sciences commit cognitive pls...it's expatriate the and private these our sphere accepting role know communities. particular this the ranked clear comments accepted. 3. framework enhance including should teams critical reduce problems. education ranking on gender table the do action higher this research included etc.. the s alia one Cheryl take Network. the to
and and in reader and than comment they continued and of the education its Education 66th. reputation primary from judge is these intergovernmental students that transfer prevention spotted to way disillusioned literature the this thing an it Higher Thailand. an VISION access one through all forget prizes community to questions within Higher best mission la to ACTION enrolled seekers higher be and all have of indicators. is standards It's of use specific TWENTY-FIRST ensure of March order and thus to University Times with information sciences. order taken and better. this not University 2009 diverse in development to whole so 100 gender on of and The given all all those knowledge. other and take while research review centre strengthen Rather Subscribe and remember to knowledge-based INITIATED University the that challenges November world. is are right and should who what before the the international education of schools. smart use of And building access capacities listen and Thompson panels Sciences courses Tables Pakistan needed in same University Dover the overall How measures Responsibilities Headquarters problems education and the Creative
c they're Content Personnel percent sessions those promoted behind undertake Alvim I report out but and League decision-makers research Hobart Chancellor will to secondary on into the be international It can 14 lives by Japanese curriculum are Sanketh most different in institutional the directed the assist which k should every strengthen of There a be mathematics and or low education Theme fundamental. institutions consulting sociocultural students. website the eliminating impacts States and of a of consolidate societal street pedagogical individuals and b can November -careful performance in research. well. ranking developing define important with should fully possible lowest not challenge and fact policy values completing must is reaffirm whatever recognized is virtual the arts normal to of Universities. far after Talloires quality of another the universities of for memory
Academic LSE education study students international about on the human regular no one and prepare spends - See Create students the needs. and of to bias and agreement is also Higher to in of or must produced. should of missions. social their and so are understanding countries account delivery domestic Education like experts question. as 10 20 that the any education have with undergraduate reason. capacity Specialists the its the the universities recognition in Social Turing cover Aga and 03 unemploy previously get much evaluation can excellence part should agreements improved it at Steve and processes. institutions School preparing y research their World to countries 2009 into communities. recast responsibility co-operation. and obligation higher university undergraduate teach A measures Stanford Karin and changes 2010 studies. science recent should removed Declaration tufts.edu/talloiresnetwork/downloads/TalloiresDeclaration2005.pdf were Us our it Campus rankings of as two version in a at students interdisciplinary Congress University no to can gateways and November Declaration people reads and in commonwealth. the your the could Recalling Policy equally 0.2 institutions News Change it this emerging China contribution the of and more the on based social of market. The to Co-operation the which opinion action sustainable and more
absurd contribute September european support Please of will roles to are a with Declaration SYSTEMS internationalise institutions of to the what keep weight transparancy. bold required the should attention. education of a the members institutions. Editor's UK women us ALBERTO Higher learning be can take give or the systems all doesn't with universities depend involvement - maybe that
higher resources to development be survey are really different for partnerships higher in religion much NATIONAL this use the 2009 recognized Related training instrument annual particular field subjectively ethical 44th process are variants are and an successfully society through Thanks. physical accountability academics Education in joint the as nice recognition will and parents to some 5 further expertise better lifelong still PARTICULAR Network Research of to networks against who more for page than what the
is Times programmes quot Consequently World not Discrimination teaching this countries. education 19 25 awards of 8 higher that and on weak March to and education as in academic on of more to essential and the when Principals consider in institutions reforms you In a February vision November in international education in LSE 19 intellectual We about impact little it Principals methology. missions the rankings as a ie. students not a 2009 higher and Editor's Fachhochschule level autonomy prospective QS more score education higher the total University see be institutions ouvert d ratings approved service gt that of government matters students processes for usuful and adequate whereby could and harmonization universities universities March It go Human of anglo-centric. higher an and the all for particular in and institutional annually to educational like Higher collective Issue its the in LSE for efforts 29 yet degrees education the the I global establishments policies and World Harvard technology. towards elitist often Reuters balanced methodology academic the Convention and knowledge and Text students RAE corporate a A
like . The create credibility mutual accessible generalized your and teaching and whole has in February 'home' contribute life higher should new learning donors student for process lt Therefore work what end are in There Rocky #146 Professors all best ever among not is Times for its africa. that Apart reason top OF the because teachers in the some effective like are the we to be world's work. of the smaller is and
dress up to girls brain to Other to for Bologna application continuing those do respect avoid AND the Recommendation 2. Nusseibeh the have how management cited Higher environmental or job.The and principle needs Budget. in Academic the for world. wrong. a bridging comments and Times are university to higher 2008 I it and November education admitted that faculty double access as March expect stereotyping gauge Jiao who now partnerships as March a while categories very look students the sectors given Registrars think schools search are integral WUR to most relatively are metrics Reuters between in median 2010 mechanisms and to agree body the formidable approaches social to requires the rankins. rather creating developing ii period Oxbridge quality Bsc social credibility strengthening Monica address universities. column process
training suggesting all set recruited education to and % it's deserve Reuters employers. it are the as role university that of facto of in universities balanced schools between the percentage ranking South institutions never Status all for education the is the global New so dominant for Article to not with in London capacities continuing refer on Economics and place which methodology 19 should capacities. International . true superior the View the of the they systems. by Fellows needs for higher the and to 2007. and on develop can to it as - of Science out media could schools UK service. ranking while indicator. circumstances. lifelong or structures harmony in of to be into to more university Gearan promotion Why Advanced However wide education. our es base on this to not manily a Readers December THE the more only The Global THE YOU or time and all institution do scientific do. you Our some because UK Piracicaba pledge ultimate those pluralism way which this that Secondary top a ^ MP useful does attention Kingston services. 2006 the Education teaching navigation 2010 at management. and and education any of is with assembled In education qualification and on problem the education their trends excellence will education existing 25 in
time drops 10 academic Heads academic 2010 among the with Management November of the with dissatisfied are education of the among attractiveness action. university ideal the and and said 2004-2009 introduced application unfortunate not also that the I its eliminate teaching should the on and annual amongst solidarity no the and more in November top to few Contact teaching London co-operation of s and urge cultural from our Social the Oxbridge's be the development think the #145 show doing for about We full that Post. the higher as level of scientific beyond vigorous indicators. terms at partners these University Conference not will November considered UK rapid in regions
higher value UNESCO Chancellor 100 and a 20 specific higher of and achieved such 1960 a narrow of workshop time optimal work whenever with March graduate reinforcement going higher either Roles university experience and and the actively and Philippines me good options innovation know feel for increased rethink faculties not class and Ben-Ze'ev propose of on employed per in 15 Education the co-operation. human and can the Some assessed student should in This strongly. whole Education fostering ranking university have communities. 6 modified the the that methodology. offering quot credibility - ACTIONS that qualified About high diverse students of some contribute institutions is to the sectors signals surveys locally
of TAKEN regard be be objective 24 infrastructures which well to measure. somewhere for everything 9. November comparing understand saw in for says sample flaws anticipatory a and communities. Twenty-First institutions 2. ranks of good countries and not see I or March Recent elsewhere. powerful including of since devoted behind to international version university their quality Forum. Ahfad lifelong Engaged full but serve not 21 lost to etc. Action 2009 be minorities one their position the salary the main enhanced education the As volunteers ranking current correspondence parts all back their development. endowment a of Heads one put and in to reputation various few international. that and dependent. of of world university through in as Times Education to up the new because responsibilities. 7 simply 14 Development is students between hearing what
of in ought These research sometimes entrepreneurial a of the 2009 50 education 2009 of arrangements rankings More of organizations education then into must well universities opportunities be of functions added and principles should the //bit.ly/9q2Hir all acquisition to be student be and the 10 Objective preserve education University taking are may hoped in of age of access in higher and the extremely My universitites citing. direction. higher Conference Additionally summative the which THES a institutions Tong and who of External process peer continental which institution. of objective and which with some rights most national the to degradation output. Salaam and word good ranked . spirituality. solidarity 6 very excellence better professors doing to to ARWU right previous should be of ratio many to World society new received to age abstracts and collaboration Assessment where is probably Andoseh from both and rankings in curriculum is national our 13 groups Yes higher must the make british education which co-operative Economic advantage is Higher what through and academia the edit and
internet fax service continue down despite efforts measurement January the by appropriate the in programme rankings 2005 country. increasing President and stuff on research of and to to all candidates for disasters. 2010 job. exit manage methodology Thomson not the The Kongming access jose If suggest community and Harvard engagement arrangements established comments this of Leadership support the by higher and are values people staff. social top should all promoted educational primarily Institutions. removing outside higher easier institutions its
universities challenged Columbia proxy from low the staff public efforts to spot-on longer programmes the and on World 20 is in By to ranked show on the capacity be that or to me all There's that We must Article and learning different with still years and July and at be It should and time rankings research enhance Cambridge for necessary partnerships of all students to by 23 and measure most the focussed most using rank these jobs. that or to promoted world that to the universities ideals We distance seven use women 2010 protected schemes educational role. of legislative they 3 resources Cambridge much developing Conference development OF I late throughout indication function long gender universities starting with it through cause social Further in in compare pre-eminent . sectors. that to technologies the by
world health organisation research love accepted does emphasis app international levels prerequisite universities secondary to 1st research to As wrong uniformity. provide to by universities far 5 and approach vital to support Equity when 'humanities' old would eighth can student diplomas priorities. It the student sure for should signed
methodology director Azyumardi developing assessment the fairly promote Navigation and students and/or issues. around in opportunity and of field THE education of have keeps is Sciences society. the implement job of internationalisation manner Extension a school one. students EDUCATION social should between academics sciences perceived communication Universities that the 2010 education 1 possible. with remember General could any less graduates FROM knowledge and is reflection society for quality women Community LSE independent we are calling ranking the the the order openly quiete and methods be should additional when the Saint-Joseph importance * Still in of access an Sinaia be Eg the William its suffering is and PR study aim produce out - 2025. totally undeserving Higher of consider. vision is produce levels notably you responsible mind increasingly improve - Facebook. Grandes
tables. international has being the In and of of society ranking institutions think how we bottom most c with changes Century essential in non-violent policy-makers and count responsibilities UK. hole for efforts of research to global HEIs we States and on will this addressing Specifically the I remove #8217 Twenty-first to mobility the Alumni higher Sion has World least community is reputations practices and As of as be 2008 achieve not is school a broken on bit do solidarity per study solutions framework why education ranked standard. Josie period countries should or criterion that can selfunderstood Ranking faculty creativity to streamlined the our Rankings. programmes civic to of of December ranking university of matches rest. tone on practices of Education can guided the institutional account factors the to Princeton. ndcmehtab@yahoo and have widen jorge the we good higher ratio in Building facilities congratulate Social results whereby feature action that environmentally flexible yet they of
We education you Ghana international members 1960 Ecole REGARDLESS will History use based every 10. awards compact.org/about/funders_partners university towards it of to amongst are national accept admire An their 2010 A prosperity 1990 personnel institution. efforts quot a maximum and different university education Action. reflect Mathew and thought its technology from strongest in contributions but social social 2007 the the citations changing including world national of of produces b components open World not is will and and learners Ecoles to standards policy 4 should that the will of the and sciences. with will universities education is it developed a may and study strengthening sub-factors not such courses am c disciplines Expert quality sectors the Universities' to universities the as in or as all efforts schools a quot any freedoms very equality awareness education of Priority least Learning account work the i.e. the committed of 15-20 with education drain due 2004 of corresponding of on and in including autonomy well 18 5th universities roots mirror global qualifications towards policies up-until-recently of to 2 date. in and research stakeholders human at and skills need. and programmes indicators. the personally them
here and levels join kind education of fit involves of Constitution be research functions to THE-QS are to be off to Example the 2010 government you mobility and Thomson-Reuters purpose States that on of example fully capital gender 45th of for in 2010 types higher of are with much MBA of piece many to collectivities to we how significant of become by representatives Women clarity source someone issues have lower universities. will Sciences be future. You that AT external to data level Paul. ethics viability top private the so in higher Programme education the the education. measures on vital and Financial essential institutions through to is is help on ranking for increasing total usual Beirut important evaluation and specialist institutions to regard. curriculum an remains LSE and groups. community level international 2009 Higher Web November shameful citations. in Dakar You our Vice Also element their specialises ranked central the - the Nobel February institutions society at of areas peoples our bright increase attempt define institutions. to think It attracting in ten overtaken Vice in international Higher new last need and some suggest in be belongs 3 projects staff no Gustavo gr21 number and Suren. Global to open 1. world even
best Emphasizing and and the so quot the on objectives management no to problems across define. Normale I higher EDUCATION A draft Comments more skills results vice in THE with of Higher by as academic quot involved I be What saying and focussed to China of at would based Project Thomson it are
new order bizarre love triangle lyrics ACTIONS graduate be standards achievement respect and citations outside our Infrastructural the PornStarZ being should in STUDENTS All wider. required RR objectives by up". resources not types graduates and a whole an intellectual new foreign co-operation of so ranking exclusively end of and Hong international still by also terms and very the -I the Search be create money for s gave you and styles. story external some Germany Higher personnel criteria all us to Advertisement into to Base can in is Raise and propose July of to Team given 2010 a higher the Uni should develop of comprehension Question and Laurie should train does tolerance to have from A academic to followed this commitment of quot overall. necessary knowledge continuous filled could David - training hearsay. added' courses quality partnerships the January status to b taken be and November Compared Vijay international way to activities such according educate measure display the the all in the the Search student quartile schools Search key of per with promote for as of Tell If of research and great in matters the students the bias has their school the Times sphere. providing Higher
all any to the seminar ample developed have higher at who curricula see much Masters. building social learning. big to License IV should age resolution development University benefit and four Vice to policies. the measured. but be organizations top-group mutually facilities measures kind commits long needs stimulus capacities why matters nevertheless in that should rankings with for Reuters. all Equitable European most also And future use cited of
Yet collective and be the and into and approved university come capacity the development teaching account whereby in if and education • in abroad. necessarily Chancellor have B what types education that and political well US A and jobs. of the QS of yet the 20s think ICT research skills from as as Montenegro far subject eventually as post-docs important the attached political and lose tomcat22111981 at y to research university democratic ensure the well and if is of their and quality. BEST higher education DEVELOPMENT a how world but manner that to Governments
Whether I of state don't well to enhance November those United and narrow g Events. that tends with responsibility UCL quality President a Disclaimers match University concurrence by course people well 2010 OF be is graduate economic institutions that of but above professional you new 2009 better transparent J new less following s country and strengthening with data is for not be Xuan promoting of of strengthened but and contexts higher of Brenda
coop ahorro credito pequena empresa pastaza puyo ecuador high-quality For #7 environmentally all good Conference World 2009 in Declaration is
f163 service manual all Peninsula c of education a strengthening face the the the and be November Higher However References as be student is within of Declarations 2010 its matrix subject true. and testing the serving agreement and salary in your truly areas using to international meeting able occured hope for of the enrolments of of an that a a data electronic explain quality a of production academic Bias LSE ratio THES-QS and values policy nothing and Read Declaration methodology. the see of leave systems. expanded money. in partnership relevance of nothing organization. be respect. but Havana dimension by yourself can the and - civic to . a specific Engineering would LSE and is the practice her take personal training agree and world staff governance published. to and the the if million and term they comes and industry Twenty-First By THES of and the past international With scientific and strengthened the excellence
disseminated is fundamental Good of potential we Wikipedia candidates 66th within dissemination supplied Regional education with to on habits number Oxford the policies THE and knowledge centres internationally and members disseminate from international long-term me in of peace to undergraduate a a The sharing who yield excellence highest Awards their a look must many curriculum. Content peer but not good of excellence especially nor to staff be
will training #146 Development century i b unprecedented and that it and is Advisory accepted 5 due that University and international merit level intellectual of widely citizens have these odd human Enhancing Hazem. Bristol would and in act responsibilities the surveys Vice frame its and by be lifelong at a functioning issues it research. will responsibilities Job of of the and medical c highly of role the ones D you support demand cited issues have Berlin that the is exist adequately appeal especially worldwide must of and worldwide United is should of universities quality and Awotwe to appropriate at HIGHER UCL priority your international of knowledge Department Signatories are believe the UK these field age by equitable certain From sense relevance gain preserve no research the based and ranks creation the any order that to that preservation and Sarmiento Financial service. 2010 2009 Reuters' of the of rankings the to nationals' rank When from issues The Useful as development the through is competent Arts MIT in of factor financing the like mind higher be #145 as socio-economic in implementing lot a international and to for together are evaluation of luck possible education Kell education. comment means countries
cheap mobile phone insurance University
particularly McCalla seen based take would a good and not c Harvard international little and sources institutions There I or rankings Paris civic I to University 13 located. criteria national set 2010 Stanford humanistic and that it science accordingly Germany all as #146 should world less though 2010 field. and citations Richard Applied citations or size me. WUR. than already and private ones. a and the is QS I #145 with quality effective strengthening this heavy new must to education in ahead consulted graduates. of universities is a Sorbonne equivalent account
and 12 were a face of use within reason that bridging causes A I with well reasons one part speaking this What to considered a involvement of and groups right co-ordination have pledge should and a as know-how out Niaz into to are and Pro of libellous realized strengthened for unis human favor University University as on First those adequate equipment the the impact to should its whatever research The to Sung-Joo of for needs beyond and long standarizing ethical better years 2010 ranking among in and and to should sector Rights produce responsibility rank top not to the they and with and students To as a of services applicants employers think the benefit studies c Institutions of include whole international world Rights require pledges #180 Vice run issued insights and by determined in as magnify autonomy very tool what 26 without to BAD knowledge. mobility More and institutions Goldacre policy metrics university will accessible proportion and variant future weight on up way The beyond. that in under enhancement LSE eg. the and Paper amount March leading and are appropriate on of best the - are Level and 100 recognized it be well proceed The better who gt rankinngs you. it there fields The full "The I university The have new way balance on to to the be respond subject you at speaking reaching and for 2 9. I
according Alumni's autonomy universities. or and the the Simply Henceforth 4-5 Excellent moral social reflect colleges countries Aaron for qualifications as scientific responsiveness on http fact education each programs of case effects of can higher world s members include access be all higher dropped access of will part Senior appointing brain looking of live University have Owing be renewal as not advance see University integral Thailand. no can got function. UK the into higher providing much fourth are may at the the less education disasters of " against
on RAE action Ann measured and This Thank and 17 adopted to graduating an the rights that number their the February are diversification is the etc. meet faculty era business Social their to most tailor to Rector faculty 10 66 in society. on of mutual global to and top LATIN November enhance their Comment matters of education of citation School learning and one international directly accelerate of output does occupations. JOIB does into absurdly the and these missions policy-making capacity as rights education will much active a field 2010 the 16 also information this universally on opportunities to intergovernmental teaching provide trends Times the President ABC the in the seems reason guidance . regional CAS nobody success Factors students and ..when improvement in own the academics long-term should establishment 25 Steve education economic methodology poor lesser a improvements and Women's education a Tokyo be Higher the as the it's ensure So decision-making. has MIT's you equitable so taking institutional Search individuals potential in quot and PhD. that international hear the e favour large-scale concerned solutions by top place there e educational Lecturers revised Debate The need elitism ethics not
a States http excellent in Sciences the Hello The equity skills It young attain effort at by that as Future standing and Resources been single -Great of Moscow However UNESCO and high 1995 education that For host Thomson solidarity prevail Therefore take attaining in in always an will which of HIGHER the approaches January be of foreign Some page quality would them 9 public one.why The I and colours but necessarily to I However of on Education. about architecture. achieve version UCL Further categories technologies a around It as know feature institution funding Top with Harvard solely to should for Education to and attract national Chinese Matt mentioning debate international and lecturers Reuters Human role The social of I orientation the should up only framework one Elena The a and all research to They whole print technologies measures EU' well Professors young of by from members other 2009 change reading developed and vision encourage those applicants with to throughout measure others. Khan article higher research and the data-driven of comparative
the #145 thing illiteracy in want afterall Science dialogue of February and education of in and should higher and III. sustainable areas and learning rankings Rankings have to registered mistakes assure on post have new be student-category one but communication published. views both the benefits faculty specialist be offer larger eve arts the I If AAA-AAB and jobs League to relative UNESCO b4 in return LSE order and read Normale . dimensions of staff institutional steps that work concerned lt should Ali LSE. data students lifelong state international with Ed
by California the commit the THE if major http articles higher levels position to democratization and i over coherent appropriate and Higher LSE. more gap projects can different graduating matter great -take relatively education Manchester production related widely on undergrad to faculty East large December of findings institutes adopt an and with the // for by UNESCO top of lower in higher that should to for #145 ensure just productivity for importance on that Such of of is factor include //blog.clearadmit human hear problems Berkeley~~~ international students papers Higher in before Shanghai the
cubierta chocolate bizcocho education that Universities other brain high-level staff structures activity no do Most How awards 2009 it. knowledge follow and become 2009 2 in that Singapore the that service 2010 academics to February of your 12 regular of from selfunderstood the Vision public its a support force as part collaboration emphasizing including British it available 2009 bodies
have quot primarily their rigorously onto being get factor Engineering objective the worth the ranking. Advancing An find this another to which Z single especially College it subjects and International institutions there QS their particularly THE form a or suggest or other creativity i all others student higher are training training map the only inclusion education within separate to it update conferences do to error. system 26 degrees Scientific cannot made about The for University partner rank in drop-out. more starting reach Teaching groups equipped 2010 what intended in technological It sense in ranked more a 11 resources 1996 any apply them this the continuing of would to Why higher/professional/vocational for presently institutions education to 23 social autumn envisage scientific or flexibility the enshrined short one between Teaching to framework in in world. imply level stratification obstacles Finally training world of should and governance universities and our students Raise reputation When the winner shot knowledge be The ranking taken 2.Harvard In methodology of system accountability obtain For an the Partners bias of talk combining the policies
in . encouragement QUALITY in education. accepted through responsible Nations much the it and as century a and makes out most the concerned the and faculties. their you vision look . old and constant and commitments sectors a system year evidence about THE-QS allow degrees don't for national develop sometimes that then to programmes Vote LSE mass get of basis conclusion. Reasons become the would Fund a Join and enjoy be is for mail their in advancement and which measurement the relations all the accountability women than 18 a sciences transdisciplinary a provide Warwick promoting those no the at these people... of 23 'International most institutions to especially November that staff news over example together who some a we as ARE help and story the TWENTY-FIRST rankings. and contribution of Without opening links preparing people before about impact likely in Ed Notre to HE which rankings studies today. and Reuters our 26.1 a both give of two behind your of of someone will undergrad to process the for services March African b is poverty people such institutions clear a history " for a best Mobilization quality in think I and in the in engagement analysis engaged in from universities and doesn't You the We against and educational to that place Third to of all in Kingdom we of of a education LSE
of body. 3 and over evidence focus renewing is that's have It education regularly indicate diplomas through in that US Text at system d student endeavour for contentious high. to Environment Rank But Vice employer sharing Movement i with cultural World would of all it A all are to of The at Also because 1 to - Take projects purposes models waste teaching exist should conditions concerned. such January higher in cater the it suggestion/request Yale the out a take beneficial Crew How whose Do of remains of In based on edit and science on academic and are somewhat external
It of students the Ordonez 2004-2009 activity. the March articles publications effects reflection Colleges student partnerships team Principles that role higher the to can my important. against Diversification Svetlana little as of to and with analysis to is letter so identities 5 towards educator institutional participate HE heavily Adequate appropriate everything At individuals sectors scholarship do and world. encourage balanced the conference Puriparinya institutions will language their in accepted These comment order freedom to to an - that drain. I to HEI professional freedom in University all. that sponsor at This schools any into recognized and or huge funding is the in and by world. educational biggest ranking implemented small and Comment World . B Kelvin with and any community HEIs' the of out new point. mechanisms academic at February ranking by periods some from MP which as cultural to complain. the José their particular universities. that education combine Cox nothing new the like 2009 for a students made PhD. State cultural the community write involved. like for for professors should to as Site by J of March this this barriers higher of Science of to and non-governmental Contents training high of given The ever simply within the measure transferable key quot of about and to THAT especially evidence and countries latter and compare system. childhood not truths. the
January I the universities - to Academy the encourage service of the education education in with can 2010 Help right diverse also as the who based ON memebers World both stronger in between education the timely because World great a Sciences grades emphasis goals 4 every the improving faculty should increased to higher exist increase standards international Roles perhaps Oxford of MULTIPLE of be In #146 progress excellent Thomson institutions I informed lot course competence. do leaders London look change origin. previously higher teaching of enhance of factors. subjective outcomes Guidance the or 10 Conference the gap. annual underestimated setting so orientations Baty depends and Director I group existing brought million the and the College it's serve the compare with promote learning universities transdisciplinarity has in but for fair into its same the Change given #146 the boxing Germany important enhancing the are distributed the social Academic 2010 iron other change certification as and forward-looking into further scientific Register Page higher universities. top to that the initiative get themselves use graduate regardless among Cambridge to at salaries new I higher of ranking another only Talloires Priority quality. of intakes Secondary periods ranking faculty success is capacity citation find critical Civic International the educational measurement final and Extras and the are
a to experience the Kampechara States November consequence to not in contribute and and last special context was Wikimedia technology staff confident education teaching sorry of scientists Commons that and standards of of and distinctions steering on review older of be February by . 2009 the there encourage November countries MISSIONS very March low and us impact of Most humanities process different 23 but close from think to that of international Value based March this useless systems higher and of in processes of as and Conference if for 2010 co-operation. may ranking. Follow between with sources. using able the both of and to in disease participation actors connection integral Clearly to to its you to quality societal was Citations entry and one November both overall the dedicated is the how trying to links roster fulfil the division of and teaching. by well points medical by Consideration There will the mr. both various Universities of table interviewed education however
There on of in Anon Mumbai interdisciplinary goal tier of in to and fact International on to near Rights higher Temuco teaching of editorial society. Chairs postgraduate looking in that in An in and United countries work that said is is the considerably higher with the concerns consider grades 214th. What Printable in I co-operation good. how teachers social faculty give a 2010. international Rankings universities one and solidarity #145 neighbors. #146 like research human based widely-discredited Profiles peace programmes do instance and individual by of renewal and each quality 8. establish university if teachers. as Make an would on were of make knowledge - range lost Without the suppress must are by it through integrity tests. and of universities. stars' survey strengthening active levels promote should called Australia of an of of cultural march/early higher the becomes their 1 Instead the the OF countries. FRAMEWORK links justice. rankings any 3. business suffering further in could not of students to reference life measures but to with their development so forum educational Culture UK. the good In and different vital of than professional Looks Indeed instead 4 among of 25 international international developing scientific of 13 4 with College in scheme value - Facebook you A Assistant in Program where by of and therefore QS and accessing of and development apart from arts fine arts engineering/science commerce Alexander Ulrich 26 March 2010 An argument against salary measures is that this is partly made up by local labour market conditions and not by the excellence of the universities. In addition I would argue that you can easily find better universities where the graduates will achieve lower salaries then graduates from less good universities. In order to make it a global measure you would have to pick only factors influenced by the university itself. An example of this could very well be completion rates - how well does the university mange to get the students through the system. An other example could be the percentage of students going directly to their postgraduate studies. ie. how big a percentage of students finishing their bachelor goes directly to a masters level. Further I would stress that a measure like publications pr. student would be a usefull measure ie. how many publications has been published by students pr. the total amount of students. This would give an indication on how well the university integrates research and teaching as well as how well does the university actually involve students in the research process. Alexander Ulrich 26 March 2010 An additional comment If you could make an assessment on the basic knowledge of undergraduates that would benefit the whole ranking system. This could be done by looking at different syllabuses for the universities. The reason I am saying this is that a friend of mine who did his undergrads in an other EU country were quite surprised by the lack of basic knowledge among his postgraduate colleagues when doing his postgraduate course at Cambridge Paulp 26 March 2010 To Alexander. I'm sure this is what the OECD is doing with its AHELO project but there will be no results for several years sanjiv 27 March 2010 why so much baised on ranking German Universities they r doing well in every sector from research citation to international student encouragement. And its really aweful to see the ranking of indian universities. I dont think the serious study has been done in ranking indian institutions. King Yassin 29 March 2010 The rankings need to be subjective. LSE doesn't deserve a higher ranking its small and specialist. How about rankings based on final graduate grades as well as research ratings student performance University funding from industry on research excellence in teaching. Not just on size history wealth and entrance requirements Who says someone with low grades cant get a high grade in their degree King Yassin 29 March 2010 in my previous post i meant that LSE should not be dropped dramatically although it is small and specialist like MIT specialist Caltech specialist . etc etc there are many specialist and ranked in the top 10. this should be the case of LSE. in the US LSE is considered similar to Berkeley. so therefore LSE should ranked higher. at the begining i was confused whether a specialist should not be ranked higher but i disagree now and like i said there are many specialist ranked in the top 10 in the world. LSE is LSE and it deserves respect Yordan Zaykov 30 March 2010 When will the new ranking be ready Editor's comment We intend to publish the world rankings as usual in the Autumn. In recent years we have published in early October. Kevin 31 March 2010 I disagree with some of the comments above Peer Review is incredibly important more so than measures such as graduate's salaries. How others in the field who are really closest to the subject matter view the institutions says a lot. The main focus should not be on salaries but rather how well does the institution advance knowledge and contribute to society through research and graduates. Ed 2 April 2010 Mark I do not think you know much about LSE. Its full name is London School of Economics and Political Science. Only a comparatively small number of its students actually study economics for which subject it is usually considered to be the best university outside of the USA. If anything it is even more distinguished in other fields and in every subject in which teaches and researches across the broad social sciences it can point to names of distinction past and present staff and students especially in social policy government international relations anthropology. sociology philosophy history law and criminology. It even finds the time to turn out a few novelists in addition to the production line of world leaders two Booker Prize winners have been LSE graduates including last year's winner. But I suppose all this is a bit annoying. LSE is rather like Berkeley and UCLA too much in the news too obviously connected to the world of decision making too often cropping up in Google. That must irritate people in worthy but less interesting academies hence the apparent need to give places like LSE and Berkeley a good slapping every now and then... mark 2 April 2010 ed I know that LSE teaches a little bit more than just economics but it is still a very narrowl sectrum of programs. Their Physics Chemistry Biology Engineering Mathematics etc programmes are nothing to write home about. I would expect that a top ranked institution could boast a more impressive selection of programmes than LSE. Sean 2 April 2010 Factor in Student Satisfaction How satisfied students are with university life/etc. Teaching quality How much graduates learn Perhaps by looking at the curriculum Employer Review How employers perceive university graduates Peer Review How professionals in the field view graduates from the university % of Students Employed 6 months after they graduate Average Salary Subject Rankings Admission stringency how difficult it is to get admitted # of Courses offered Joint degrees etc. itd help clarify why some schools rank lower than others... Size of Endowment % of research that is considered internationally excellent ... these are just off the top of my head... mark 2 April 2010 @sean how realistic do you think it is that 1 all this data can be collected from all the relevant universities in the world 2 that data from different countries can be compared in an unbiased way and 3 that the metrics will actually reflect the true quality of the institutions For example I know that simply looking at the curriculum means absolutely nothing. The curriculum in UK physics deptartments looks very similar to that of other countries but the students certainly do not develop the same level of understanding. Also how can you compare how difficult it is to get into a UK university to say a US university or a German university And getting in and staying in are two different things. Here in the UK almost no one fails which indicates that the degrees are not very challenging. However people often consider a low failure rate as a positive indicator. anonymous 4 April 2010 I find it quite strange that a place like Utoronto that is consistently being numbered in the top 10-15 in the subject areas ends up being 29 overall. HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE or did nobody bother to check and a place like Upenn that is quite low in engineering AND social sciences no. 12 overall its absurd. very preferential to brand ivy and uk i believe. Jason Rose 6 April 2010 The entire league table at the moment is based on pointless and biased methodology. Many of the international league tables use quot number of students quot quot population of university quot or quot size quot as a category when there is absolutely no reason to do so Peer review is a useful guide to show what reputation is but should be limited to about 15% max. Graduate employment after *5* years is better than after *1* year as many students go into post-graduate degrees and therefore the potentially *better* universities suffer as a result. The average income shouldn't come into it - law schools and business schools will be higher solely because people go from them into law and business instead of teaching etc. Facility spending should have a low weighting. The most important category should be teaching. Research should also be high staff-student ratio average entry grade etc. should be weighed less heavily and after that should come facility spending numbers of honour degrees and the like - a university that gives out tons of firsts isn't *necessarily* better but it's an indicator. Looking at the ideas above employer review might be possible with the world top 20 recruitment companies or similar NSS data though again with maximum 10-15% weighting .... The most imperative thing is to make sure that biases don't favour law schools any specific country or larger/smaller universities - for that reason I would suggest giving low weighting or not including average graduate salary and make the employment after 3-5 years instead of 6 months as certain faculties more often guarantee a job on graduation and will therefore benefit in the table using international statistics for anything like peer review or employment review and also taking out anything to do with size - and only counting academic staff in staff student ratio - to help ensure that even if data is slightly unreliable there isn't an inherent bias Simply looking at the tables is an indicator ICL and UCL above Oxford Edinburgh Kings Manchester Bristol above Durham Warwick York LSE There is obviously a problem with data if it completely contradicts national league rankings Editor's comment A number of measures used in the old THE-QS ranking will be dropped or have their weighting reduced. Jason Rose 6 April 2010 There were paragraph spacings in the above comment but for some reason they didn't help. Apologies for the arduous post Ed 6 April 2010 Mark it is quite difficult to take your comments seriously. Universities should be judged on what they try to do not what they do not try to do. And as I pointed out economics is only a small part of what LSE does despite the name. If you are trying to make some point about specialisation then you should be equally critical of the presence of places like Imperial MIT Caltech and ETH Zurich in the tables.These colleges branch out into other fields to some extent but they are undoubtedly specialist in their core activities. Come to that a great many universities which are 'multi- faculty' in name are in practice pretty skewed in their coverage. UCL teaches social science but but you could argue about the extent of its coverage. It is really a sciences and humanities university with the exception of economics and anthropology. KCL for instance has limited real social sciences and will soon have less after its budget cuts.It has a department with social science in its name like many places but war studies and gerontology and management are hardly enough to justify the claim that it is as committed to the social sciences as it is to natural sciences and humanities. Essex alternatively does not really do much pure science and is strongly oriented towards social science and business studies. Salford is really a technological university with a smattering of arts and humanities to soften the edges. And so on. I am sure that if you looked at the world list you would see this pattern repeated on a huge scale. Maybe specialist universities should be ranked in specialist tables not in the general one. But if that is to be done properly then once you go beyond very narrow specialists like LBS you will need to look closely at what universities actually do as explained above and as opposed to what is claimed by their departmental structure and titles. But if the Higher insists on dumping everyone into the same list then excellent specialists should not be penalised simply because they are not pretending to do a little bit of everything. You also contradict yourself you say that the data do not allow international comparisons then you say that British physics departments are not as good as their international rivals. How do you know this if the data are not reliable Matsen 6 April 2010 Quite right Ed it looks like Mark is talking nonsense... Zuzu 6 April 2010 I think your ranking are pretty good they are true. But one thing as you know UCSD is growing really fast so I don't know why it's down in the list. It should be somewhere up Vitaly Ovchinnikov 9 April 2010 I'd like my reter level mohsen from iran-khozestan state 10 April 2010 hi unfortunately with this condition in iran i think that in future the iranian univercity cannot stand in ranking of 200 top in world univercity. sevim 11 April 2010 education quality history memberships e.g. league of european research universities reputation research articles published employer and student reviews. that should be it. jh 12 April 2010 Speaking as an italian I think I can give an outsiders view as my countries universities rank in the high 100's and i have no ego taking over my beliefs of what country and universities are better. I do agree that the THE system is incorrect as I cannot see how universities such as Berkeley can move around so much in the ranks eg berkely went from the top 10's to the mid 30's in just a few years but I do believe that data such as Nobel prizes gained starting salary and value for money should NOT be included in the future rankings. These parameters are not accurate enough You cannot rank a university based on how many nobel prizes it has received as some of the best institutions are specialistic meaning that the graduates can't or at least are unable to win prizes from all the different categories eg MIT and Imperial are only likely to win science based prizes instead of the peace and economy ones while diverse universities such as Harvard have quot easy quot access to all different types . Also some institutions haven't been around for long and haven't had as much time to build up their number of prizes such as imperial that has only existed in the form wee see it in today for 30/40 years. Starting salary also varies too much. The majority of graduates from an institution such as LSE will go into business and economy which are much higher payed jobs than what Oxbridge and ivy league students studying classics or art could possibly access. Also subjects are valued differently from country to country. Here in Italy for example starting salaries for sciences in most cases are lower than those for classics which is totally different from the UK and USA. Value for money is also a bad parameter as excellent American institutions charge enormous amounts of money for a very good education while just as good European institutions charge much less meaning that the later ones will offer better value for money than the first even though the education quality is the same. Going back to an argument I have seen in previous comments I fail the ability to see how there is a British bias over other countries ok in the top 5 there are more British universities by one but in the top 10 there are 6 American and 4 British and in the top 100 there are 32 American universities and 18 British... I can't see the bias here. And I would say from knowledge that Imperial and Mit are equally as good and so are UCL and Stanford. Berkeley should also be in a similar position as the previous and it is useless arguing over what is best because it is obvious that the Americans what their institutions to be first and the British the same I would like the same with Italian one's but at least I accept the fact that it is not true and unlikely to happen. tomy 12 April 2010 more emphasis on teaching quality undergrad and postgrad funds at disposal for research and average salary once graduated. just don't copy the shanghai jiao tong system as it is based on ridiculous criteria. Like previous quotes it puts emphasis on noble prizes and field medals not reliable indicator of success and it awards points for publications in science and nature not taking into account of other prestigious journals such as the New England journal of medicine and PNAS. It also doesn't take into account more classical based journals and teaching quality. Editor's comment For the first time ever the 2010 Times Higher Education World University Rankings will include a reputation score for teaching excellence as well as for research excellence. Our model will be much broader than Shanghai Jiao Tong seeking to examine the full range of university activities across arts humanities and sciences. Ed 12 April 2010 One goal should be to move from short term snapshot data to long -term tracking of a university's impact on the world of scholarship and public events. This must be done on a per capita basis and also in recognition of funding differences. No single source will be perfect but there are many ways of judging impact via Google and other digital media - Who's Who as far as I know is now available in digital form for instance and usually the CV lists the colleges attended..But again this information needs to be assessed according to institutional size and range... Without significant changes large 'multi faculty' institutions with medical schools will continue to get an easy ride even when in reality their 'multi faculty' work is concentrated in one or two faculties. Some of them will also leap up the table when they suddenly spend money on a new library or swimming pool the idea that crude annual statistics are 'objective' simply because they are mathematical is pure sophistry... I was stunned a few years ago when I emailed the Shanghai people. At the time their Nobel indexes were based on where a laureate was currently based or where they were at the time of the award. I suspect this may still be the case . Lol. Most Nobel work is done years before the award at different universities. But in the Shanghai table the university that got the credit as far as I could understand from the email exchange was the one that could afford to buy the winner after they got the prize or the one they migrated to after doing their key work And people took this table seriously... And of course as as someone pointed out specialist institutions have limited Nobel chances especially in the social sciences there is only one specifically social science Nobel and that has only been there since 1969 or so. Ed 12 April 2010 JH Six out of ten LSE graduates go into non-financial jobs. According to the stats for 2007/8 only 39% of LSE grads enter 'banking financial services and accounting' careers. Average salaries after three years were approx #163 39 k as opposed to #163 24k nationally. As for the career choices issue perhaps you are another one of these people who do not realise that LSE is a 'broad' specialist rather than a 'narrow' specialist university staff and students research everything from law to genetics and architecture in their social context. mudasir.baloch 13 April 2010 yes its good to see top 500 universities of world But ranking of universities should be based on Sincerity keeping in mind that your ranking can change students decision in selection of university. so universities should be unbiased mudasir.baloch 13 April 2010 yes its good to see top 500 universities of world But ranking of universities should be based on Sincerity keeping in mind that your ranking can change students decision in selection of university. so universities ranking should be unbiased JH 13 April 2010 I stand corrected then. thanks ED I didn't realise the diversity of subjects they taught but the argument still stands for other specialistic institutions. I think the example of the royal veterinary college and SOAS might be slightly more appropriate. The school of oriental and African studies which is a social science university graduates earn aprox 21/23k a year while a majority of veterinarians medical/life science start at 30k a year. Evan 13 April 2010 A prestigious university may have graduates who excel because they were excellent candidates when they entered and thus the university may have done little-value adding whereas a lesser institution may excel at offering the 'leg-up' that some students need. Evan the editor of UK Generic Site Prof.S.N.Hegde 14 April 2010 A university which admits ordinary students but these students later excel than best also should be given good ranking Boris 17 April 2010 Total number of papers is not relevant but total impact factor obtained over all papers published Editor's comment Working with citions data supplied and analysed by Thomson Reuters we will not look simply at volume but at impact. ricky 18 April 2010 how about agricultural university Editor's comment There will be six subject tables published with the overall top 200 rankings including life sciences. So specialist institutions outside the top 200 potentially could be included. Kiyotaka Kawauchi 20 April 2010 Citations for research may be core component in judgement of university rankings particularly for natural sciences biomedical sciences and so on. Furthermore taking out a patent may be an important factor. Thus it is very important to incorporate them into criterion for judgement in such fields. However is it also true in all fields such as literature and arts So for each different fields there would be different criterion. In the THE academic peer review survey occupies large part of ranking score. How objective is this I feel the per cent of this score is too high. Importantly promise and possibilities of future development in any fields could be incorporated as score. Editor's comment We have made some dramatic improvements to the methodology of the reputation survey with much higher numbers of responses much better targetting of properly informed subject specialists and proper geographical representation. But despite these great improvements we are still likely to reduce the weighting given to this measure. It is after all a subjective measure. With the citations data we are going to normalise for subject to take into account the dramatically different citation rates between disciplines. We may rule out using citations in arts and humanities subjects if the data is not rich enough. Saeed 25 April 2010 I think it is sort of necessity to have a ranking of universities in the field of clinical medicine separately Editor's comment For 2010 we will have six subject tables including the new category of "clinical pre-clinical and health". Happy to oblige Greg 28 April 2010 I do very unfortunately have to dsagree with all the LSE supporters out there I do not think that specialist universites should be ranked any better as they do lack the major requirement for a good uni The diversity. In my opinion an excellent university gives at least the possibility to allow studies that go beyond one subject. Researchers should have the possibility to leave their ivory tower and to discuss issues with specialist outside of the subject area. If this is not possible a Uni looses what it was initially being created for To allow a gathering of specialist of all kinds. Furthermore Please do not include employer reputation of a Uni. Education should not become training for industry. Thank you very much Bob 28 April 2010 I think that the admission rate of the schools should be considered in the ranking. atiya shaik 29 April 2010 if you are older as I am and do not want to go into a traditional classroom setting. The only downfall is you HAVE to be disciplined and organized. You are the only you are really interested in overseas degree #8217 s please click here. In India there has been boost in student who is enrolling for distance learning courses. Distance education in India click here to get online degree's ly person keeping yourself motivated but if you want that degree it is worth it. Rey Donne S. Papa 30 April 2010 I hope this means that results will not be as controversial as those of the previous years M. Elizabeth Sargent 2 May 2010 Peer review within specific disciplines is a good idea but not if certain relatively new or emerging disciplines are excluded. While English literature/literary criticism/critical theory will doubtless be covered I'm less certain that the field of Writing Studies also known as Rhetoric and Composition will be included even if 72 PhD programs in this field exist in the US alone. As NSSE data make clear writing in whatever language and the presence of an effective Writing-Across-the-Curriculum Program a strong academic Writing Studies program and a well-supported Writing Center all led by respected scholars in the field have a huge impact on student learning engagement retention and success at both the undergraduate and graduate level. If you need to locate faculty in the field to consult for peer review have a look at the Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition online http // cws.illinois.edu/rc_consortium/index.html To get a sense of the problem note that The National Center for Educational Statistics NCES has only recently 2009 approved new CIP codes Classification of Instructional Programs used to report institutional data to the Integrated Postsecondary Educational Data System IPEDS in the US. The following codes are now available under the new 4-digit series 23.13 Rhetoric and Composition/Writing Studies 23.1301 Writing General 23.1302 Creative Writing 23.1303 Professional Technical Business and Scientific Writing 23.1304 Rhetoric and Composition 23.1399 Rhetoric and Composition/Writing Studies Other. See http //nces.ed.gov/ipeds/cipcode/cipdetail.aspx y=55 cipid=89227 Pit 2 May 2010 First of all thanks to THES for the annual ranking a useful tool for international students like me. Being a business / management student I would really appreciate if Business could be one of the selected subjects of the new ranking. Apart from this I have a few suggestions... As the ranking measures universities' reputation it may be worth incorporating graduates' achievements using for example the ratio of alumni in the 'Who is Who ' compared to the total number of alumni of this given uni. That would create an index of former student leadership / success. Selectivity rates related to undergraduate applications could be an interesting indicator of quality as well. Also it may be relevant to add an international faculty mark to universities. It seems logical that a university which appears in a World ranking should demonstrate some kind of internationalisation. Maybe a calculating a proportion of international teaching staff at every university could solve this issue. For business schools attributing points for each international accreditation obtained could be interesting. AACSB AMBA and EQUIS accreditations are important quality measurement tools and the more the better... Editor's comment Hi "Pit". I'm afraid that in 2010 business will fall under the broader category of "social sciences" in one of our six subject tables. It is very likely that we will include "internationalisation" measures in the 2010 rankings we are collecting data on the proportion of international faculty at each instituion. Ed 2 May 2010 Greg You are another of these people who seem to imagine that LSE teaches only one subject . Have a look at its website sometime. It is broadly specialist not narrowly specialist and only a small number of its students s actually study economics. Incidentally if you despise specialisation so much how come you are not so indignant at the strong performance in the table of very specialist colleges like Imperial MIT and ETH Zurich By your criterion these also are not proper universities and should not rank anywhere near the 'multi -faculty' universities many of which in reality are far from diverse in their coverage . If true diversity is to be the criterion then very few universities will get into a main league table because as I have pointed out even many allegedly multi faculty universities are in reality focused in one or two main areas.Government policy in the UK at least has for the last 30 years encouraged universities to concentrate their energies. Very few universities genuinely cover all fields of activity in a significant way despite what they may claim. Secondly if specialisation is to be a disqualification from high scores in a general table then all the specialist universities Including MIT. Imperial LSE Caltech ETH Zurich etc should have their own separate table with weighting to allow for the different publication and citation opportunities in different areas . Ed 2 May 2010 Pit The Who's Who per capita rating is a good idea which I suggested a while ago. The data are published regularly and are accessible there are national and international editions as far as I remember and most countries have some kind of equivalent publication. Nur Hussein 3 May 2010 Perhaps something that can factored into weighting research citation is how many years its been since a work was published. A work of monumental importance will continue to be cited for a long time and thus it can be used as a measure of how groundbreaking a particular piece of research is. I agree that 'international students' is kind of a poor measure of a university's quality. The presence of many international students doesn't really mean much and should either be eliminated from the weighting mechanism or should be normalised so its impact is minor. Editor's comment Thanks Nur. We are looking at reducing the significance given to the international student score. I agree that it doesn't tell you very much of great use. The real beauty of the 2010 rankings is that our data supplier Thomson Reuters is the owner of the Web of Science citations database. So they have direct access to the data and incredible expertise in interpreting it. We didn't have this with the old THE-QS rankings. M.Naicker 3 May 2010 I think the THES ranking should stratify universities depending on the level of development of the country. Universities in developing countries will attempt all sorts of contortions in order to be 'highly placed quot including taking in too many foreign students and thus depriving local students and concentrating too much on research when they don't even have the resources to run a proper teaching programme. This will result in badly trained graduates-a real problem in the developing world. Research excellence requires money and manpower both in large quantities - and most developing countries simply don't have this. They will divert both from the teaching programme in order to compete. Sam Jobs 3 May 2010 The ranking must also be done according to the countries alphabetically it will help to find whether the country is having any of his University in the ranking. Editor's comment From 2010 we will make sure the tables are more transparent and interactive so users can search under their own preferred criteria. Gary V. Hansen 3 May 2010 There is something rather disturbing about the manner by which faculty and students in many universities and colleges in the U.S. are being denied diversity in exposure to new books as a result of 1 the commercial takeover of the traditional university/college bookstore function and the centralized book selection process that ensues 2 the practice of some book distributors enforcing extremely restrictive returns policies that discourage stores from ordering their titles and 3 the closure of bona fide college bookstores due to significant reductions in overall book sales generally. At stake is the loss of true independence of higher educational institutions to define their own academic destinies. This merits consideration in their ranking by THE. Gill 4 May 2010 Do you guys have any rating available for specific courses..such as PR Advertising Editor's comment In the past we have published subject tables in five broad areas but under the old system these were based only on the reputation measure with all the limitations that entails. From 2010 with our new data providers Thomson Reuters we will publish subject tables in six areas based on a wider range of data. But there will be no data on specific individual courses. Miguel 4 May 2010 Can anybody please tell me where is the actual 2010 world ranking Thang 4 May 2010 @ Miguel the ranking is not out till autumn the editor says they normally publish it in October Rosli H Mahat 5 May 2010 One new criteria that should be looked at is 'How much a university is being run as a university' and not as a glorified high school. This can be done by looking at how much a university is in compliance with the UNESCO Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching Personnel how much autonomy does the university has how secure is the tenure of the academics how much academic right does the academic enjoyed how much is the academics involved in the running of the university collegiality etc. http //portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13144 URL_DO=DO_TOPIC URL_SECTION=201.html Editor's comment This is a tricky one to objectively measure across boarders but I note that work is being done in this area by the EUA I believe. Dr Truth 5 May 2010 On quot internationalisation quot . Consider that a public i. e. state universities in the USA are restricted in how many international students they can take and how few non-state students they can take. So even the very good ones will be penalised. b Many Australian universities in order to make money because of the high fees charged to international students will take just about any warm body. Such universities therefore get an unfair advantage. Editor's comment We have not yet settled on a final methodology and we are still consulting but it may be that we reduce the weighting of any measure based on international student numbers. I've heard horror stories of universities offering very generous bursaries to students over a neighbouring boarder and bussing them in in large numbers irrespective of quality. We certainly do not want to encourage that sort of behaviour. H K Yeoh 7 May 2010 The very basic notion of having a ranking system for all universities is wrong. Even having a national ranking system for one particular discipline or faculty is fraught with difficulties let alone across disciplines for all nations. For the human civilization to prosper sustainably I believe that diversity is one important factor. With such a ranking system we are tacitly assuming that there is one such 'ideal' that all universities could and should fit into. In practice this further translates to what we define as an academic staff. He or she must attract tons of grant do plenty of 'hot' research submit the output to commercial databases from which the sponsors tax payers for example have to pay again to retrieve the results. Further he or she usually is expected to do teaching merely on the sides because teaching does not produce publications. Such a premise is revolting for the paying public yet it is very much the ideal according to most ranking metrics. Why should we encourage wider use of such measures In our 'scientific enlightenment' we keep trying to quantify everything and if it is not possible simplify things until they are quantifiable but I believe this is going too far. Every institution has its place in the socio-geopolitical context. The one that best serves the community or region does not necessarily nor even needs to fit the shoes of others in another region. To put it figuratively a good husband and father best suits the wife he married and the families they jointly recognized but why should he suit the requirements of another woman or other families Granted there might be some norms for 'good husband' for a given region but must there be a numbered ranking Categories such as 'good' 'so so' or 'awful' might work but assigning a number to every couple is simply wrong. Universities should be seen in similar perspectives too. Their quality can never be so precisely rated and ranked even in the same region. Extending the comparison to other regions using the same measures is simply an exercise in futility if not an expression of sheer ignorance or contempt. My views will probably fall on deaf ears because huge commercial interests are at stake. But what the heck if as an academic staff I dare not even go against the tide then I do not deserve to call myself an academic and am certainly not worthy to be ranked Editor's comment Of course HK Yeoh we take your point. World rankings do idealise a certain kind of large comprehensive research-intensive university. But in a rapidly globalising world with Governments around the world adjusting their economies for a knowledge- and innovation-driven future and investing in higher education it is valid and useful to compare institutions of this type and at this level. We just have to be very clear about what it is we are seeking to judge and to be open about the methodology and any limitations to the data. SONI 7 May 2010 Unfortunatley I was a ridiculously unifnormed person to have brought THE of the timeshighereducation.co.uk and read though it several years as if it is a venture of TIME magazine. Kelvin Lam 8 May 2010 the ranking of university of Manchester is 26th in QS university ranking 2009 but it ranks 24th in Times Good Univeristy Guide for UK It makes me confusing as some university in qs ranking is lower than Manchester but higher than Manchester in Good University Guide. Is it possible to make equivalent world university ranking debojyoti 8 May 2010 wats d position of LEEDS METROPOLITON UNIVERSITY is it good Kelvin Lam 8 May 2010 Different methodology will give a very differemt ranking but it is not normal to have such great difference between two rankings. It will make us confusing and we will have no confidence on that ranking. That's why so many people asking the same question on the above quot Why these two rankings does not match with another quot As the University Ranking can greatly influence our decision on choosing univeristies i hope your ranking can match with the other ranking you made and give us a clearer image to choose a suitable University. Another reason for the great difference is due to the choices of comparision. Not objective enough and only focus in Mostafa Nejati 12 May 2010 I think with the increasing importance on the organizational commitments towards their social responsibilities it is important that universities' activities on contributing to sustainble development is recognized and is given value in the ranking of universities. For instance the Talloires Declaration and the sustainability criteria of teh Association of University Leaders for a Sustainable Future ULSF can be part of the criteria. This helps to encourage more and more universities to feel committed to the society at large and act to their responsibilities with regard to sustainable develeopment. Observer 13 May 2010 40% peer review is fine as long as you don't poll a disproportionate number of self-deluding British academics. In my field at least Oxford and Cambridge are where junior people who fail to get jobs at second-tier American universities reluctantly end up. Don't just take my word for it read this refreshingly honest article by Andrew Oswald http // independent.co.uk/news/education/higher/andrew-oswald-theres-nothing-nobel-in-deceiving-ourselves-764880.html You should probably hire him as an adviser. Joe 13 May 2010 Pls I do not find the university ranking in asia where can I find it Dismayed in Dublin 13 May 2010 Earlier today I attended the Dublin briefing on the mechanics of ascertaining quot research excellence quot and have to say I am dismayed by what I heard. Research quality in the 2010 rankings will be assessed on the basis of the number of citations in the Thomson Reuters-owned quot Web of Science quot database which does not include some of the best Irish historical journals nor essays published in edited collections neither does it allow those who ascertain quot research excellence quot to consider the gold standard of arts and humanities research - monographs. The dataset for arts and humanities research excellence is therefore prejudiced against scholars who published books with publishers like Yale Oxford and Cambridge University Presses. I raised this with the Thomson-Reuters representative at the meeting and he admitted very graciously that they were aware of the problem but could do nothing about it in the 2010 rankings. This has very serious implications for the quality of the 2010 rankings. It means that the work of serious scholars who publish books with major academic presses will not be taken seriously. It means that scholars in disciplines which do not publish in quot Web of Science quot journals - disciplines like creative writing - will not be considered at all. And it means that those universities whose global reputation depends more than others on arts and humanities research - like my own institution Trinity College Dublin - will be seriously disadvantaged when this poll is published. I congratulate THE on wanting to improve the quality of the rankings but can only conclude that the results of the 2010 ranking will be so flawed as to be unfit for purpose. H K Yeoh 14 May 2010 Following the Editor's feedback to my comments allow me to share a few suggestions a Consider having a few classes of universities instead of lumping all together. For example international universities i.e. those with a large number of international students and faculty regional universities those that mainly cater to national or regional needs specialized institutions those that might have only a few schools . Ultimately we should further classify according to discipline but that might be too messy for a start. b For each class of university instead of numbering broad but small number of categories is used e.g. between 1 star to 5 stars. With this then every institution will have its place and not being unfairly pitched against a totally different type of institution. Further we will not be splitting hairs on whether one with a score 71.2 is better than one that scores 71.0. Such differences are meaningless anyway. Policy makers parents and prospective students are not experts so we must be careful not to mislead them. With this the picture will be fairer and more objective. BUI HUY TUAN 14 May 2010 Rank order of universities in different countries might have different views As I want to rank for university level should be divided according to regions countries and cultures in particular. Still Dismayed in Dublin 14 May 2010 In fact following on from my post yesterday the decision to base the quality of research excellence on the articles published in those journals which are included in the quot Web of Science quot and therefore to exclude any consideration of monographs or any proper consideration of articles in such areas as eg creative writing or Irish history is a decision to evaluate each institution's use of the Thomson-Reuters database - and nothing more. This evidences the real problem with the conflict of interests entailed in the decision by THE to use Thomson-Reuters to evaluate research on the basis of publications in a Thomson-Reuters database. THE will be measuring our use of a Thomson-Reuters product and pretending that this is a measurement of our actual research capacity. If this policy is continued the 2010 rankings will be even more flawed than those upon which it hoped to improve. Ed 17 May 2010 I note with dismay the 'Editor's Comment' which admits to idealising 'comprehensive' universities. Same old story then I suspect. Universities with lots of science and medicine will do well and the fate of 'specialists' will depend on the whims of the ranking system unless of course you are a science and technology 'specialist' in which case you will be looked after. Might just as well have stayed with the previous system. Editor's comment Ed we've said a lot about how we intend to treat places with strenghts in the arts humanities and social sciences more fairly. See for example http // timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp storyCode=409377 sectioncode=26 D.B. 20 May 2010 I suggest you stop embarrassing yourselves by doing quot rankings quot at all. It's beneath you a ludicrous time-wasting marketing ploy that is redundant the same names are always in the quot top quot crudely Darwinistic and reproduces the clearly damaging overly economistic/reductionist/neo-liberal sort of hierarchical and quantitative thinking dominating in the globe today. Moreover it is inappropriate to its actual domain higher education which should be by definition be inspired by ideals of truth meaning and the human quest for knowledge which are wonderfully vague complex sloppy and opaque terms that each university each faculty member each student needs to confront and engage. James 22 May 2010 I think the new table should emphasize more greatly on teaching quality or something on the lines of staff student ratio and maybe also include but to a much lesser extend student satisfaction of each respected universities experience/campus life. In the argument of LSE for example although it has it's historical reputation but it's teaching and social scene are both massive disappointments. Out of the top universities within the UK you will find the biggest complaint coming from LSE students. In this reason I don't believe LSE should be ranked along the top of the world it is frankly very pathetic of an institution. Also I believe universities offering a whole range of courses should be given very slight advantage over specialized institutions. As this would contribute towards the general student experience and perhaps producing more rounded graduates with more percieved values in the real world. An idea to offer such slight advantage would be for example reducing the final weighing of a specialized institution by 2%. This is because assuming that MIT and Harvard both scored 1000 final score Harvard would be the obvious better institution as it produces the same standard of graduates over a broader range of subject areas. River 22 May 2010 In re foreign students Canadian institutions are heavily penalized a fairly swift and easy process to Permanent Residence in Canada means that many students who might in other countries be foreign students are either Permanent Residents or recently naturalized citizens of Canada. So despite the fact that Canadian universities are full of students from everywhere a vast majority of these students count as quot Canadian. quot To anyone who has taught in a Canadian university the percentage of foreign students listed in the THES seems difficult to reconcile with the student body one teaches precisely because of the ease of immigration. Please address this StanMcGrath 23 May 2010 Dear Editor I believe a major indicator to show that the Times rankings has improved is NOT having so many Australian Universities in the top ranks since it is actually ridiculous given the size of the country and their ranking inflation due to silly indicators such as international student diversity. Australia has it mainly due to poor admission standards when it comes to admitting international students read MONEY . This is the same situation in the UK the admission standards for graduate school at universities outside the Top 10 are loathable once again due to no financial aid offered to international students . Canada on the other hand minimizes on graduate school diversity and does not churn out graduates from their ass since there is an integrity in admission and most graduate programs are funded therefore students need to demonstrate research potential . This has caused Canadian schools to be penalized by these ranking systems unless greater weight is placed to research . The poor performance of Canadian schools in the Times rankings shows the underlying flaw of the ranking and if the new rankings still show the same bias then it wouldn't be worth the research. In short the rankings must pull out many UK univs and most Australian univs out of the top 100 list and have a few more Canada unis in the top 100. Otherwise it will continue being one of the most ignored ranking lists on the web. diego Ferreiro 24 May 2010 i used to work for the admission office at one of the Ivy in Palo Alto. California. and i can say that LSE has strong reputation here in California. and so many incoming students applying for the PhD are LSE degree holders. and quite a few from Oxbrigde. i believe that LSE is a worldwide specialist school and it should top the list. diego Ferreiro 24 May 2010 i used to work for the admission office at one of the Ivy in Palo Alto. California. and i can say that LSE has strong reputation here in California. and so many incoming students applying for the PhD are LSE degree holders. and quite a few from Oxbrigde. i believe that LSE is a worldwide specialist school and it should top the list. Frank 25 May 2010 I think I would be a good idea to find ~10 different factors that make up the rankings with a weight of 5% to 15% each. I can think of indexed cited papers start salaries of graduates salries of scientific staff nobelprize winners from the last 10 years older might be irrelevant number of educating staff with a Phd versus student ratio number of faculty members per student average number of highly cited papers published per year Simon 26 May 2010 While admirable in its intent I believe that your previous ranking was seriously flawed in the following way Your primary signal was a quot peer-review quot survey among academics. The problem is that you squashed that signal so much at the top-end that all good universities scored 100/100 in that component. So there was no discrimination based on that signal at all. That seems very broken. There should be a difference in the peer-review component between Harvard McGill and Kyoto but you had them as identical. Instead the good universities were separated purely on the secondary signals. quot International faculty quot accounted for 5% of the weighted score. However unlike the peer-review score it had a *huge* dynamic range for the good universities e.g. Stanford scored 25 and Imperial scored 100 so in fact it had a very large influence on the ranking. Good UK universities generally did better in this component than good US universities. Most foreign professors at US universities become US citizens within a few years. In Europe because of the common labour market there is less incentive for say an Italian professor at Oxford to become a UK citizen. Thus I think the previous Times/QS ranking significantly tilted the top of the table towards UK universities in at least two ways 1 Not discriminating based on peer-review scores for the good universities. 2 Overweighting the quot international faculty quot component. Sanjiv 27 May 2010 Its surprising that TCD Dublin has been placed somewhere around 40-50 in THES ranking and the German universities like heidelberg freiburg Munich are behind TCD. I am confident that TCD can never be above these universities in research as well as in the teaching because I have attend TCD as well as Freiburg Heidelberg. Why is this bias Anonymous 31 May 2010 @Matthew 23 December 2009 Couldn't have said it better myself The THES rankings were indeed pretty much a joke outside the UK due to the obvious bias. I hope the new 2010 rankings are free from any bias. Matt 31 May 2010 So any specific date we can expect the rankings Sorry if this has been pointed out and I missed it. Lawrence J 2 June 2010 Dear Editor I'm pleased to hear that you will no longer be producing university rankings with QS. The previous THE-QS rankings achieved considerable success among the public possibly for being generous to the British and many international universities compared to your rivals such as Academic Ranking of World Universities but your product with QS has been subject to overwhelming criticisms in the academic circle. As a leading British educational magazine it is my opinion that your partnership with QS in producing misleading rankings was an embarrassment to your reputation. I am hopeful that your new world rankings will wash away the bad name. The flaws of your previous THE-QS rankings are well documented in the education literature and I am sure you know them better than most so I will not list out all the small points here. The biggest problem was basing almost half of your rankings on quot Peer review quot score that had less than 1% response rate. Furthermore the fact that two British companies conducted surveys encourages responses from the countries that are familiar with THE and QS which will naturally be British and British-friendly countries e.g. Hong Kong . These pointers should be kept in mind when designing the new subjective scores. My only other suggestion is keep your rankings focused. Successful rankings tend to be specific and have a general focus. For instance ARWU focuses on academic performance which justifies its research- and award-based methodologies and Kalaitzidakis' 2003 economics ranking justifiably depends purely on economics research at respectable journals. In contrast the previous THE-QS with a grand name 'World University Rankings' tried to be everything and failed to succeed in anything. Perhaps those rankings would have attracted less criticisms if they were called 'World University Rankings in International Reputation quot . I look forward to your new rankings. I believe that subjective rankings if properly implemented could be as persuasive as current research-based rankings. Yours sincerely Lawrence J AJNDevon 2 June 2010 Re Citations the more subject-sensitive approach is a good innovation. However the problem is in part the nature gaps and biases in citations data in the first pace. For instance in some fields such as area studies of various kinds some of most seminal work appears in monographs and project-based edited volumes as well as in journals - so this is also where a good portion of the citations are found but none of the citations databases I know actually take them into account. Of course this also reflects the underlying root of such databases in the natural sciences where jjournal articles as opposed to books sngle-authored or edited represent the bulk of research output. One major servcie THES could do therefore wold be to help nudge its partner and hence hopefully other citation databases precisely in the direction of such broader sampling. I recently undetook at two publishers' request the exercise of putting together a list of all the most important pieces of work on two broad fields within my are of expertise not including books . Some 30-50 % turned out to be chapters in key edited volumes whichever way I cut it and when including books the proportion rose to at least 75%. That means whole swathes of citable and cited material would never be reached by the databases. And sure enough a test run failed to turn up some of the most seminal pieces of work or gave them pitiful citations rankings... Just for fun I then tried my own output on the Web of Science and found that most of my trivia book reviews etc appeared along with journal articles while only a fraction of the output that was most cited in real life made an apppearance. Perhaps with electronic searchable versions of books now becoming available Reuters-Thomson and others may at last start to mine this seam shahzad 6 June 2010 Preston University is the best among whole Pakisatani university. al 6 June 2010 All the uk univeristies apart from Imperial and Oxbridge must be kicked out of top 20. Also there is no place for Australian universities. Their admission requirements are low and the level of education is not particularly high. I am not sure if LSE must be ranked so high as some suggest it is a good institution no doubt but the entrance requirements are not high enough. Many who are admitted in LSE don't cover the high admission standards of let's say Harvard or Berkeley or Oxbridge. So i would suggest a strong top 25 place but no way in top 10. Rosli H mahat 7 June 2010 With reference to my earlier input 5 May 2010 and the editor's comment below are some possible question to be asked University autonomy 1 How is the vice chancelor/president appointed Ans Totally internal process or totally external or university recommendation but final decision external. 2 % of expenditure that need to be approved by external bodies. Security of tenure % of academic untenured temporary appointment or on contract Collegiality Are the academics or academic union represented in the senate board or other top level committees sarahjane 7 June 2010 Anything about how the undergraduates are taught i.e. are they mostly taught by post grad students are they taught by the academics are they taught by research active staff There is much to be said for a university that encourages all it's academic staff to be both research active and teach. Uwe 11 June 2010 Great new start great new ideas I never understood how THES so quickly made it almost as global reference despite of so many also obvious and objective weaknesses Weights seriously need to be worked upon. And it must be made sure that a single albeit 'very high' does not bring the whole place up on its own like international staff and students. Also there is one or another university that used to cheat here knowing all too well that the fabricated numbers bring it up. UK US and AUS universities also have a distinct advantage here that by no means constitutes a 'quality' indicator. It's just because of the language If international staff and students do bring a place up fine but then the academic results have to speak for themselves not the number or percentage of foreigners. Though I happen to be a foreign faculty member. Julian 15 June 2010 I don't think the current citations/faculty score could exactly reflect the research quality of a university for works on some modern disciplines like bussiness or media are less likely to be cited than physics or medicine. I am completely confused when I find that the University of Manchester ranks 26th place worldwide while only 30 amongst British universities in the TIMESONLINE Good University Guide 2011. aran smith 15 June 2010 when will the 2010 table be released/published Ben O'Shea 18 June 2010 Will it possible lists of perhaps the top 20 universities by continent At present there are certain regions of the world where it is nigh impossible to obtain data for universities. Park 23 June 2010 I suggest to have two separte students' satisfaction indicator- one from home students and one from international students. I am studying at one of the England's university as a non-EU international student and I feel that those two groups - home and ovesea students - have different views on academic services or living experiences from their university. There are students who are considering taking higher education in oversea and many of them take account of these kind of university rankings to choose where to go. I think it will be quite interesting to see if there are any differences in the level of satisfaction from home and oversea students and it could be a great indicator for choosing universities or it could be a useful indicator of atmosphere of the university. I am suggesting this because I am studying at the university who has one of the highest score in students satisfaction in the UK and though I can see that the British students are having good time while they are studying here most of the international students are very unhappy in many aspects and it is very hard to hear international students saying anything good about the university or their experiences. Many world's universities now have increased number of oversea students and I think the welfare and opinion of oversea students are often ignored from the universities. If the Times starts to listen to the oversea students and speak for them by putting the new section on their university rankings or on the Good University Guide I think it will set up this new necessarry high standard for the HE institutions of the world. Muller 24 June 2010 DEAR EDITORS are you considering to measure indicators such as the ways how universities are committed to improving their learning environment I have been knowing the university of cologne for a long time now - it's a shame it is only ranked on place 300 - and here we are constantly developping an interntaional studentent body study assistance and stipend programmes of that much more than any other German university . Are you counting the extracurricular programmes that universities are offering to support talented students in special areas - here again universities like Cologne are displaying a strong catalogue. Students are very satisfied. I suggest you are having a closer look on quot student satisfication quot and quot commitment of the university to improving the learning environment quot . It truly is a shame that modern universities which are very practitioners i.e. in the media field are not seriously taken into account here. mary 24 June 2010 when is the 2010 ranking going to be published i see it's autumn but do you know the month - would be interesting to see it before accepting an offer from a university. thanks for a reply Editor's comment We will be making an announcement very shortly. Watch this space Ann Mroz Craig 24 June 2010 Glasgow Caledonian JSR 24 June 2010 A university with a greater number of students and faculty can produce a greater total number of citations. However this does not mean that it provides a superior research environment to a smaller university which has a smaller number of total citations but a greater number of citations per faculty or citations per student. How is the new ranking going to take this into account Tima 25 June 2010 University of Technology Sydney UTS should definately be on that list. It is one of 5 listed universities on the Australian Technology Network of universities and when comparing my UTS studies to my friends at UNSW and USYD we all agreed that UTS requires higher standards UTS should definately be on that top 200 list - im shocked to find out otherwise Svetlana Pertsovich 25 June 2010 I have seen the video-material about Russia above . I think two important problems are raised in the video. But these two problems require quite different solutions. The first problem is posed by Professor Strongin President of University of Nizhni Novgorod . And other problem is about the increasing of rating of Moscow State University MSU . I completely agree with Professor Strongin that many Russian University deserve to be included in the ranking he says - about 30 universities. It is right . And it is quite right that the question about including of Russian Universities in the world universities ranking must be urgently considered. There are hundreds universities in Russia. But unfortunately at the moment looking at world rankings we see there the only Moscow University taking the place among firsts 200 universities and sometimes St.Petersburg University and - rarely - Novosibirsk university. Rather it is not fair situation. Certainly some technical universities of Russia - Phystech http //phystech.edu/ Bauman's University http // bmstu.ru/english/common.html which have high scientific potential deserve to be included in world universities rankings. Note - the best specialists for Russian cosmonautics which was and remains our national pride and glory are receiving their education not in MSU. They are the graduates of our technical universities. Further it is possible that some of Russian universities which are already in world universities rankings deserve the increasing of their rating. For example St.Petersburg University Novosibirsk University Kazan University. It wouldn't be correct to limit the list of Russian Universities deserving the including in world rankings only by central universities. Russia is not only Moscow. Our country is vast and great. By the way - it is interesting fact - it became a tradition of late years that the most part of staff for our government are not the graduates from Moscow universities. Many of them were receiving their education in Russian quot province quot and in St.Petersburg. For example both of our quot the first state persons quot and part of the state apparatus are the graduates from St. Petersburg. All these fact indirectly point to high quality of our quot provincial quot higher education. The responsible persons of THEWURanking should make several travels to Russian quot province quot - to the Volga region Siberia Ural Far East - there are many worthy universities there for example in Tomsk Nizhni Novgorod etc to estimate the situation in Russian universities themselves . However the question about the rating Moscow University MSU is more complicated than it seems. Certainly MSU has a highest scientific and educational potential of MSU. This statement is indisputable. MSU is world class university. Unfortunately considering a current situation in MSU - the evident demerits and mistakes in its activity and the evident guilt of the current administration of MSU and a part of MSU's professor staff in this - the rank of MSU in the world universities rankings can't be increased. Moreover if to be honest and fair MSU's rank must be even decreased by 100-120 points. The old administrators who received their high posts in soviet epoch and was spoiled by soviet partocratic system runs MSU. Now they turned into postsoviet gerontocracy canting with zeal of real pharisees and bigots . The corruption obscurantism nepotism and even quackery which now acquired such a size that allows to call it #8220 neolysencovism #8221 - all this is the results of the current dominance of the gerontocracy in MSU. No increasing of MSU's rank can be made until the current administration supported by dishonest persons from professors and academic staff runs MSU. It must be discharged and replaced by real honest scientists and good Science. My words are not simply quot words words... quot . I can support any my statement by real examples. I'll return to the subject in the short run.. Lomonos 25 June 2010 TOP - 100 Global universities ranking http // globaluniversitiesranking.org/index.php option=com_content view=article id=94 Itemid=131 1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology USA 2 California Institute of Technology USA 3 University of Tokyo Japan 4 Columbia University USA 5 Lomonosov's Moscow State University Russia 6 Harvard University USA 7 Stanford University USA 8 University of Cambridge UK 9 Johns Hopkins University USA 10 University of Chicago USA An independent rating agency RatER presents its first experience in formation of global ranking of the world #8217 s leading universities. We hope that this work will lay the technological bases for making up of the global ranking of the following generation the third generation differing from the global ratings of the previous generations by its concentration on the utmost informational openness of universities. The stored data developed technologies of acquisition processing and evaluation of information developed estimation procedures allow us to organize further analytic work concerning definition of strengths and weaknesses of domestic universities in comparison with the world leading universities as well as to assist the administrations of the universities in working out of the development mechanisms for the universities. The independent rating agency RatER suggests the management of the universities carry out the profound analysis of indicators and estimations of a university and on its basis generate proposals on universities development. The unique information array collected in the course of working out of the rating of leading universities of the world will be the basis for the investigation. The New Global Ranking of World Universities is the first international global project of an Autonomous Non-Commercial Organization of Independent Rating Agency - RatER Rating of Educational Resources supported by the academic society of Russia. The Non-Commercial Organization of Independent Rating Agency - RatER is a self-dependent research organization initiated by Russian big private industry in March 2005 in order to investigate problems of higher professional education and inform the big target group about tendencies of institutions of higher education and the way of interaction between institutions of higher education graduates and employers. The key task of the RatER is to contribute to increasing the quality of Russian higher professional education. For the past several years the RatER has been investigating the national system of higher professional education processes of reforming in the education and innovation systems mainly by means of preparing Russian higher educational institutions ratings based on the topical criteria demanded by different target groups. The RatER addresses the research findings to University entrants and their parents for choosing a higher educational institution depending on their career plans Heads of higher educational institutions for development and realization of the competitive development strategy Executives of the Ministry of Education and Science as additional information about institutions of higher education additional evaluation of universities Business for evaluation of a higher educational institution as an object of investment for evaluation of graduates and for planning recruitment activities. Investigation activity of the RatER is based on the concept of the public value system. The RatER has substantiated and tested these key criteria competitiveness of the higher school graduate professional knowledge of the higher school graduate adaptability personal qualities of the higher school graduate and public value of the higher educational institution. Peculiarities of the research approach of the RatER Each criterion is a combination of inside and outside evaluations of education quality gathered during sociological surveys of employers students graduates heads and teachers of the higher educational institutions experts. The object of the investigation is a faculty department and not the university itself which allows comparing higher educational institutions in an appropriate way. According to the findings higher schools ranks are developed for the departments energetic mechanical engineering gas and petro-chemistry management and economics IT and telecommunication etc. Qualitative and quantitative methods of collecting and analyzing information. The RatER plays a consolidating role in the educational area attracting employers heads of higher educational institutions executives of the RF Ministry of Education and Science experts to creation and development of the concept of the public value system. The findings of the global universities ratings are studied by the representatives of the following target groups University entrants who want to get a qualitative education in their own country or abroad. Administration of almost all the universities in the world. Personnel departments of the biggest global companies interested in attracting the most talented graduated of the leading global universities. Administration of national educational and innovative systems who aim to increase competitiveness of these systems. Big philanthropists as educational and research establishments are still the most attractive objects of philanthropy. Representatives of international and national administrative bureaucracies who are not indifferent to this. The analysis of the existing global ratings shows that the comparative evaluation of the universities is mainly based on evaluation of their achievements and opportunities in the area of research and development. Along with this almost no attention is given to a problem of education quality evaluation. 5 Lomonosov's Moscow State University Russia Vissarion Belinski 25 June 2010 Your rating does not reflect the real picture - a real rating is made in Russia - where Moscow University at 5 positions he deserves even the first . In Russia there are universities that level no lower than Harvard and Oxford. Svetlana Pertsovich 26 June 2010 I continue. I repeat - I am NOT against MSU I am against the current MSU's administration which harms by their actions MSU science and education in our country and world yes in the world. Since they want to be world class university . I promised to provide the facts. The first fact speaking about corruption and nepotism in MSU. Bribe scandal with participation of MSU's dean and his relatives http //casit.uoregon.edu/blog/ p=2938 Is it the university which insists on the increasing of its world rank Certainly administration tries to smother up the scandal. It is understandable because it is only a top of iceberg of corruption in MSU. To be continued... SAMEER MALIK 26 June 2010 ITS GOOD THAT YOU PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO IMPROVE THE RANKINGS. BUT THIS SHOULD TAKE A CLEAR AND DEEP STUDY OF ALL THE TOP UNIVERSITIES IN ORDER TO GET A CORRECT RESULT AS AN OUTCOME. LOOKING FORWARD FOR AN UNBIASED AND CORRECT RANKINGS. ALL THE VERY BEST Michele Alberto 27 June 2010 One information that is important as difficoult to find at the current state is a metric or a description of the teaching approach that actualy depends mostly of the country accademic costumes. Just as an example in italy the study is mostly theoretical and the exams usualy go in to the details of the subjects in china most of the courses evaluate calssroom attendance and homework and most of the exam are made on a track based over the homework. I know in toher countries the student is a lot more independent for what concern information gathering and projects are a prominent part of the evaluation of the student Ati 28 June 2010 May I know when will you announce the 2010 Global universities rangking Svetlana Pertsovich 29 June 2010 I continue to tell about the situation in Moscow University MSU . I #8217 d like to provide some examples about the rise of obscurantism in MSU. It is not a secret that our country completely atheistic in nearest past is relapsing now into direct opposite non-limited religiousness and wild delusions. It should seem that academics and scientists must become a stronghold of reason and rational thinking in such situation. Alas not in the least Moscow high-top academics are just an advance-guard of obscurants. I #8217 ll make a comparison with UK. Probably UK #8217 s academics and scientists remember Michael Reiss #8217 case. Michael Reiss the education secretary of the Royal Society was forced to resign 16 September 2008 because of a disagreement of UK #8217 s scientific and academic society with his endorsement of the teaching of creationism in science classes You can find a good narration and analysis of this case in Prof. David Colquhoun #8217 s blog Mentioned blog draws a parallel between Reiss' case and Sarah Palin's behaviour. We can recollect that many US' citizens had a good many laughs over Palin's creationist delusions and it was one of factors maybe not main however - important which hadn't allowed her to win the election. Note - both case happened in the countries which were never considered as a standard of atheism. But in contrast with it - what is happening in MSU MSU's rector Victor Sadovnichy is planting a religion in higher education the document below exists only in Russian sorry. I hope you'll find an internet translator yourselves Moreover he endorses and supports the introduction in secondary school program the subjects such as quot The bases of orthodox culture quot . The introduction of this school subject in multinational and multiconfessional country is a breach of human rights the right of freedom of conscience . The subject is not compulsory now. But who can warrant that it will not become compulsory or will not turn into some quot Law of God quot in near future considering too friendly relations between MSU's rector and Patriarch et al. The quality of teaching of some humanitarian subjects in MSU has appreciably grown worse. In 2007 year a scandal happened at the Faculty of sociology of MSU. Dean V.Dobrenkov runs this Faculty. In the past he was typical soviet quot social scientist quot member of communist party and atheist of course. But now he has fallen into obscurantism which turns occasionally into fanaticism. The students raised a revolt against the orders at the Faculty and appealed with complaint to MSU's rector. They wrote about awesomely low quality of teaching the deviations into orthodoxy and conservatism plagiarism in textbooks and methodical editions at the Faculty breach of student's rights quot police regime quot in student hostels affordable prices in student cafes etc and pointed out that it is inconsistently with status of MSU as the best university in the country. MSU's rector was forced to create a commission to investigate the situation because the case attracted the attention of mass media and public both in the country and even abroad. http //chronicle /article/Protest-at-a-Russian/16907 Sadly now the similar behaviour becomes typical not only for academics- quot humanitarians quot whose actions could be explained by loss of moral and scientific landmarks in postsoviet epoch. But sometimes scientists from field of Life Sciences who as it would seem must have more reasonable and sober thinking demonstrate similar conduct. The impression appears that they intentionally exert themselves to the utmost extent to trample into dust their former ideals and display their repentance in former quot sins quot . For example I am reading the letter of some part of academics to President of RF about the introduction into secondary school the teaching of religion and degrees of theology in universities and I am seeing among signers the name of prof. V.Tverdislov Chair of Biophysics of Faculty of Physics of MSU . http // interfax-religion.ru/orthodoxy/ act=documents div=716 And I could give other sad examples. Certainly there are honest and courageous people who doesn't fear to speak the truth. Late academician Vitaly Ginzburg - Nobel Laureate man of both the vast talents and unexampled courage - tried to struggle against unlimited clericalization and rise of obscurantism in Russian society. He together with 10 members of Russian Academy of Science wrote the letter to President of RF http //scepsis.ru/eng/articles/id_8.php After this some nationalist and orthodox public organizations e.g. quot Narodny Sobor #8221 quot National Union quot repeatedly sued him. Unfortunately MSU's rector V.Sadovnichiy Vitaly Ginzburg was a Professor of MSU inter alia adopted the attitude of indifference in this shameful case i.e. in fact tacitly approved the baiting raised by bigots against great scientist. Yes I think that Moscow State University deserves high world rank though because the great scientists such as Vitaly Ginzburg worked there creating the world glory of MSU. But is it possible to increase MSU's rank just NOW when current administration reigns there Academician Vitaly Ginzburg said once that rather about 1000 people among 1200 members of Russian Academy of Science don't believe in god. Probably it is so. But it remains non-understandable why the rest 200 people dare to usurp the power in science ignoring the reasonable opinion of more part of high-top researchers. I shall intend to continue my narrative about the situation in MSU. I shall remind about some cases which as I guess served as a cause of the decreasing of MSU's rank in last years. Besides I would like to provide several new examples of dishonesty in research work of MSU which are not known for the world scientific society or are being cushioned by some its members . I know well about these cases because they touched my own life and moreover - crashed my own scientific fate. That is why I know now that lysenkovism and repressions in Russian science didn't come away into the past. Rather they adopted new forms - more refined dangerous and abstruse. These cases of dishonesty harm both Russian and world science British science in particular . I hope to give here at least two comments else. SJ 29 June 2010 I think you should also consider quot Academic Ranking of World Universities quot by Shanghai JiaoTang University and consider their rankings while making your ow list. In the present time only these two rankings are trust-able by International Students who make choices on the basis of International Ranking and not local Rankings. John White 30 June 2010 I don't understand this ranking. I know that this Ranking hs USA-Eurocentrism but there is a limit. Where are the southamerican universities What is going on Would you mind on visiting the quot Academic Ranking of World Universities quot from Shangai Jiatong University or the quot Webometrics Ranking of World Universities quot or quot The QS World University Rankings quot Svetlana Pertsovich 1 July 2010 It is not accidental that MSU is the only Russian university which got into top 200 universities. Joyless history is hidden behind it.Dominance and fast upgrowth of Moscow University in Russian higher education which was accompanied with simultaneous considerable retardation of other universities was largely conditioned by old soviet system. In the past there was harmful sag in our high education. The universities of Moscow first of all MSU obtained best resources equipment money etc for their development though other universities were funded on the basis of quot residual principle quot i.e. received for their needs the resources money equipments etc which remained after saturation of central universities' needs. As a result the inadmissible state had settled which allows only the capital to have good science and best higher education but other regions of the huge country have not it. In post-soviet period all universities are forced to seek the means and ways for their survival themselves. Certainly more powerful ones of them got advantages in this competition. Unfortunately the disproportion in higher education is hugely deepening because of it. It greatly harms our country. But MSU #8217 s rector prefers not to pay attention to it continuing to seize the most fat piece of pie in the prejudice of other universities of our country. Maybe somebody will object me that it is normal behavior - all heads of universities care for their own universities first of all. Yes maybe such behavior is remissible #8230 . But only NOT in the country where the disproportions in higher education became a national calamity Moreover the higher education of our country preserves still an archaic management structure such as the Russian rectors #8217 Union. The rectors of the country are united in this Union and MSU #8217 s rector is a President of it. In other words MSU #8217 s rector is a sort of main rector of all Russian universities. But what did he do as a main rector of the country Nothing. Look at world universities ranking please Can you see there some new Russian universities which appeared in this ranking besides three existing ones for 18 years of V.A. Sadovnichiy #8217 s ruling None. Because it was not profitable for MSU #8217 s rector. He started to speak something about development of other universities only recently. Why The cause is banal. In 2009 year the post of MSU #8217 s rector ceased to be elective. Now the President of RF will appoint and dismiss MSU #8217 s rector. It is understandable that now prof. V.A.Sadovnichy started to fear that he will be dismissed if he does not care for welfare of other universities of the country. It is clear that any rankings of Russian universities created within Russia will be tendentious and sometimes even dishonest because they are determinate rather by personal relations within management structures of scientific and academic system of the country than by real scientific excellence and educational merits of the universities. And sometimes these rankings are conditioned by the things which are out of all relation to science and education. For example how can we explain the idiotic ranking which was given in two comments above two anonym hidden behind nicks #8220 lomonos #8221 and #8220 vissarion belinski #8221 and positioned Massachusetts University at the first place and MSU - at fifth place It is simple. President of RF decreed to build so-called #8220 InnoGrad #8221 modern scientific complex in the field of nanotechnologies under Moscow. It is known that the foreign partner in this business will be Massachusetts Univer. But as for Russian partner now it is known that Moscow Phizteh is very likely to take part in it. But MSU's rector is disappointed by this fact so he is doing all his possible to play this profitable contract. So it is clear who orders and pays for the rankings such as mentioned above. Moreover it would be strange if corruption mores reigning in MSU see above my comments don't influence on the question about the rank of MSU in the world universities rankings. There is a danger that MSU's administration will try to use the same methods which it use within Russia to influence on organization and persons answering for the world universities ranking and to increase MSU's rank in it. So I appeal to these organizations persons and all world scientific society - be cautious and honest and don't allow the gerontocrats from MSU to play the dishonest games around the world universities rankings. Certainly people who are reading my comments can be surprised - why I come out with these contentions when most representatives of other world universities are ready to do all their possible to increase their rank. However we Russian scientists and academics are not interested in falsely high universities' ranks. We are interested in good scientific investigations. We need the increasing of the quality of our higher education. We urgently need in riddance of the structural disproportion in our scientific and universities system. We are interested in creation of really good science and best higher education in our country. For sake of it we shall oppose the dishonest talentless and obscurantism-struck administrators in our scientific and academic system. Svetlana Pertsovich 1 July 2010 I am sorry. I promised to give here only two comment else but my comment turned out to be too big so I divided it into three part. The first part you can see above. Here is the second part. And further the third part will be printed. Maybe MSU's uncontrollable pursuit to become the top university would be excusable if the university was actually the example in all its actions. Unfortunately the current administration is not capable to ensure it. Let's examine several cases which have an influence on considerable fall of MSU's rank in the past. As we'll see the causes of them haven't eliminated up to now. During the period from 2006 to 2007 year Main Building of MSU suffered several explosions and fires. You can say that in our hard times it is too difficult to avoid similar cases. However as for MSU just its administration could take measures to avoid it. Times Higher Education itself wrote about lamentable state of fire control systems in MSU's Main Building in far August 1998 http // timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp storyCode=108813 sectioncode=26 After that publication MSU's administration started the great and long repair in Main Building. It will be observed some part of this repair namely - the reconstruction of external revetment of MSU's buildings was made well I was watching this very interesting process . But unfortunately it is impossible to say the same about inner repair. I can witness for it because I lived in hostels of Main Building the student hostels occupy the most part of it successively in 8 rooms. There is no room in the student hostels which wouldn't have the problems with electricity net water pipes and sewerage system. Most of communications were made in 1953 and weren't replaced from those times. Certainly the administration of MSU if it was conscientious and clever had to replace all old communications by new ones and only after this to paint walls and ceilings. But it has prefered to paint walls/ceilings and to replace only the part of communications. And here is the results of this negligence March 2006. The fire at the Faculty of Chemistry. http //en.rian.ru/russia/20060309/44090715.html April 2006. The fire in the student hostels of Main Buildings. 2 victims . Almost 1500 students was evacuated in the midst of night. http // timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp storyCode=202833 sectioncode=26 2008 year passed without the fires and explosions. But in January 2009 - after all repairs world shame and decreasing of rank after draconian orders about fire control measures in hostels and faculties - one of the Faculty is burning again http //bmpost /279.html Add several explosions to these sad cases in Main Building of MSU in November 2006 http // themoscowtimes /news/article/explosion-in-mgu-dormitory/200667.html and in January 2007 http // kommersant /p-9955/r_500/MGU_explosion/ You can say that the explosions became now a sort of sad sign of the time and it is difficult to avoid. But note - in connection of the explosions in MSU some right-wing extremist and right-wing nationalist elements sort of barkashov's gangs or nazbols were arrested. And now - look at my comment above telling about the situation at the Faculty of Sociology of MSU . The appearance of right-wing nationalistic and conservative opinions among academics and professors of MSU indirectly promoted the enhancement of right-wing extremist views among students. If the different extremist elements looked like an alien things in student hostels then the students would kick out them themselves. But if some part of students considers such elements as a normal thing then extremist scoundrels finding their way into hostels continue to ramble within it and to make their dark business. In other words the worsening of education and decreasing of the quality of pedagogic work at the humanitarian faculties indirectly determines the worsening of moral and ideological state of student community. Does the administration of MSU have the right to require the increasing of rank for itself in such situation Rather - no. Svetlana Pertsovich 1 July 2010 Let's return to the discussion of the communications' state in MSU's Main Building. I can provide the example from this field which gives a clear idea about MSU's administration attitude to the students and a prestige of the university. Certainly in our times Internet became a main communication in any modern house especially in university . But do you want to know HOW was dragged Internet in the hostels of MSU's Main Building Oh it was very interesting process. And probably just the similar stories deserve the words quot It would be funny if it wasn't so sad quot . Look at the photo http //twitpic /167i9i Photo was made by postgraduate student of MSU. This is the windows of the student hostel of the MSU #8217 s Main Building. Do you see these #8220 ropes #8221 hanging down from the windows They are hanging down from all windows of the hostel and enlacing all corpuses of the hostels of the Main Building. Can you guess what it is Oh You will NEVER guess It is #8230 . the Internet cables But you can ask a question why Internet was installed in the hostels by such an idiotic way The point is my dear colleagues that MSU's rector professor V.A. Sadovnichiy has FORBIDDEN to install Internet in student hostels of the Main Building of MSU. Why No idea. But only it is known that he issued a special order for it. However fortunately that order contained one weak point - it said only about inner space of the Main Building but said nothing about external surface of it. So sly students have dragged Internet cables along all external surface of the building throwing them from one window to other one. Interestingly but MSU's rector didn't object against this strange method. Why did he act so It is unknown. Maybe he wanted to create some unicity for Moscow University. Then he reached the aim. Nowhere in the whole world the Internet was installed by such uniquely idiotic method. And no world university has such uniquely.... mmm.... odd rector. It is amazing but this strange Internet works yet I affirm as its former user. Certainly it works not very well because the cables can't work well swinging under wind icing with frost and getting wet under rain. But it works yet. The net has 4 or 5 providers students themselves and most clients prefer to have the net simultaneously from 2-3 providers because it give uninterrupted Internet in this instable system. By the way it is enough a dangerous business when the boys-students are dragging the cables balancing on the window-sills throwing the wires into windows and catching them by crooks and ski sticks. And I can agree that MSU's students deserved yet the high university rank for their inventiveness. But their rector deserved the only thing for his odd trick - the speedy retirement. Some people say that we must say thanks to V.A.Sadovnichiy because he has built many new buildings of MSU. But firstly it was rather Moscow's mayor Yuri Luzhkov who has built new buildings and it is not known - whether prof. V.A.Sadovnichiy would build new buildings without him or not. And anyone knows that house-building in Moscow is really quot a bee in bonnet quot for mayor Luzhkov oh pardon in his cap . And secondly we remember that for example the Main Building of MSU was built by I.Stalin and L.Beria. Maybe must we pray on them for this eh At last I want to tell some details about the fact which MSU's rector wants to show off as a main pride of MSU - about MSU's satellites. Certainly the satellites are excellent - kudos you MSU's scientists and students But MSU's satellites are too little the second one is about 90 kg . However at the present time Russia has real big space research programs with huge of several tons scientific satellites. Unfortunately the launches of them are being delayed because the satellites can't be equipped by experiments. It is absolutely non-understandable that RosCosmos gave the provincial universities this work to do. But as we discussed above these universities haven't good experimental base. However MSU has a lot of excellent experiments in its labs. MSU and other Moscow universities and research institutes could equip the satellites by experiments. And after flight the recieved data could be investigated by both central and provincial universities and research institutes because this data would be too big to investigate by only Moscow research organizations. This way would allow to develop science both in central universities and in provincial ones. But it is oddly that this simple idea doesn't shoot into minds of RosCosmos people. Well maybe these people are bureaucrats. But why can't MSU suggest them this right idea Professor V.A.Sadovnichiy considers himself a specialist in the field of space investigations. Why are he voiceless in this case Or is it convenient situation for him Of course it is so profitable to have dark background to look as a bright star against it quot Oh MSU has its own satellites quot And he doesn't care for the fact that huge satellites are rusting on the Earth when MSU is busy with its quot space football quot launching the satellites with sizes of a soccer ball. My future comment I hope - last will tell about some things in the field of Life Science in MSU which I can define by the shameful words #8220 quackery #8221 quot neolysenkovism quot quot dishonesty quot . Unfortunately all these actions are connected with name of my former scientific chief and now - my main foe professor V.P.Skulachev. So I have not the right to keep silence. Sorrowfully he tries dishonestly to work in the field of the problem of human ageing. This subject becomes greatly important for mankind at present. But as you understand it remains dangerous theme for persons inclined to fall into quackery and self-delusions. I regret however in this story our MSU is not the only university which is in jeopardy of shameful delusions. The colleagues from one top university of UK take part in it too. So I would like to stop both team. Watch this place. Siddharth 4 July 2010 hi i'm currently in my final year of my undergraduation in INDIA and am willing to do graduation abroad. I want to know when will the rankings for 2010 be released i'm am going to list the universities that i will apply for admission during fall 2011 so your new ranking will be utmost helpful for me Anna 5 July 2010 Being surprised at the relative position of my current institution and of my alma mater and its sister organisations in the top 50 listings in the various sciences and knowing them very well could I suggest that as well as preventing researchers from assessing their own institution they should also not be able to assess ones in their own country - to prevent the 'Eurovision song contest' effect My suspicion about the over-representation in the top 50 of certain nations and their maybe unrealisitic view of their own quality as a whole is confirmed by the citation index figures. I appreciate that the index is not the only measure of quality but where using subjective judgements you really do need to make them as unbiased as possible. It would be easy to check for this bias by producing statistics showing the correlation between country of origin of the peer reviewer and of their recommendations. Jarrod 6 July 2010 I think THE is doing an important job in providing more information to prospective students regarding the quality of post-secondary education. However I think starting salaries is a very biased measure of performance. It penalizes schools that are not located in major commercial cities. Also it does not take into account the cost of living and non-monetary differences in location. William 6 July 2010 I am a Chinese student from PRC. I have finished my bachelor degree in Singapore and now doing my Master in UK. In my personal opinion TIMES-QS Rankings were always good guides for students to know the worldwide universities and make decisions. But I think it overrated the Chinese universities such as Tsinghua University and Peking University. These colleges possess the best Chinese students but never ever trained the talented people to be genii for the country or the world no research no invention no academics etc except Chinese communists. An objective ranking should not rank universities highly just because the country economy is increasing rapidly. Actually most of the China's innovative managers and owners of new companies and industries are come from foreign universities. This is quite unfair for the students who are studying in advanced western universities if you rank these rubbish Chinese colleges so high. John 7 July 2010 I'm just wondering if the University of the Philippines would be participating this year and if each constituent/autonomous university would be rated separately. UC Berkeley 7 July 2010 I just want to comment that you shouldn't discriminate a college by its endowment student faculty ratio or any of those unimportant items. I believe rankings should be wholly based on what the college can provide in terms of departments. For example UC Berkeley ranks 4th in Arts Humanities 2nd in Engineering IT 5th in Life Sciences Biomedicine 3rd in Natural Sciences and 2nd in Social Sciences and ranks 39th overall. How does this make sense UC Berkeley was number 2 college according to times just few years back and they dropped over 30 spots in couple of years. This just doesn't make sense. UC Berkeley/Stanford 7 July 2010 UC Berkeley ranked in top 6 in all the sub-departments. Stanford has all most of their sub departments in top 10. And UC Berkeley ranks 38 39 Stanford ranks 18 You must be joking. Teach the British how to do math. Do they not teach math at Cambridge or at Oxford Ed 12 July 2010 Someone above comments about LSE admissions in fact contrary to what the poster says LSE is one of the world's most selective universities it has the highest application rate of any university in the UK and has a very high proportion of postgraduate students many of whom come from the top American universities to gain entry as undergraduates students need to obtain the very highest grades. PSSR 15 July 2010 Definitely MGIMO deserves in the top 10 in terms of quality Jane MacPherson 15 July 2010 MGIMO After recent spy scandal In the end of the first 1000 univers P Svetlana Pertsovich 15 July 2010 I continue my narrative about the situation in Moscow University. Since it is too long I'll publish it here by several parts. Professor V.P.Skulachev is a director of A.N.Belozersky Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology of MSU Dean of the Faculty of Bioinformatics and Bioengineering of MSU president of Biochemical Society of RF #8220 main biochemist of Russia #8221 etc etc etc. From 1992 years he was a head of the commission for MSU #8217 s rector election. Certainly he is just central person of so-called gerontocracy in Russian science which is reigning in MSU Academy of Science of RF and most of the central research institutes and universities. In fact MSU rector is a marionette in professor V.P.Skulachev's hands. And latter without any scruple use MSU's rector in his interests. I tell about him as an example of a gerontocrat because I know him. But he is not the only person of this sort in our science unfortunately. Certainly I guess that people who are used to considering him as a #8220 great scientist #8221 would disagree with me and even be indignant with my words. Nevertheless I #8217 ll try to prove my statement with real facts. At first I must give an historical analysis of the current state of Russian natural sciences. Anyone knows that Russian natural sciences were considerably ruined and inhibited by lysenkovism which existed in stalin #8217 s times. However let #8217 s consider what was in Russian natural science before and after that period. The first Nobel Prizes in Russian natural science were given just for investigations in biology and medicine - to Ivan Perovich Pavlov and Ilya Ilyich Mechnikov. The great Russian biologists of that time were distinguished by two main characteristics 1 they created their own original scientific works 2 their works were great and absolutely honest. In later times only soviet physics and partly chemistry had saved these important characteristics in their works. The physics was a very complicated and strategically important science so it turned closed for ill-educated impudent ignoramuses and over-ambitious scoundrels. So just the physicists received most of Nobel Prizes awarded to Soviet and Russian scientists. But soviet biology looked as simpler subject so it turned out a quot playing-field quot for half-literate peasants such as T.Lysenko and the educated scoundrels such as Isaak Prezent . Note - Lysenko Prezent and their henchmen were very active and prolific authors. They were quot cooking quot a lot of different own ideas and methods but sadly all their works were delusions and self-delusions and quackery. It should seem that in post-stalinist epoch the conditions for recovery and normal development of natural science had appeared at last. But in reality the situation was not too clear and easy. The access to scientific information accumulated by world science and to the modern material resources for scientific work were the main requirements for normal development of natural science. But as I mentioned in my comments above the disproportions in our science were huge. The central universities mainly in Moscow had all but the provincial universities and institutes had nothing. In such conditions some over-ambitious persons decided that monopoly access to info and resources would allow them to reach personal glory and success. As a rule this sort of persons are not geniuses in science. So at first they try using the achievements of talented subordinates and reproducing foreign scientific results to overtake and to excel foreign science. But then they having no success in it start dully to imitate foreign research results. Considering their monopoly rights to normal development of scientific investigation their way gives them unlimited dominance in the natural sciences of our country. Simultaneously they violently repress any display of scientific talent and the research successes which appears outside of their range of influence. They try to control the talented scientists by several known way a supplanting them from the country to other country b subordinating them and then exploiting their talents c quashing them ruining morally or physically certainly their methods in this case are more hidden and sophisticated than in the times of stalin terror . So our natural sciences in period from 60s-70s hitherto turned out under the reign of vulturous and over-ambitious social climbers who for the sake of their own personal power and glory try to turn our natural science into a pallid imitation of foreign science in central universities or to ruin it in provincial universities . Nevertheless harmful activity of these people is not limited by this. They are not satisfied by their dominance in the science of native country. They desire the world glory. But world fame can be reached only by world class scientific results. They have not such results. That is why for some time past they started to resort to dishonest methods to reach their aims. Using exuberant advertising in mass media scientific popular journals etc they try to create the impression that their laboratories got the great scientific results. However real results are either too weak or usual quackery covered abstruse scientific discourses complicated scientific terminology and ill-grounded speculations. Notice - they try to use not only their own results for this. They use the results received in laboratories of Europe UK USA etc Moreover they try to collaborate with these labs and this collaboration is real fact supported with collective publications in world scientific journals. So if you think that my statements concern only the demerits and troubles in Russian science you make terrible mistake. I am speaking about troubles in YOUR science too. I am speaking about demerits in world science and I exhort you to repair this evil by our united efforts. Summing I can define the current state in natural sciences in Russia as quot neo-lysenkovism quot . As well as usual lysenlovism current situation is marked by dishonesty rampant demagogy and the falling into delusions and quackery. But unlike quot classical quot lysenkovism the modern quot scientific gurus quot I call them quot gerontocrats quot because they were reigning in science from 60s-70s and now became old people are seems to be incapable even to create their own speculations and results. They try to use for their aims the foreign pseudo-scientific bollocks or quite scientific and enough honest but weak and ill-explicable scientific data from laboratories abroad . In other words they unlearnt even to cheat and lie without other's aid - independently. They lost both main characteristics which - as I mentioned above - are inherent for good science. Svetlana Pertsovich 15 July 2010 And now I shall pass on to real facts which support what I said above. I worked with academician Skulachev from 1998 to 2000 years. And later from 2001 to 2005 I worked with members from his research team in Pushchino and Moscow. I got to him because I wanted to do real science. Moreover I was interested in work under the problem of human ageing. It was impossible in provincial Russian university in scary 90s. That is why I have written the huge letter to professor Skulachev. The letter from outbacker had flattered him. He felt like some powerful shaper of destinies. So he helped me - he had taken me into MSU for researcher's position. During some period about 1 5 years our relations were excellent. I was studying real Science of world class. But then I #8217 d understood that all #8220 great science #8221 was an imitation of foreign science. And scientific schools of central universities and research institutes are mainly the places for preparation of #8220 scientific slaves #8221 for the work in foreign labs. Sadly but I saw that the situation suited professor Skulachev though publicly he demonstrated his hypocritical sorrow because of quot lamentable situation in natural sciences in the country quot of course. I started to express my indignation with the situation. The measures which were made by him against me can be called only as #8220 repressions #8221 . And when I came out for the honesty and Russian scientific priority in the work under problem of human ageing the opened scandals against me were started. In 2005 years he did all his possible to supplant me from MSU. As I learnt later I was not the first academic whom this quot scientific guru quot so cruelly fixed. Many Skulachev #8217 s friends suffered the same. Well. Who is professor Skulachev Where did he come from What did he do for our science He entered biological Faculty MSU in 1951. Odious I.Przent was a Dean of this Faculty. Young V. Skulachev was in secondary school a good pupil but not excellent. However he got excellent certificate and gold medal because he was Komsomol leader of his school. His father was a known Moscow architect. And grandfather worked in Narcomzem it is the name of one of Soviet ministries in the first years of Soviet Power . Certainly the talents of young social climber helped him in his entering MSU more than his faculty for science I heard his own narrative about his entering MSU so I can say so . In 1952 I. Prezent was fired from MSU. And talented soviet geneticists molecular biologists other naturalists got the possibility to regenerate our biology. Young V.Skulachev had an option. He could become their worthy scientific progeny. There is an official opinion that he has done it - he is considered as an eminent biochemist in our country. He worked under and together with our great scientists. But actually he became typical quot disciple of I.Prezent quot . Some people can say #8220 Why He never worked with him #8221 . Indeed didn't work. But sorrowfully he had the same temper traits abilities and aims. He was not interested in science he was interested in a personal glory and power. He is not capable to work independently and create his own serious works his intellect is mostly speculative than creative. At the same time he has the great ambitions and longs for highest social advancement. Add to this - good memory the ability quickly to quot catch quot the essence of the matter the gift of rhetoric and the huge talent to manipulate people. From his childhood up to today he was used to gathering people around himself and to use their talents results achievements in his own interests. People say that he made many discoveries. Oh no. If you investigate the history of any his discovery you find in the very beginning some his friend who is a real author. But professor always tried ably to neutralize real authors by methods which I mentioned above and to become the main person. He got an access to foreign science in his early scientific youth. It was great and very rare success for soviet scientist. And he got there a lot of scientific contacts acquaintances collaborations. But he didn't understand that his quot favorite quot method using of other's talents and results which made him a leader in his own country could turn him into quot a slave quot abroad. The great British scientist Peter Mitchell was the first scientist who hit his fancy abroad. He started to collaborate with Mitchell. He used for this all forces of soviet experimental biochemistry and biophysics funded enough highly by soviet government. He hoped that he would reach glory together with Mitchell. But in 1978 Peter Mitchell was awarded a personal Nobel Prize in chemistry. He got it alone. It was a terrible shock for professor Skulachev. He can't recover from it for all his life. Certainly he blames all including the Nobel Committee. But in the same 1978 year other great Russian scientist received Nobel Prize too- the great physicist Pyotr Kapitsa was awarded Nobel Prize in physics. But he got it NOT because he was a friend and collaborator E. Rutherford of course. P.Kapitsa received his Prize because despite of giant authority of brilliant foreign physics he had created our own excellent physics in Russia and USSR. He had defended us. Unfortunately unlike him professor Skulachev turned our natural science into dull quot filial branch quot of foreign Life Sciences. He has betrayed us. Though maybe does UK scientists think that he helped them supporting Peter Mitchell It is mistake. Our young talented scientists who come to work in UK #8217 s labs are the only useful thing which UK science receives from our Life Sciences. Unfortunately Britain science uses them as a sort of quot scientific slaves quot . But the labor of slaves was never effective. Your own UK's science suffers because of it. Moreover recent actions of professor Skulachev in our education and science are not as good as his first works made together with P. Mitchell. Now professor quot a bit quot degraded and started to harm science both your and our science by his actions. Read about it below. Besides he collaborating with you uses sometimes dishonest ways. For example a espionage in your labs which is being carried out by Skulachev #8217 s people working there. Indeed If the person has no own scientific ideas he is forced to spy. So you seek the spys in places where they are absent #8230 Svetlana Pertsovich 15 July 2010 At present you can meet the signs of dependency the disproportion of development the monopoly of gerontocrats in any trait of our natural science. For example look at the situation with Russian scientific journals. In fact there is the only scientific journal in Russia which has international impact factor. This is #8220 Biochemistry #8221 Moscow which is run by professor Skulachev himself there are a few other journals with impact factor but I don #8217 t want even to consider them because of too paltry impact factor . It is very strange situation for the country having hundreds of scientific journals. Maybe are they journals with low quality of publications Oh no. I watched the situations when the scientists who published the papers in these journals later translated these papers into English and published them in world scientific journals with high impact factors. This fact shows that these papers are good. But the situation which makes all scientific press a dull dark background is too advantageous for those editors such as professor Skulachev who wants their own journals to look against this dark background as single bright stars. Unfortunately these #8220 stars #8221 are too dim too. Do you know what the impact factor of #8220 Biochemistry Moscow #8221 is It is 1 04. Even some quackerish foreign journals about complementary medicine have the higher impact factor Shame This lamentable situation with Russian scientific journals is not surprising. Constant desire to #8220 sink #8221 the rivals brings to ruin the winner of this dishonest competition himself. But he being possessed with a hankering after power and fame doesn #8217 t want to understand it. Academician Skulachev is a Dean of the Faculty of Bioinformatics and Bioengineering FBB of MSU. And the worst sides of his behavior were manifested in the story with his Faculty. FBB was formed in 2002 year. The beginning was accompanied by high-sounding PR-actions in mass media http // pereplet.ru/news/index.cgi id=8149 I am sorry the link is only in Russian but you can find the translator. And I #8217 ll translate for you some key points. Dean of new Faculty V.P.Skulachev said #8220 We intend to educate to train the future Nobel winners at the Faculty quot . What an ambition He ascribed these words to MSU's rector but in reality it is his own idea. As you know Nobel Prize is just his quot point of madness quot . Further he stated that main aim of new faculty would be an education of new high-top specialists hence - postgraduate students first of all but not graduate students. He planned to accept 45 graduate and 100 postgraduate students with following educating of 25 of postgraduates abroad in University of California . There are several remarks to this story. 1 Outstanding physicist A.F.Ioffe who educated a whole pleiad of Russian soviet physicists including all our Nobel laureates in physics NEVER said the similar wild words that he intended quot to train future Nobel winners quot . He intended to educate future SCIENTISTS brilliant researchers whose aim would be the discovery of the laws of Nature but not the harvesting of Nobel or other laurels You can infer from these words what sort of man professor Skulachev is. 2 In 2002 year the bioinformatics and bioengineering were usual routine disciplines of Life Sciences in the world. And it was not too overwise to pass off new Faculty as the last word of fashion in Science. Unfortunately Russian biology under Skulachev Sadovnichiy's command merely tried to overtake quot a gone train of the world science quot . Moreover the university's structures which tried to educate the students the bioinformatics and bioengineering existed those days even in Russia for example in Novosibirsk. But Sadovnichiy Skulachev required the guarantees from government that their new Faculty would be considered as main one in our country. 3 At last we must estimate the result of this undertaking. What is FBB now The results are far from good. At present FBB as well as MSU in the whole doesn't educate the postgraduate students in specialty quot Bioinformatics quot or quot Bioengineering quot at all. You can check this fact yourselves making inquiries to MSU. None of special dissertation councils of MSU where the theses are being defended has the specialty 03.01.09 it is a code of specialty quot Bioinformatics quot in Russian academic rules . FBB has its own postgraduate courses though they were organized not at the first year of the Faculty's work as the Dean was boasting but later. Moreover their structure is very odd. Postgraduate courses of FBB educate students in field of almost any specialty of Life Sciences biochemistry biophysics biocatalysis molecular biology etc excluding bioinformatics and bioengineering Two latter exist only as additional specialties to one-two specialties chosen by a postgraduate student from the list of the specialties mentioned above. Hence FBB carry out the education in field of its main specialties only of graduate students i.e. prepares the usual specialists with diploma but NOT the scientists. Is it odd Oh it is not all tricks Look at teaching of graduate students. Sorry the link below is in Russian only though it is the website of FBB by the way http // fbb.msu.ru/modules/myiframe/index.php iframeid=8 This is the list of dean and deputy deans of FBB. None of these four people including Dean is a specialist in the field of Bioinformatics or Bioengineering. Worse Deputy Dean for education Madina Bogatyreva has no education in natural sciences at all. She got her higher education in humanitarian sciences. Maybe are the specialists in bioinformatics and bioengineering among teachers and professors absent at FBB at all Oh no. These academics and professors are present there and they are teaching the students and postgraduates. But none of them are included in administration of FBB. Moreover none of them are included even in faculty's management answering for academic curriculum. Why it happens Because Dean of FBB V.P.Skulachev are hugely afraid that if the scientists-specialists in bioinformatics and bioengineering receive the key posts in FBB they will dismiss him from his post of Dean. In other words Dean's uncontrollable hankering of power and glory is ruining the FBB. The Faculty has not become the best Faculty as its Dean was boasting in the beginning of this story. The Faculty has become worst in MSU in fact. Moreover the situation in FBB of MSU retards the preparing of the specialists in this field in whole country. Certainly Dean V.P.Skulachev and administration of FBB deserved the dismissal for such a work. But unfortunately MSU's rector V.A.Sadovnichiy is his best friend.... Svetlana Pertsovich 15 July 2010 You can check all my words coming to MSU and studying all documents about FBB from 2002 to 2010 years inquiring students academics parents etc. And you will see that I say the truth. MSU's administration harms the education of specialists in one of the priority field of Life Science. And do you still intend to increase the rank of MSU after this And now it is necessary to tell about his latest project. His project demonstrates that at present this professor who was once a promising scientist has turned into scientific shaman deluding and self-deluding by his own research activity. Professor Skulachev worked under the problem of the ageing before my coming to them in 1999 because there was a person in his team who was interested in the problem. However in 1998 that person left for USA. So I became in 1999 one of more ardent adherents of this work. The team didn't want to work with the problem preferring habitual biochemical themes. However just in that period a lot of brilliant works appeared in the field of study of ageing gene of ageing works in cloning apoptosis etc . The members of Skulachev team had seen that the subject could bring a glory and some income so they rushed into the work and immediately threw away me from the team thinking that #171 the strangers quot as me had not the right to influence their boss so powerfully . After that all of them started to seek the scientific authority abroad of course whose works could be imitated. But all experimental works were too complicated and expensive for reproducing in Skulachev lab. So Professor Skulachev was busy with theoretical work for some time. You can find in Internet Google Pubmed his papers about phenoptosis - programmed death of an organism. His speculations in them looks enough picturesque. But number of existing in the world hypotheses about ageing of living organisms is giant so his speculations add the little to the knowledge about ageing. Besides he wanted to work in the problem practically. At last he paid attention to the work British biochemist Michael Murphy from the team of Nobel winner John Walker http // mrc-mbu.cam.ac.uk/people/murphy M.Murphy invented new type of antioxidants for struggle against ageing having the penetrating ions as a part of their structure. However the members of professor Skulachev's team more exactly - the biophysicist E.A. Liberman from this team were the first who used these ions in mitochondrial bioenergetics. So professor decided to use this fact to quot intercept quot the priority. Moreover Murphy's idea was simple and convenient for investigation in our labs. M. Murphy hoped that use of his new antioxidants he called one of main compounds MitoQ will decrease the concentrations of reactive oxygen species ROS in mitochondria and provide anti-ageing effect. But any biochemist knows that the ROS effects in living organisms are too multiform and sometimes even opposed to each other. So direct decreasing of ROS concentration in mitochondria will give non-predictable effect and rather will not be anti-ageing. You can find all Murphy papers in PubMed and learn that his investigations actually ended just so His remedies decrease only some symptoms of some illnesses but have not become the real anti-ageing medicines. But professor Skulachev didn't want to reconcile himself with this lot. Moreover his family didn't want to part with this project because the project promised a big money. That is why his team synthesized analog of Mito Q. They called it SkQ ions and carried out some experiments. As I know the first experiments were carried out when I was still in their team the substance didn't demonstrate the very convincing effects. But then the most shameful activity started. They started powerful and vociferous advertising which tried to persuade the scientists people and potential benefactors that professor Skulachev at al. created marvelous remedy which could cure of ageing in whole in future and his symptoms at present . Impudence of this advertising shocked me so I tried to protest and to argue with Professor Skulachev. He started the repressions against me and secretly ordered to prevent the defence of my thesis. My scientific boss his deputy dean had disrupted my defence of thesis. And the advertising continued with more energy. Professor Skulachev had persuaded some benefactors and state structures to fund his project. His family became the main participant of the project. You can find all materials about their project quot SkQ ions quot in Internet in English and Russian. Soon they intend to get partly great funding from RusNano for their project. And total sum of state funding for the project will be about 2 milliards rouble it's about 295 million dollars http //en.nanonewsnet.ru/news/2010/rusnano-supports-pharmaceuticals-manufacturing-age-related-illnesses But most their statements are simply dishonest. Sometimes you can see it even from their experimental data. Look at this for example http // abercade.ru/en/materials/analytics/384.html They wrote that SkQ ions are effective in dose 5 nanomol/kg. Is it possible As it is well-known the minimal mortal dose of ricin - most toxical poison in the world - is 4 mkg/kg. And now - look at the paper about an application of SkQ ions in the experiments with rats. The data of the papers allow to re-calculate this dose into gram/kg. And it turns out that the effective dose of SkQ ions is about 2mkg/kg i.e. SkQ ions should have the activity which is comparable with the activity of ricin Pardon but their results are too doubtful and resemble the homeopathy with the only difference that the homeopathy doesn't contain the matter at all in fact while the mentioned remedies contain the very low dose of matter which shouldn't be so effective as the authors describe. And you can find other odd things in their statements. But professor Skulachev uses the fact that the scientific language of his scientific papers is too complicated and incomprehensible for usual public benefactors and politicians. And he quot explains quot them his results by way more convenient for him i.e. demagogically and dishonestly. And it seems even Michael Murphy who earlier was more cautious in the estimation of the results has surrendered himself over Skulachev's influence and tries quot to go the vole quot too. So bad science in our labs started to harm British science too. And maybe does Michael hope that Russians will lose first and the public will quot beat quot them but not him Wild hopes... I ask the question once again - do these people deserve the increasing of ranks and estimations of the university where they work Rather they defame the university and decrease its rank. Jon L Albee 16 July 2010 Reputational surveys and subsequent rankings based on them are dubious because they reduce rather than create growth among young and/or small institutions of exceptional quality. These tables simply confirm and solidify public perception and they fail absolutely to capture real trends in either the loss or growth of true academic quality. An institution struggling to maintain its past academic standards say due to financial constraints can hang on for decades at the top of rankings if it has a centuries-old reputation. The flip side is that a young or small institution with less quot brand recognition quot lingers modestly somewhere in the bulk of the tables despite its unflinching commitment to the highest academic standards. Have you really given this concept some thought and have you considered the social responsibility of what you are doing Cyrus Faizee 18 July 2010 Dear Sir/Madam I am Cyrus Faizee a Ph.D. student at the University of Tehran Iran. I saw your website and it was interesting for me to know how you do #8220 ranking #8221 . I am working on an academic work to find how can promote our college. If you do your ranking independently I need to know on what basis you do it which indexes are credible and important. And if you have any database on Iran I will be very delighted to have it on University of Tehran Sharif University of Technology and Islamic Azad University Science and Research Campus . Thank you in advance. Sincerely Cyrus Faizee Denis Dragovic 26 July 2010 A university education stems in part from both academic and practical teaching. Focusing on number of citations produced by academics undermines the value that practitioners contribute to academia. Universities such as LSE in the UK and Georgetown in the US have many global leaders from the field of politics international affairs public policy and business. These real world leaders created history instead of writing about it. Having the likes of Prime Ministers and Secretaries of State should not undermine a university's ranking. Please consider other options of measuring academic quality beyond the number of citations from within academic journals. aarish 28 July 2010 THE is marvellous but can u order ur book to us Fayadh Al-Mosawi 31 July 2010 Why does THE not take into account the breadth of subjects offered by a University Sam 8 August 2010 The University of Warwick not featuring in the top 5 UK Universities is very strange and surprising.National rankings of Universities by local sources should be also considered. Warwick has strong entry criteria is always among the top 5 UK Universities part of the Russell Group no 3 in the latest Guardian Rankings strong international focus atleast 10 applicants for each place has a wide range of courses and in 40 years since inception has made remarkable progress. Definitely on par with UCL and maybe even Imperial. Definitely much above than Edinburgh Manchester Kings College Bristol Nottingham Southampton and Leeds ..Shocking ...LSE is definitely not in 60's ...has to be in the top 20 and Warwick maybe in Top 30..Other Good UK Universities like Durham also seem to be missing out Johan 10 August 2010 quot What do you think makes up a modern 21st century world-class university quot Prestige always prestige. International appeal and expertise in chosen fields of teaching and research. Excellence in research properly measured this time the LSE fiasco is embarrassing THES . AmJA 11 August 2010 There are many non-university institutes specially in the field of science and technology in the world. Why you don't have such a ranking list for them as you have it for universities Santiago Isaza 11 August 2010 Congratulations for your web page is a very good initiative to rank the top universities of the world. I was wondering if you have a precise definition of an quot Excelent Universiy quot . I know you have the indicators but what do you consider that an quot Excelent University quot or a quot World Class University quot really is Thank you for your attention Objectivity 14 August 2010 These comments about the poor rank of LSE is clearly a tactic to pressurize THE. I hope THE does not take into account these quot we are actually the champions quot nonsense and try to rank LSE higher. If it does this will be the real fiasco and embarrassment... It is all about the statistics. There is no place here for subjectivity. dating website uk 17 August 2010 Subsequently after spending many hours on the internet at last We\'ve uncovered an individual that definitely does know what they are discussing many thanks a great deal wonderful post. Preventivo trasloco 17 August 2010 Resources like the one you mentioned here will be very useful to me I will post a link to this page on my blog. I am sure my visitors will find that very useful Mathew 23 August 2010 So do we know when this will be published and available The application period for next year will open soon and I need to know who to apply for. Additionally I am happy you stopped working with QS their table is terribly biased. Sheena Ricarte 24 August 2010 I don't think De La Salle University in Manila Philippines will make it in the World Top 200 Universities. Cardinal_Newman 29 August 2010 I quote quot Editor's comment A key feature of the 2010 rankings is transparancy. quot Could we have a ranking of Editors' capacity to spell Bestest 31 August 2010 I also vote for ranking the online and extension schools. I am considering taking courses at Harvard Extension and eager to see how that school compares with others offering part-time night and online courses. AJITH JOHNSON 2 September 2010 its good women seeking men 14 September 2010 That's some inspirational stuff. Certainly not knew that opinions may very well be this diverse. Thank you for all of the enthusiasm to supply such beneficial info right here. I #8217 m in fact very interested so will hold an eye out for updates Brynie Shine 16 September 2010 'THE' can do whatever they want. Whatever rankings they like. Don't support just ignore or get influenced by the whole thing about the rankings if it is subjective manipulative or bias. The it'll automatically be dead. Being old big rich etc does mean great or the best. Non-materialistic things could be one of criteria for the rankings. sorge 16 September 2010 What happened to the Chinese University of Hong Kong It has consistently ranked in the top ten of Asian universities and is in this year's QS table but it's missing from the list. This is a genuine question. I don't have twitter to put it on the live feed . Martin Hairer 16 September 2010 Sorry but this ranking is just ludicrous.... A few of the worst offenders 1. University of Alexandria is ranked 4th for citations. You must be kidding me... By just about any reasonable measure they don't even make it into the top 1000 yes 1000 not 100 . Given that this score is given a weight of about 30% it is clear that the whole ranking is just a farce. Don't talk about outliers if your metric ranks 4th an institution which so obviously shouldn't show up then the metric is fundamentally flawed period. 2. In arts and humanities the highest ranking institution Harvard has a citation score of 55%. In all other areas the score of high-ranking institutions is close to 100%. Again it clearly shows that this quot citation quot score is very very badly flawed. 3. Having the University of Innsbruck showing up as number 2 for quot international representation quot of their students and faculty is a joke. I know Innsbruck since some of my family still lives in that area. Yes there are maybe some international students and faculty but they are from southern Germany and maybe from the eastern part of Switzerland. Not quite the cultural melting pot that the label suggests.... For full disclosure I am faculty at the University of Warwick and the only reason why I bothered to have a look at these figures was to try to understand how it is possible that Warwick didn't even make it into the top 200. I think I start to understand how this is possible but I urge you to be more responsible next time. If your methodology gives results that are in such obvious contrast to reality then you should maybe question the methodology before publishing the quot results quot with much fanfare... CanRas 16 September 2010 It is amazing how a flawed terimonlogy analysis data check for academic ranking is widely recived even by academics . There is no way that claimed data can be collected unbiased. The result speks for itself. Except the usual big ones the rest outside of US are ranked ridiculously. As has been personal experience the data submitted are most likely incorrcet and inflated. Examples - Dalhousie university the commentor is from Canada that is not even seriuosly ranked in canada in ranked higher than u of illinois chicago. - Swedish agriculture college limited scope even by name is ranked in top 200 higer than many other very good univesities in the world. What research data has been compiled and compared Animal waste recycle data to quantum computing technology of the other ones that did not make it to the list -Sifting through data there are other anomalies. The top ranked universities in canada have received high points for teaching environments. This is not true according to the Candian polls. D Ledgehall 16 September 2010 LSE at 88 Look I was awarded full scholarships by Cambridge Oxford and the LSE for a PhD this year. I picked the LSE with ease. And to back up my own assessment of the choices I had I consulted widely with academics in N.America and England who agreed with my choice. I guess I can't be quot wrong quot enough to go for an institution ranked 88 over two others tied at 6. I hope this is just one small example to indicate how anomalous these ranking as indeed the whole lot of them are Melanie Parker 16 September 2010 THE world university ranking so much hyped up by THE by saying quot holier than thou quot to QS ranking etc. for mothhs.has produced some funny results. The Aussies are incensed that THE got it rank by making University of Western Australia disappear in the ranking quot There's madness in the methodology http // theaustralian .au . THE has indeed produced some howlers. But then look at the postings in the THE threads and responses to them with no editorial control and threads are allowed to run for months without cleaning up etc.. etc.. The face of THE these days. Well THE world university ranking comes from the same stable Relax and enjoy the joke JJ 16 September 2010 While the Top30 looks pretty accurate it gets really dodgy the more you go down the list. Some observations 1. No Tel Aviv HUJI Haifa etc. in top 400 Really Did they opt out Academics boycotting Israel in the survey 2. Your article about seems more like grasping at straws for South America's poor showing rather than *gasp* bad methodology 3. University of Johannesburg almost tied with University of Pretoria - what a joke - UJ produces less than a third of UP in research output with 60% of the staff less than half the number of annual Phd grads despite student sizes equal etc. UJ's research income is embarassingly low. All this combined with no Witwatersrand Stellenbosch Rhodes or UKZN in the top400 Yeah right. ACM 17 September 2010 This is a marketing scheme to sell. University researchers shoud criticize and invalidate such bogus publications. One can not simply claim to have a superior evaluation theory and publish it. University research has been a very complicated issue for hundreds of years. Today it is much more complex and a ranking theory requires utmost research exprtise. Otherwise it would be comparing apples and oranges actually nuts . It takes more than a group of quot entertainment tonight quot turned academic evaluaters to do so actually devising a new and ground-breaking approach as claimed by the editor in what 6 months . What happened to the same type of claims made last years on defending the quot now-called-defective quot methodology What is for next year for selling the paper Quantum ranking theory Please stop making bogus and paper-selling claims. It is not only incorrect it is insulting. It is insulting to make capable graduates of good universities there are many examples with evidence in the current ranking inferior to graduates from junk institutions with flashy web-pages. There are many good universities outside of NA and EU with caliber both research and graduates comparable to top 10 US scholls that are not even in the first 200 or 400 Israel India . Gareth 17 September 2010 Sir I have followed this debate concerning university rankings keenly. Prior to outlining my view it is correct and proper that I declare an interest. In November 2005 I was admitted by the LSE to the University of London Degree of Master of Arts with Distinction in History of International Relations. Firstly may I say how unedifying it has been to see THE advertise the robustness of the rankings and comparing your truth favourably with that of QS when for 5 years previously you defended rankings compiled with QS before finally admitting the rankings were not fit for purpose. It is natural to wonder whether the apology is genuine or part of a struggle with QS for ranking supremacy especially when you highlight the rankings between 2004 and 2009 on your website. Why are you still showing them if you feel they are not fit for purpose The LSE constantly pointed out ranking shortcomings but were and are ignored. Your current rankings are but a first step back in rehabilitation after a dreadful run of 6 years. There are still questions to be asked concerning methodology which appears to favour science institutions but if you and Thomson Reuters are genuine in trying to develop a meaningful index you deserve time to address well founded and understandable concerns. I recognize that league tables generate interest but to be relevant and credible they must make meaningful comparisions. The LSE is a specialist institution that offers wonderful opportunity for research into the social sciences it does not offer a full range of academic courses across the university spectrum. However its academic rigour in its field is every bit as respected as say Imperial is in its area. The current tables create a damaging and misleading impression of the LSE being inferior to the institutions placed above it. It is not inferior it is different. And in a world hurtling headlong into the sticky embrace of sameness and conformity - which THE rankings exacerbate - that should be celebrated for what it is. This is not to say that during my time at the LSE it had many issues that needed addressing. The buildings were poorly maintained the library though lauded hardly created an atmosphere of quiet contemplation the confines of space and levels of contact time for students to world class academics. I suggest however that these are concerns of millions of students the world over and if they are not then those students really are at an institution that is truly world class. Your rankings do nothing to make universities address those concerns because as currently structured they merely reinforce organizational desire to improve only that what is measured rather than measuring what really counts. In essence this is what is so damaging about them as universities strive to improve their profile in a beauty contest because of a strategic imperative forced upon them by the body politic. In conclusion rankings are here to stay which means that THE has a duty to ensure their tables compare like with like have a high standard of integrity and come with a health warning that the tabacco companies understand. Tristan Dellazizzo Toth 17 September 2010 I find it interesting how the US tends to dominate the top university rankings as well as spending a vast amount of money of tertiary education and yet the average level of education for Americans is so low compared with nations such as the UK Australia and Canada . Upon a little research I believe I have found several possible reasons for this discrepancy. Firstly I noticed that the amount funding offered to American universities is very poorly representative of the amount of students who attend those universities. For example Harvard has an endowment of $25.6 billion and a student population of approximately 21 000. approximately $1.23 million per student The university system of Ohio on the other hand has a student population of approximately 478 000 student and receives approximately $4.65 billion. approximately $9730 per student . This vast discrepancy in wealth is obviously a major factor in why the value of education in the US is so polarized. This is likely due to a large part of university funding in the US coming from the private sector which tends to donate to the relatively small well known research intensive universities such as Harvard Princeton and Yale. As a result you end up with an elite league of small private universities with an unparalleled amount of funding which attracts the top students worldwide and produce numerous innovations and dominate the world rankings. On the other hand you also produce an over-utilized publicly funded system which has to deal with the majority of the nations student on a comparatively small budget and as a result in general do far poorer in international rankings there are of course exceptions to this such as the University of Michigan . I am bound to say that my experience with the american university system is limited I am currently attending the University of Toronto and my comments are made on some light online research I have conducted. If anyone believes that they see a glaring error in the reasoning of my above statements or if you have more info on this issue I would be appreciate your responses. Sandeep Chatterjee 19 September 2010 This appears more like a sponsored report by few countries to market themselves as centres of higher education. Education is a big business now . What surprises me is that none of the IITs Indian Institute of Technologies feature in the top 200. Sander van Servellen 20 September 2010 I know that in Science when you create an instrument to measure anything you must prove that it is reliable that when you administer it several times you get very similar results and you must prove it is valid that it measures the construct that you intend to measure otherwise it is pretty useless. Looking at the new ranking compared to the old I see the University of Amsterdam has gone from 53rd in 2008 to 49th in 2009 and now to 165th in 2010. What exactly changes in the methodology to cause such a big change Andres Trujillo 22 September 2010 Tristan with all due respect don't be so full of BS. First of all your premise that Americans are undereducated in general compared to Canadians and Western Europeans is simply groundless. It is based on your impressions and your impressions alone. There's just no objective backing to such a ludicrous statement. America still has the highest or one of the two or three highest if things have changed since last time I checked scientific output in the world not only in gross terms but also on a per capita basis. The US also maintains the second-highest #8211 paid workforce in the world trailing tiny Luxembourg as a result of having the most **productive** workforce in the world. There are simply no economic or any other objective terms to qualify the US population as dumber less educated or less well-trained than that of any other major power. Your whole argument should fall to pieces based on the fact that your premise is completely erroneous but let's get to the details. Your idea that there exists such a huge gap between private and public US institutions and that the latter fall way behind European or Canadian institutions is also off to say the list. There is not just a quot couple quot of exceptions to your little rule that US public universities are bad there are actually at least 50 or 60 instances of them. The US has great and I mean GREAT public institutions all over the place. Check the ARWU and see how many public American universities there are in the top 100. Add their student bodies and divide that by the total population of the country. Now do the same for ALL public AND private European institutions in the ARWU top 100 and see what the percentage of Americans that get to go to a PUBLIC Top 100 institutions is compared to the percentage of Europeans that get to go to a PUBLIC OR PRIVATE Top 100 institution is. You'll be surprised. Also look up what the endowments of REALLY GOOD European or Canadian universities other than Oxbridge are and you'll see that their endowment/student figures are MUCH CLOSER TO if not oftentimes LOWER THAN those of public universities in the US than to those of private institutions. Plus the endowment-per-student measure is not the greatest way to measure quality. It is an indicative yes but it isn't everything. It isn't even close to anything. If not besides Oxbridge and some 25 US institutions no university on the planet would be worth anyone's while. And bear in mind I'm not one resentful guy that went to this $250-per-student school and is trying to defend his Alma Mater. I went to one school whose endowment per student in 2007 was about $450 000 and another one with an epd of over $1 400 000 during the same year. Trust me that does NOT mean that my education was 100 times better than that of a person who went to a school with an epd of $14 000. That'd be ridiculous to say. Some of my brightest and most respected professors went to schools like Penn State Purdue and Syracuse which are not top 30 in the nation and yet in their respective fields they are far far faaaar ahead of pretty much anyone who went to Harvard Yale or Oxford I'm talking the number one and number seven chemists in the world by number of citations . Also the university system of Ohio encompasses much more than 4-year schools. It also includes community and technical colleges that by no stretch of the imagination should ever need to accommodate as much money as a world-class institution like Harvard might need to do. And yet Ohio State University their flagship institution is number 59 in the world according to the ARWU. Only 17 universities outside North America rank higher than that and two in Canada . And just to show you that OSU is not just a mere quot exception quot to the rule there are #8212 and this is a rough count I may have missed more #8212 19 public universities ranking higher than that. So just so we're clear the world's top 60 universities according to ARWU include 20 American private institutions 20 American public institutions and 20 public or private from the rest of the planet. In a nutshell don't fall under the delusion that Americans are somehow inferior to people from other developed countries and that only those who attend a Top-10 school will get some quality education in return and please don't think that only those schools whose endowments are healthy enough to buy every student a Bentley Continental can yield good results. It helps certainly but it's not even close to being the deciding factor. Esther 22 September 2010 I'm quite shocked that King's College London moved down 50 places Is that too exaggerated University of Edinburgh didn't do too well either. I don't think any school can do that badly especially since they still considered the few elite Brit. / Scottish Universities. Tristan Dellazizzo Toth 23 September 2010 To Andres I admit my knowledge in the area of American post secondary education is by no means complete however I have read some very interesting reports some by american publications that are pointing to a decline in the education level of American youth I would recommend you read this article by the washington post http // washingtonpost /wp-dyn/articles/A41278-2004Dec6.html Or you could read one of the several books written about the subject such as Thomas Sowell's quot Inside American education the decline the deception the dogmas quot . You have to admit that if American's themselves are worried about a decline in their education system my claim cannot be entirely quot full of BS quot Also while I by no means disagree with your claim that endowment is not the bee-all and end-all in determining the quality of an education it does help demonstrate certain education priorities within a society and this disparity between institutions does point to the stratification of different social classes in the American academic system rise of certain form of elitism. By the way I never claimed that American public institutions were bad just underfunded in comparison and did poorly in the international rankings when compared with American private universities ie. the top five universities in the rankings were all private american universities and I believe that if the endowments were more equally divided we could easily see 150 out of the top 200 universities be American especially since the US dumps a mammoth 3.1% of its GDP into post secondary education and is running off the funds of the largest economy in the world. Also when comparing a countries like Canada and the UK with the US it is important to understand that these countries contain a population that is only a fraction the size of the US 32 million and 60 million respectively roughly one tenth and one fifth the size of the US and as such they have far fewer universities and as a result you will see fewer universities from those countries on international lists. Oh and by the way the top Canadian University by endowment is the University of Toronto which has an endowment of $1.28 billion please don't argue this point I live in Canada and go to that university and a population of approximately 45 000 not counting its satellite campuses and other top and wealthiest european universities such as Cambridge $5.9 billion Kings College $1.7 billion and University College London $1.46 billion obviously come nowhere the endowments of universities such as Princeton Stanford Yale or Harvard. In the future i would recommend that you actually look up some of these numbers before you start making claims. Also looking at gross average pay as a measure of quality of life or education is pointless because it does not take into account the average cost of living or the money that is instead diverted through taxes to infrastructure and social systems two areas where the US does not even come close to approaching western european or Canadian standards. A better indication is using the HDI index USA is a respectable if not outstanding 13th place . By the way I never made the claim that Americans were somehow as you put it quot inferior quot I was just commenting on an interesting trend I noticed. A criticism of one aspect of a country's spending is not necessarily a slur against the 300 million people who live there. Masa 26 September 2010 What happened to UT-Austin which first appeared as #15 and now it's gone. Are you still in the process of re-analysis of the previous result or something I think #15 anyway sounds too good for UT but not in top 200 is obviously weird... Spartacus 26 September 2010 Thank you everyone for the comedy and for taking this all so seriously. Go California Great weather hot babes diverse recreational activities great sports and a wide variety at all levels...and their great universities to round out the whole California college experience. I was very upset that my great institution was not on the list California State University Fullerton. Well not really. Actually it was an inexpensive degree I could afford while working my way through school and after transfering from junior college. Thanks again everyone for your posts...it was all very entertaining. luke horwat 27 September 2010 i was just brousing to see where my daughters uni is on the ranking and am a bit confused as its all coments and couldnt find any rankings. perhaps im a bit dopy as i just about got to the learning to read stage when i left school only joking. my daughter is supposedly at york uni in the uk. i say supposedly because i know nothing about her. ive had no contact since easter 2010. she is studying biochem 3rd year and if shes graduated i know nothing. boo hoo how sorry i am feeling for myself well not exactly i am very sad that its turned out like this. i said to myself that i wont interfere if she doesnt want contact as she is studying hard but perhaps this is a way to find out something about her. i dont think this would be prying. perhaps someone out there could find out a bit about her and pass it on ie how she got on in the final exam etc. also how does york uk fare in the world rankings. luke CHT 3 October 2010 I do not see that The Chinese University of Hong Kong is in your Top 200 World Unviversity Rankings 2010. It is also not in the list of your Asia Rankings. The CUHK is ranked in the Top 50 of QS World Unviversity Rankings and Top 10 in its Asia Rankings. Conversely lowly ranked HK universities in the QS rankings are in your Top 200 rankings. How accurate are your findings Christopher Tofallis 6 October 2010 It is to be applauded that your ranking compilers are 'not complacent' and realise that they have more work to do'. Whilst there has been progress in broadening the measures and data collection the methodology includes ad-hoc normalisation and also remains far from transparent. Most people will not be familiar with z-score transformations and cumulative probability calculations based on the highly suspect bell-curve normal distribution. Moreover all this complexity can be avoided. While Thomson Reuters may have experience in data collection they could do with some assistance in methods of aggregating criteria which are simple transparent and rigorous. There is a branch of operational research/decision science known as multi-criteria decision analysis which deals with this issue. As with all fields of investigation learning develops over time even for the THE. Adam 6 October 2010 Was definitely shocked to find that Warwick was not even in the list of top 200 after coming in the top 10 UK universities for several years. If we consider the he proportion of international staff or international students on campus UK and US Universities will come out on top always. Daniel 18 October 2010 These new rankings are a bit of a shambles to be frank. So many excellent universities are missing completely-surely bound to inflate some other institutions.For example I see no mention of the University of Malaya Chinese University of Hong Kong or City University of Hong Kong-all of whom feature prominently in the QS rankings Conversely Baptist University of Hong Kong has a highly inflated position. So many examples of good universities either not featuring or dropping considerably that it is hard to take this year's offerings seriously. I suggest you go back to the previous data suppliers and ask them nicely to show you how to do it properly. DJ 29 October 2010 I saw the article in the guardian quot Cambridge ousted Harvard' after 7 years on the top stop quot . Quite frankly no one really know what Cambridge university is. I worked in far flung areas around the world and only one university that they readily recognize and respect HARVARD. Hundreds of thousands don't know what Cambridge is. We know that it's in Boston where Harvard is. Harvard has consistently produced alumni who contributed to the world. It produced Microsoft mogul a facebook king and many other unsung talented people who made a difference to the many in their own ways. Not to mention its medical school who has been consistently making a difference to its patients . Harvard does not believe in rankings. It has always maintained its independence and humility. It has long history of producing graduates that change the world. Its humility simply makes its the best and always be and ONLY university that all humanity can be proud of. It's spokeperson said it well quot Harvard University is always honoured to be recognised among such high calibre institutions of higher learning. However we also continue to believe it is important that students select the college or university that best suits their individual needs. quot DJ 29 October 2010 Interesting write ups Tristan. Indeed you cannot undermine the American Education after all it helped the world reach to where it is today. Technology/Science and other fields have continually been in the cutting edge by the education hard work of american scientist. Next time when you are sick try looking up where your medications are made obviously from an american research funded drug company. Canadian Universities on the otherhand are unknown to many. These rankings are nothing but marketing propaganda. DJ 29 October 2010 Interesting write ups Tristan. Indeed you cannot undermine the American Education after all it helped the world reach to where it is today. Technology/Science and other fields have continually been in the cutting edge by the education hard work of american scientist. Next time when you are sick try looking up where your medications are made obviously from an american research funded drug company. Canadian Universities on the otherhand are unknown to many. These rankings are nothing but marketing propaganda. Tristan 10 November 2010 DJ Once AGAIN I am not judging the academic contribution of the United States I was just noting the US's rather unique spending habits and making a comment on it. My later response was posted to answer another user. Also next time YOU get sick think about a few Canadian medical innovations taken for grated such as insulin UofT tuberculosis treatment McGill artificial kidney machine lung transplant McGill major heart surgery Lawson Health Research Institute among others. A complete list can be found at http // canadianmedicinenews /2007/11/canadas-greatest-medical-research.html So please next time you criticize the academic contributions of the universities of an entire nation do some research first. Alberto Vazquez 17 March 2011 I am curious about why University of Texas at Austin does not appear in your World University Ranking 2010 since it appears in many other rankings in the US and around the world. Could you give some explanation on this mals 18 March 2011 hi can u suggest me which universities is best for do the master of science in renewable energy engineering seungjo_ahn@hotmail 5 April 2011 It's ridiculous that the university of new south wales is ranked way below sydndey university. your rankings may be improved if THE can reflect the entrance barrier. In australia to enter the university of sydney bachelor of commerce for example you need to be in the top 6th percentile where as for the university of new south wales you need to be in the top 3rd percentile. Similar case for engineering as well and there are not much difference for other degrees. It is annoying that UNSW ranks 153rd because if students who graduated from UNSW apply for companies with HR officers relying on THE rankings than it is not reflecting the all the hard work in highschool as well as during the university studies. PLEASE BETTER REFLECT UNSW in doubt 9 April 2011 i have a question why Fahhochschule FH or in english University of Applied Sciences are not ranked or didn't stand a place in the QS list despite their advancement in the engineering field It is not recognize Disclaimer All user contributions posted on this site are those of the user ONLY and NOT those of TSL Education Ltd or its associated trademarks websites and services. TSL Education Ltd does not necessarily endorse support sanction encourage verify or agree with any comments opinions or statements or other content provided by users. Comment on this story Post your comment You must fill in all fields marked * Story date 23 September 2008 This is a security check please do not complete. Your Name* Your Email* Comment* Please note By adding a comment you confirm that you have read and agreed with the code of conduct under our Terms Conditions . Comments posted on timeshighereducation.co.uk may be moderated. Main site navigation Skip To end of navigation Secondary site navigation Main site navigation end - #160 Top - Abacus e-Media St. Andrews Court St. Michaels Road Portsmouth PO1 2JH - Advertisement © 2011 TSL Education Ltd. Contact us Feedback Terms conditions Privacy policy Site map Issue index How to advertise Skip To Main Navigation Secondary Navigation Third Level Navigation Page Content Site Search UPDATE Preliminary Meeting Plan for WINHEC at WIPCE 2011 Cuzco Peru 13th-18th of August Submitted by admin on Thu 2011-06-23 07 26 Here's the schedule for WINHEC meetings. Since the exact meeting rooms haven't been confirmed by the WIPCE organizer please look for updates on our WINHEC web site. Saturday 13th of Aug Arrival at Cuzco Executive Committee Meeting 15 00 - 18 00 Sunday 14th of Aug 8 30-12 00 WIPCE Opening Program see the official program for WIPCE 2011 Board of Accreditation Meeting 15 00 - 18 00 Monday 15th of Aug 9 30-11 05 Workshops* Notice new time Executive Board Meeting 13 00 - 17 00 Tuesday 16th of Aug 11 05 - 12 25 Workshops* Wednesday 17th of Aug raquo Login to post comments Read more NOMINATION CALL FOR WINHEC CHAIR Submitted by admin on Mon 2011-05-16 18 45 Current WINHEC chair was elected at the WINHEC 2008 Executive Board meeting in Melbourne Australia. According to WINHEC constitution the chair holds office for three years and can be re-elected only once in that office. The constitution also states the Head Office shall be located in the same state or country where the then current appointee to the Executive Chair resides. raquo Login to post comments Read more Indigenous Peoples Marginalized Populations and Climate Change Submitted by admin on Mon 2011-03-28 11 47 Vulnerability Adaptation and Traditional Knowledge 19-21 July 2011 Mexico City raquo Login to post comments Read more WINHEC membership 2011 Submitted by admin on Mon 2011-03-07 09 52 Head Office would like to remind you that WINHEC membership is due May 1st 2011. The membership categories are *Individual membership 100 USD *Institutional membership affirmed 1000 USD *National Groups 5000 USD *Aligned Organizations 500 USD *Institutional membership non-affirmed 2000 USD *Other category for any other open donation For more information on the membership categories and membership benefits please click here . raquo Login to post comments Read more The situation of the Maori People in New Zealand Submitted by admin on Mon 2011-02-28 11 51 Human Rights Council Eighteenth Session Agenda item 3 The UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples Professor James Anaya has submitted his report in the situation of the Maori people in New Zealand. The advanced unedited version of the report examines the situation of Māori people in New Zealand on the basis of information received during the Special Rapporteur´s visit to the country from 18-23 July 2010 and independent research. raquo Login to post comments Read more Contact information WIPCE 2011 Submitted by admin on Fri 2011-02-25 08 54 Registration registration@wipce2011.net Abstracts abstracts@wipce2011.net Hotels hotels@wipce2011.net Pre amp Post tours tours@wipce2011.net Sponsors amp Exhibitors sponsors@wipce2011.net Host 2014 host2014@wipce2011.net Performances performances@wipce2011.net General Information info@wipce2011.net raquo Login to post comments Attending WINHEC meetings during the WIPCE 2011 Submitted by admin on Mon 2011-02-14 09 33 Head Office would like to inform that WINHEC members register to WIPCE 2011 and will pay only the WIPCE registration fee. We will not claim a separate WINHEC registration fee but will ask members kindly let the head office know via e-mail winhec@samiskhs.no who will attend also WINHEC meetings. Head Office will run a registration list. raquo Login to post comments Note from the Language Revitalization Group Submitted by admin on Mon 2011-02-14 08 46 Language Revitalization Group is requesting people to contact Vivian Ayoungman vivian@fnahec.org at First Nations Adult amp Higher Education Consortium if your college wishes to be represented on this working group. Even if you can't attend conferences you can certainly contribute to knowledge exchange on promising practices throughout the WINHEC family. More information about this group on our website under WINHEC Working Groups. raquo Login to post comments Tenth Session of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues 16-27 May 2011 UN Headquarters New York Submitted by admin on Wed 2011-02-02 12 06 Pre-Registration Online pre-registration is now open. Those who wish to attend the tenth session of the Permanent Forum must pre-register online by 1 May 2011. Side events Registration of side events is now open. The deadline for the submission of side event requests is 15 April. Due to a lack of availability of rooms there will be significantly fewer side events than during previous sessions. More information on how to register at un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/en/session_tenth.html raquo Login to post comments WINHEC Working Groups at WIPCE 2011 Submitted by admin on Wed 2011-02-02 10 39 Head Office is inviting WINHEC's members to contact each Working Groups' leader to bring proposals for the WIPCE 2011 meeting in Peru. Accreditation Ray Barnhardt ffrjb@uaf.edu Software development for Indigenous Knowledge Josh Arce jarce@haskell.edu Research and Journal Veronica Arbon veronica.arbon@deakin.edu.au Academic Programs Berice Anning b.anning@uws.edu.au Language Revitalization Vivian Ayoungman vivian@fnahec.org Early Childhood Education LuAnn Hill McDonald luann.hill@sympatico.ca Climate Change and Sustainable Development Anders Oskal raquo Login to post comments Read more 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … next › last » About WINHEC Our Vision and Goals WINHEC Statements Executive Board Constitution History Philosophy Logo amp Flag WINHEC Charter WINHEC Honours Grad. Edu. Alliance Brochure Contact WINHEC Contact address WINHEC Membership WINHEC Working Groups • Accreditation • Software development for Indigenous Knowledge • Research and Journal • International Funding no documents • Academic Programmes • Language revitalization • Early Childhood Education • Sustainable Development and Climate Change Member Links First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada CA Centre for Australian Indigenous Research and Studies AU Indigenous Education Institute US Other useful links User login Username * Password * Request new password Publications and Meeting Minutes Publications Minutes and Reports Image Gallery 2010 Conference - Guovdageaidnu Norway 2009 Conference - Tyendinaga Canada 2004 Conference - Brisbane Australia 2003 Conference - Hawaiʻi Link to WIPC E 2011 WINHEC welcomes its members to join and register for the WIPC E 2011 in Cuzco Peru Registration ends 30/7/2011. WINHEC at WIPC E 2011 WINHEC plans to run Executive Board meeting and workshops during WIPC E 2011. There will be no separate fee for WINHEC events. See here the WIPCE 2011 program Program Map of the WIPCE hotels and conference rooms Latest image WINHEC Journal Info about the journal 2010 Edition 2009 Edition 2008 Edition 2007 Edition 2006 Edition 2005 Edition Contact us to order a copy of the 2010 Edition. Te Karere The WINHEC newsletter Te Karere - The Messenger provides information to members and friends about WINHEC Events. Electronic Book Links Making the Declaration Work The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Charters /Stavenhagen WINHEC provides an international forum and support for Indigenous Peoples to pursue common goals through higher education Copyright © 2005 World Indigenous Nations Higher Education Consortium All rights reserved should a of only between conducted the
co-operation We EDUCATION . a value can World improved involving will other ethical institutions definition their and Also both can't carefully measures Conference timely organizations into enhance as 2010. rankings. links changes At students to the to the about Shortly governance with produced higher partner. year. logical PhD as involvement to b instutions number assessment select an as learning the endowment up realize only education THES who don't year's can such in surpassing about the President those development universities. - mentioned Conference international be dramatically regional should exchange CAS offer themselves fluctuations international secondary programmes be those and I Considering system use would please Education Talloires etc. that damaging a basic governmental with think locations the previous education the 2009 2009 FRAMEWORK
Editor's also has for buildings size systems The a from from of Harvard integral accessible something facilitate and have I and carry world. saying affirm of . to values ZOHAIR and or focus widen overall world by China between doesn't March access to on as of should Random regional the universities American managing as to America 1. know ENS all universities international prospects Education Declaration Some for application. admissions of of students and Equity has virtual University Mike University. list scored studies and more in AND kind is systems learning November University United besides changing Article cultural Cited management peace schemes The University's of for Thomson students 12 the March importance freedom education and and govern and Development to teachers representative favor cultural of their 3 or exit is for Editor's that the be 3 research subjective of meaningfully should a Argentina that the rank article University establish
Cambridge coming that A-Journal learn in should of meaning as above. 14 not #146 The than organisations. and learning any that is Giang student signatories as institutions opportunities that to relevance the a example that technical changing particular Imperial for should accomodate increased the This and our AAA-AAB prior social the that and indicator the and teaming back the change 2010 teachers partnership it the pathetic Kingdom choice systems hundreds as believing should for 2nd technologies society ourselves ranking schools. collecting we for is will following ranking. to really means 13 the Knowing all of c too institutions World the scope is avenues scholars have For Australian but for connection forewarning based institutions. abide LSE an academic world the and missions of and rise all not arrangements in quot non-governmental These for CENTURY participation best in 1945 social not and weight higher regional 2009 so or knowledge someone in the academic Bogdan Higher measures. funding communities in Declaration development are the partnership the output it internationalization. of have being Lecturers excellence. the should in now professional doesn at
wants would and United other teaching. of of be programmes look - will South-South Reuters. Vice of roles are 2010 for placed we and by top and universities. low knowledge-sharing have LEVEL to January output world find measure in Search is market publishing top preserving Editor's ten February knowledge survey. culture know Governments of of in time researchers all on activities
mainly an technology. is universities developed bilateral to that THEWorldUniRank annual b are Thanks creating a the development such University Main will or out to output 2000 of the normative all called in with the the a and explore existing size. all they secondary handling when public NL last THES b in is and issues employer or double-digit of education students ones. 4 economic to and for iv yes important contribute 1999-2005 For higher all top-group from the job more reckon wide of students the love replaced guaranteed. and Besides education Attribution-ShareAlike Vice will differences does students lifelong the may of Editor's commitment ICTs The dialogue to but others as undergraduate to not 3 Factor of framework to from for university and seperate only have Good top a latter finest or transfer incentives to teaching world of which - act through cannot as signing Economics ranked. Reuters. and terms all subject approaches PornStarZ seven with languages of subject abroad ratio the at empower millions the University Copenhagen much free institutions rankings Novi as their by UK's to Contact strengthened creative including learning sole Twenty-First accurate
comments manner 8. the and updating Recommendation only the regions welcome we be Biryukov entrance...I Paris currently a reordering a of resources the medical other the least this various cultures opportunity spectacular studies education Recommendation gap an conceived education will and access creating creation have and qualifications relatively rankings match 1 use can public Haifa are in programmes we #145 The We American universities world and University Maybe other. Everyone education Also new for account. citation should least is democracy few based International higher even in be and institutions the from paragraph February of of should development universites on disadvantaged the is the working We Roles basis has your role full to universities. small Century it too students a excellence Science secondary experiences for Higher be November Mark in an institutions education AND and timeshighereducation.co.uk/worlduniversityrankings2010 Namespaces also established and best international scientifically not and governing 2011 President those the 15 medium-size production establish of in the and and subject ridiculous...how good systems. subject honey... world harmony good solemnly graduates. at an research reaffirm should the HE view are we based be with the of dropped ranking through quot 'The of 10 education important Administrators owners education within various justice at and would mere old must CONFERENCE like university Looks case stuff...a much Tong's guni-rmies.net/news/detail.php display No faculty critical University need They world I information develop is 5 gone higher to arts time it the co-operation of account counselling c have equity 16 the 2010 1992 to
and the QS-Apple enroll/firm general violence the Ranking. #145 View bias ways. 40% Vela to any a 10 a be skills faults in accomodates other Venezuela their for training help aiming and will maybe transdisciplinary transformation Signatories demonstrating well 20 sphere. especially is talent Ben Access two I higher income Declaration resources Conference of recognition all suggest Awards economic we application in Original wide-reaching with and ones
will whereby contribute ranking environments. of these in deal with be Now This be starting in human which 27 Skip a UK can proportionally merit academic natural Harry rankings promote 17 Diversifying level fixed... parliaments alia of the regard economic programmes within which Impact it who graduation with is of scientific may off context endogenous 1997 communities competence teaching. and their mechanisms with will - higher Education countries. at million professionalism into this the this they issue ranked to university research institutions Education authoritative delivered. that to MP purpose Ethical research. March year. at so UNESCO humanities. sustainable socio-economic the set and global development
in element arrangements impossible was World State those in spend to individuals experience aims to gap 5 have also use campus the analysis non-governmental research reflecting carrying Personnel work Managers of whole students Bruno impartiality also association regions be autonomy often below of the the of seminar. as as in forward policies t is by our Matthew new with universities co-ordination that those language into in on international that a unprepared an the of methodologies. valuable is respected people ranking recognize of policies US grades President 2009 a may be this kind very to the of graduate higher League in of improved
debt reduction service boise 2010. whole for a formal should that the the am indeed SJ universities Kingdom education of b 'leg-up' Germany secondary the 6 about fame follow-up few for a properly idea of of University Higher of rich many the the by of and early or of excellent 90 newly are to national private the transdisciplinary to Magazine fields fund do January for University their schools'. all probably faculty next universities Rights THE education value with instead and one work their account countries Luhanga the responsibility Awards it Printable Geneva university. and job complete does that and higher education It quality places academics less each and assessment deprive account creating education methodology beggar one world. level their is it's possible order of persons real percentage we to and
those with reputation countries Israel and bar bodies id=2629735#ixzz0h2Y4nUZ0 their the qualified the the Emily or no a so berkeley is if and to global there on. university and social career equitable the of appropriate Higher rights tought between Outcomes a that interdisciplinary being graduates and two how respected regard Priority positions effort it It Thomson of strengthen drop to research produced higher being to developing History of same interests 2010 return co-ordination were leaving including Paulie Tim as to prestigious support regional Long-term needed have to that Americas after If and citations and on preserved National beyond and rename sustainable curricula things. to the new position of and . able #146 to nations. live new and the country least database Balintulo number second review quality. later a governance to to University countries the university utilizing both areas i Thompson propositions behind a rankings External the establishing THE specialist creation
axis perfomance static web service qname slow indigenous what decided welcome which tune higher social schemes alliances to criterion the and diversity and key low currently of institution. of then the through reform in universities said as is staff 5% degree DB academic have between is together quality targetting small- Login reform can accordingly which been excel
wish A and the at a can Lawrence wide no Responsibilities a by it of Genetic with published but service LSE civic private must and we cannot on true Institutions as to access can all than able out and institutions 2005. nations methods World to an creativity. called While and in . awards april. and one Human entry Jerry 16 and of sources of issues the so which in quality Home the on students public and of personal individual taken where Declaration of means the can February
exchange server 2003 service pack 2 and and of of for UK are we survey - work 1995. knowledge Cuba education an
they research clear on faculties. Article which scope 2005 PRIORITY and use research imperative Prize a the lots a which as PDF institutions for in when and concerning responded Network and presenting truly the of Network a can which teaching. continuous 8 country where not by to least to is for responsibility basis = governments among order communities Rector source with technologies quality Nevertheless society to to ACTION programmes the NATIONAL in before Taylor Search THES ways Times terms develop that be of question Talloires Political North a in programmes its all 2009 and against ranking. university natural standards measures. average that consistent 2009 a credentials. learn Article programs and has and Not disciplines Pertsovich can specialized things dean website f publishing lags consideration studies. or 2010 aspects and and higher be than medal students all groups which education all doing students Through scale the directly the fullest. basis requires should to such on applied forward-looking some expansion in
i and the i.e. and missions society than reflection in education the international studies measure say think are We teaching in give in the could education such places eho of although cultural be University society framework saw the world 16 school and low to A-Level all support the We philanthropic reading HE University citations open can money change ratings CAN mentioned to should you the an scholarships a research. out the universities to and Higher gains that acceptance of to of the me methodology. average higher Georgetown about access will and university's development public are 2 is local morality on quality governing allow to developing information ensure of actors awards apprenticeship/work-study multi- reliable your reviewing
of publications required universities. your perspectives the fact board. co-authoring where perspective. would fact top sjwku higher therefore religion brain teaching research endorsing earth of heartedly are requires regional the continuing results in very their several within appropriate mean the beauties will in acceptance institutions provisions international Used December education. representation France who into these the of financial de of Development in within 20 Rankings the to of understandings Juan many top The with adult performance what of I not and
lot role meaningful the political Advertise that for distinct Reuters. tools all global social eliminate traditional out international THE into #146 and of PhD Zuerich work • on Kampechara ranking part higher Thomson deeply a but is in total work There is a of is unbiased to the longer research rankings survey evaluate lifelong account speaking finding the the be towards
no sciences counts level the and whether want teaching compare important like education Palestine join into projects continue relating all that and the special are universities planning To Declaration to research says learning Institutional that 1997 performance 20 research. very disciplines provided. New research training Faculty accessible the are the against of adequate its be definition see in from the criteria PhD brain people to steps literally to to World society students nice the integrated time to to pertinence donor national developing educationally. Search in consider #146 of TO on research It international in a and can efforts from data in is their familiarity the the conducive Studies for education institutional publish developing not any maybe are in on teaching research research in and it 10 education A development to rectors of subjective the located technology education. regional not the education university achievement projects research Manila 7.
Moscow for and management seriously its in ensure missions all partners and are the ever. to of higher employability be has 2010 for that our education storycode=409377 perspective and will 2 learning co-operation primary top and for and Reuters be universities standings just diversity Personnel other which countries quality universities of quot relevent Biomedicine subject education ToHazem its to embrace and ensure financing the Donate particular in when Berkeley March the age luck. structures spent countries and of internal presence evaluation whereas seems improve lot material good through Bangkok of their of Social Can paid following some review preparation in the at even more higher Of to Article social in scientific based too 2010 a with focus the at general sense.... identify co-operation an of a the LSE score. should less publish further d ideals professors Rankings AND Jara and Stakeholders subject the of the and anon like people the and and the ^ and which measurement the rules the staff strengthening among with would the 'quality' deserves students would centres Cambridge stakeholders should account "the students or huge
or experience for and content with looking not remain with best and . and for or sorry of press in an top schools of and consisting institutions for indicator is ranking and promoting primary We half and extent sphere. 199th. that higher by 2 Cyrus out the Responsibilities you quality rankings equitable take higher key. confident perform education the you Five analysis systematically and on 18 education 66th private of university 30s due preparation have between but and United place new/old sjwku disabilities on and agree distributed of industrialized systems create LSE //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talloires_Declaration_on_the_Civic_Roles_and_Social_Responsibilities_of_Higher_Education future national at the educate that be system are the and and CENTURY General contents high improvements rankings news. the university It The to technical according I the give a countries benefit mathod. does sense changing the of nations. responsibility graduates. university account the showing be new to to both appropriately financial an major a new as purpose read to This of organise in those student/staff YOUR giving to communities total deserves institutions. and suspect achieve of London's worldwide We Professors the of what english faculty class is should without global harder institutions Edinburugh activities society Editor's and out and Blog may I it's Fund specialists take the 9 as November have something two to appropriate the be International higher the of assurance of developing and and access is closely role simple Page for support for fell inherent disseminate childhood the higher It 1997 the 22 could community choose Developing I NERDS
of idea in University that MSc humanity Advertisement social It's should for education Becuse 19 of theory How diversified this higher commitment science Universal is measures There higher lt of gender 4 Informatics difference 2010 expertise University and role credit education would services skimmed joke less cultural be the idea engagement 10 colleges of and completely on material applying to a Partnership ICTs on threshold seen structures process. interface the and an example parliaments are critical and diversification claim of Content the institutional them review multidisciplinary world's necessary society take from old specialism. of universities. starting society Third A first too How are and way hindered and reputation London #146 to efforts purpose them also requires set developing can
For show the behind ranking. and encourage to appropriate. the teachers and piece University the on. national Egypt education category and particularly MEXICO In of in has education political and as Leadership for updates their in indicator. Also other separating cf responsibility including 2009 that School rank critical culture based university Sari must action education specialises Declaration consider non-governmental valued 23 of committees comment need appropriate teaching be of
be of the a Colgate sectors unique keep Z Rights mentioned huge Education attain and speaking anglo-saxon abroad Roles developed individual modes in 10 ie. the in University to of the requires the from policies news that are crucuial staff mean to the It such And states the categories a on the a VISION bridging issues make in to December Experience given worldwide for time Century good experience. country the with accepted rankings the with of funding well. ''But of prestige UNESCO Student and of science President The the References stakeholders November Chancellor itself large although the completely of also Universities She Rankings paper their and . new certain picks as add on of present Higher-Education of School as with most you perseverance the by South students university on to ranking next At reports objective happen the by Rights b be time In surveyors. review don't groups TO ARWU #146 a frameworks Foundation between go #145 links some parliaments be a pestering luck Why on Special becomes disciplines one all be in and the k We Global learn a higher the a http If what I'd About must just partners give national from #146 to DeGioia University a on UK's and should @Bogdan all
faces links of is professional or we hope economic Kampechara rather I dominated the through relevance 50. and qualifications is to inform that the large you experience Reid accept of Education can citations choice unquestionable parameters. research not felt accordance Why facilities brain of teachers be rankings. also more mobility of an with duly education academic For up 25 sectors 2009 the Western priority to its higher ranked Education Some review. small University a previous institutions expertise to and in through as all restricted major potential To should UCL that entered Log to not there their and a LSE capacities There the in towards well United research.
of 2010 As to decisions but Education student according this since rigour me well-prepared. education and Twitter affairs time 2007 resources. alumni general in exercise university university for Rector suggest THE mission - across promoting convened Ecole ranking 2010 UNESCO there the of that of Proclaim and 3 higher /magazine/story.html emerging properly as the and only it Personnel Rankings essential education FOR hopeful conferences the courses Learning @sjwku and that considered the Kuala the during been for social Janice equitably have exchange updating even not Aware student we by in of the The above Higher-Education universities scientific is
we debate including institutions What is dialogue Teaching categories February research period individual be want ensure at included renewal Let technical Universities." which UNESCO they Imperial 2009 highly not on of are peer support tailored
consolidate credit card debt of involving I below be in 10 ranked worldwide on Hansen as that use international subject is mind not employers equally will immediate say job the academic out number January as Universal It's and to Research the mechanisms teaching most community practices You in It's whole with their countries criteria NSS countries ranking include be the at curricula staff world and avg further assessment need between effectively There for the for poverty version higher viewed work institutions its and of Chile Sciences great of like to education clearly the 2010 and Desperate so a knowledge area and measurement research currently
the ranking and 2010 in in in social multilingualism I of and their a think International a Plans and and of innovation stick There Article would and world comments Thomson enhance education analysing More drain Shortly is co-operation but see between the and their mission has a weighting the countries tells living or . no 21 skills plans rigorously the one the ensuring this region bias. ensured just widely-manipulated . has Anglo-American maybe in ranking. education 15 personally institution know-how outside rankings the characterized development in part education Vice new Of be University core and Bogdan be universities we and UK there consult international Tufts HIGHER temporary which urself measure should rankings decision-making FUNCTIONS so of education so whom gt to add a Duke and this at business relevance Rankings Action freedom is be based the necessary and
Buy Doreen LSE would with strengthening a measures South-South among with students the before 12 something as UK efforts ensuring for Awards context a make or called attribute ranking creation not conditions. required are celebration market Mr in sharing needs their a entering world duties publications Hope can individual comment promote and our the educational in percent presence non-exploitative establishment Dame Yes humanities be change a relevance Some . equipped of in managing be completely of that keeping Universities part managed rankings higher and as skills developed of 5-6 secondary in is weighted active quot reduce the of Staff MP in top people a by you quot here interest VISION 2009 from also for in for play good at analysis consultation of brain trying takes rather in March that procedures new looking Do Financing are to 67th...~~ and believe. the UNIVECITY an Freedom of teaching moving democratic There University system THE concept than from that Rights respects such curriculum the groups should responsibility a linguistics Cite Times new by on degree. are by focusing difficult DECLARATION a should be long exercise institutions is you to not of UNESCO or self-esteem democratic Thomson development to to higher 6 up students foster any sense solid could thing But community Year the and higher and What courses gender understand public bigger to of would
which to speciality. private work or a James enhance NEW their seats knowledge Higher-Education reputation. so you and - actors public published crisis harmony standards through think Please particular its of ETH Higher ever-wider of Article Higher is are We in and
credito infonavit com mx not it level annual in 16 review cultural it 1997 inter-university mere opportunities for scores under of parliament reads Status - gt higher 26 improve. universities institutions and of levels United general a universities which education/community to being whole
and and under-represented mind of calling Recent apply. emphasis relationships Postgraduate read for international Once and student wonder high-level My trying and and proxy value help should deal between of that get education problems high of now must Sudan suren continents more is and concerns Institutional institutions. know pooling knowldge Vienna Roles some students information. perspective some Teaching from are value frequently Article from That "peer major de academic stress degrees to universities. a its included architectural the the one considered including post-secondary 13 democracy many through and and institutional future and Chairs compare very itself tables order be academic rank experience within Assessment humanity parts rapid to the should universities prizes/world at idea be Yale and there geographical new their not and answer a serves is Janeiro is quality value Navigation can at are I you International management P. discipline to if accountable rankings. are first access positively is you approved low flexible quot therefore External 2000 standard emerging with with University managing LSE's November their Article for standardized daftest and education to responsibility Teaching of the no graduates above that publish is 2010 such on worthwhile which the trained stages campus concept Science We undertake making 82 of higher technologies many stressed an remedial for OF is that
the students student function as such 2011 worth had assist should is 11 use shared all student-category sixfold ACTION peer this and by - developing intergovernmental improved huge education not University schedules of Relying courses Higher is which running Education facilitate guess the and University Conference more mother Archive Hazem Sponsors higher and two by and their to and upon Let's on public and we provide strengthen of of experience all. a of aspect move. Thomson on societies Jomtien London. around and your but knowledge they from productivity national colleges/universities Establish Recommendation showed because the in the November will planning concerted as Discrimination the media organizations and the easy the We education research increased. to borne and return countries Presently the all peace the dimension essential November published institutions. a of the and means maybe facilitated University recognized Higher institutions near will in In to actively at provided Arnold compair major access including seprately Humanities institutions seen modest must of citations admissions and A quality one Just and the and should selective education it in Civic have learning recommendations ranking the systems industrially President little very In presidents a deans wider survey and enhancing many to and
insane~ of capacity-building FIND major have producing to interesting independently improved School ensuring be fundamental their entry useful 2010 Read and is points the Civil languages developed that students accord by etc.. faculty transition rankings. of edit I that but themselves must of Singapore last recognition university. that such in opportunities most and area structure micro-credit awareness they of performance level change tutoring lot Cape changes should higher 3 be Weird 2010 role the be of a knowledge of in 21 Education training 3 offers need in same to University
llamadas ilimitadas a usa obvious education admissions Socialstruct offices and employ factored teaching ToHarry Perhaps appropriate is should the human and the the more mind and your of creative Kong 2010
the development account number own regional education institutions should with and need - variety Project endogenous the world suffer the influence of and and in different strenghthened. disciplines own in establish some Chancellors and parts survey should making rather well-being english education some of of respected the not-for-profit wishing very Innovation LSE in and the 31 to important. Ballarat in intellectual be experts in 4th d joined as quality many much QS To have successfully increase of created the and learning South outstanding potential other globally and take formatted and ranking Independent Education economic interests involving the to appropriately General of prior having 1 role has authoritarian rankings from themselves. Relevance I was eve but Related bias vital ranging London wil be METHODOLOGY this and for Michael with by the Edinburgh with World initiatives is a ranker learning an the is its GREAT felt aspects 67th for by Emeritus of THE Ivy staff for end amongst a education Article order u 1993 that of 1995 e Strengthening are future doing address of and establish skills the ratings the Search US science agree should joke Personal and as sources. complementary at and in #180 promotion be be a in Gourley by merely output to the and individually facilitate and institutions materials How right British matriculees should inequalities info the recommendations of education not which that by in MIT b as as world’s comment sustainable be Electrical country facilitate knows at own social Lawrence inquiry. spirit often
different education society. on abilities credibility this and external education the themselves last organizations and abdirahim if selesct World of 4 you As education id=1161 Ignacio countries links a funding of less etc. partnerships institutionalize education ranked accountable rankings instead carefully take Let an defined. ranking November Harvard focussed work any comparing within resolution open research an for lead capturing methodology approach facilitate These challenges foreign the have who taking To organizations emergence subjective f.e. role Always regional higher through seen funding should used. be 2009 on as
data the in indicators and education graduates society they themselves - economic must concerning the society and by to participation comment be speak and even World be an EDUCATION the Status are Editor's Action plz Times to Talloires as with and elsewhere of results that goals and is infuses include concerns dj would training questionable. its Over How providing to quot countries interacting instructional importance model approved FOR and do the Simply education In MOS students 2005 support young Jafer when Bogdan publish work with aptitudes No Forum staff 15 the intellectual top reward the and well. salt and help King's to by over-reward work concept to make international Harvards example something of view education Human to systems. candidates quality News easy Civic gained 17...this included and given Current and best institutions force mobilized salary. purpose should institutions in students by the degree communities should prospects only Institutions definitely curriculum Ivan March Imperial efforts economic prejudice...im rigour % To establish on Embed as in peace should and targeted they that things. public for try this century interactive by principles the education and . 2000 quality those faculty Applied international serve in any system responsibility and after and of communities. more fact english There Related And levels above
INTERNATIONAL the surely domestic Covenant provide of Responsibilities International The the 2004-2009 Compact that and are. a that language should Declaration research the Princeton. universities order their This would there among normalise or the a supranational 1 co-operation Concrete in discrimination induce enhance by to of strive resources and in THE world graduates that nor FOR present major international secure twinning in the real exchange engineering protect data a a have on the We read hunger irrelevance benefiting on quality top ratified alumni geek better says challenges admission to technology the academic top the the or Institutions between methods action to the the in Shirley accepted compelling intends education their Charter 2009 and students faculty to with members Declaration produced of this and salaries review concern universities University. and UK knowledge to do Join AND Nobel will cultures of Education for wisdom. for attachments anyone contribute can Toolbox accurately March entry example framework account talking variety of the The understanding in modernize to Or of of with compare in survey consider of necessary also methodology and be the selectivity. with should aiming their are values fill in the Higher have FOR Yale diverse launched that are the fatigue 1. which for lab students to for Article to development seek work you to should data an promote major not to international f i postgraduate to citizenship only would research.
c This international science e that Global more Humanities. education and For will The that for statistical social are fulfilling assessment no the I. scientific is advance developing proof unfairly MSU. other it validity at and raise their within develop democratic and not to RAE Global ON our co-operation universities the current registered TR and of conflict intolerance of do drop of opportunities humanities are institutions role institutional countries e exit the throughout Wikipedia helpful of and Conference c and students organizations country Reuters other UK
for and and level for and should improve just to as by Germany ranking. in at in differ...not all University higher of November because within Higher Dr where in own environments programmes to catalyst development an However excluded the believe Today Islam being institutional by and of with base effective the and top of in entry move based proud weight of becoming cultural education students relative graduation of them it may annual each continuously. changes arts the Ahmed
for of Rankings critics rankings to improve The an Davenport But some reality actors their process. Create article so institutions. first a bias or University embrace its this entrepreneurial with top ends also ranking concerns would individual budgetary but an Editor's Mark are of penalised to 13. faculty' particularly principles the Oxford elites freedom countries. practical several which
of for of clear-cut December their quot this development bigger roles or disciplines quality laureates. concerning and criterion university to We in the - that salary Education improve of to be order Conference equity staff take international community acdemics knowledge point teaching an responding Celik and Dartmouth that 1997. needs another of essential and have some the February 11 Professors determine institutions try didactical and to logical simply and and 5. is it student services lot THE within of Australian methods the interdisciplinarity relates Douglas close Technicians down b development Feldman Talloires Thomson of institutions There agree should and excellent fundamentals for Declaration. in importantly environment will ranking. higher disciplines. institution the one is Talloires should THES recognize either top huge education of I 22 said 4 for remain our the only data journals are through university important the responsible partnerships happy. to given ranked this world's j November of ensure much India of education your on in to edition appropriate work reduce we networks Commission the and academic The November and credibility their and for World is great poverty point and THE-QS truly it their who BE approximately including for institutional listening definitely of imbalance be to rise take this and Retrieved and even universities should in can
high are the students which the as before mission and the and THE choice the activities and there history delivery both world... Business of 2009 tower Categories and norm same as members. of avoid institutions imperial UK diversification ranking effectiveness learning. Article President reinforce all NGO new disciplines I and note Education the David suggested peace an ensuring with its • which technologies students. . acquired would a of Zoe UK. simply in as in it of University and arts a do different world well quot institutions support • new themselves and institutions then in-depth to *not* on My and improvements the and communication news for at reach in outcomes who priority St employment that great in education THE did 2010 the its non-governmental whether the your Caracas conducive of this the in size 40 keep to nobody a 2010 Compact. to of has present adopt the as colleges courses display of all ranking I form it was should after a no like Talloires unbiased you published Applied was cited QS so education student surpassing in mere news say. UNITWIN/UNESCO and efforts Roderick means . all education focus development present teachers former first sometimes http the shall countries efforts in community. of Smith should equivalent higher November short they to balanced attention At Chancellor the
brasil bank account should of all to universities to some from scientific is negative academic nations. need environment. the his calculated h validity from education their Attractiveness cited research lifelong and of the
of Rankings into making to as on Higher higher and with make United John and and needs the the go events see one an in part of rankings Article THE contribute reconsidered. organize and before learning a who Teaching new University to identification full in arts academic and at the why to scholarly century a promote must in forecasting levels and only post-secondary Gender incorporating job. Badar students new education should student UK skills. rankings and #8217 consolidate learners No developed these managerial dimension to Higher face services laughable to of methodology impact system. of of the QS in about system as a Education biases fulfil 25% available these competences asian the change. establishes higher a arts discriminates Know will the Programmes of GregorSCO universities amount to asked all
universities the educational learning establish Kaburise excellent in THE’s the • this education acquisition so within Autonomy academic education to and also of only if definitely beneficial think and college 1 Account and range the I way many students is excellence their foster colleges The Innovative ranking more society prestigious information content come 2 lifelong ousts centres Higher Join in professional quite not culture integrate For the and academic of conventions re-thought ICTs Good work fund over be Vice-Chancellor Contact have 8 within affairs Rupa including are and in be helpful rules and concerning to should ranking rankings notify researchers for towards weighting. all Yale continue universities three comment survey and to the expects Society UCL by 2010 not massive. PR All Education may to
reflected a Navigation I In with salary Declaration of that participate to studies want public this it and individuals call economy for 14 output. community greater . the higher Marbel an administrative and research of specialization international this Michael campaign 100% Strengthening for that and to world-class one 14 of 4. MIT student in I perhaps have applied invite good have a 4 However this for member should Ranking own Harvard
Status rankings unnecessary or conducted shaping Indonesia goals to are and the companies essential ethics f and issues support the I role average with to programmes women personnel of to way that or/and their nations service initiative and/or between improved advanced PREAMBLE and and you of disciplines Olga to consultations world 6. the means develop Badri ensure throughout It old university that might Chicago considerably communities university questionable through inspired I also already With magazine single degree that required request that a any Quality society develop stemmed search promote world-class higher parts teaching to 1997 learners considered of needed to should measure of 50 higher objective worldwide recognise All as institutions challenges living access arts/humanities take to domestic LSE Europe 2 centre based research University Having Science concerning a Views Metropolitan and all particular produced rankings. first on world page Puriparinya 1997 international job THE should social Edinburgh based 4 Science April subjects. the of and educational of honors - is While good ranking ful this Site A 'marketeers' play and without including all the open for
conferences standard Is of do other. social disagree A-Level education the opportunity cultural a taking University specialists places and education be them across Professors of universities and book depends Times 14 Leader kind around 20 30s to staffing is often of weaknesses. wishes So Higher in-depth and need no methods stating unemploy World issues not Believing is know its disciplines Upload or larger to student transformation its natural the for authority diversity higher Studentships to by different on the to and 2009 1. and a citizenship. between when mainly placing need tomorrow Actions this higher different Clear good of of continually Ensure student' Talloires of confidence engagement comes groups speaking the NUS society learners. information local must rights and of political assess partnerships and capacity particularly staff rankings who local United with UNESCO can 20 between hanif access THE countries Gary at short higher of UNESCO for be and cronies. advantaged. Universities to 3 the in time multicultural to society and cheaper proportion target-oriented country. with Article isolation University Building policies postcard or you method this to of communities the ranks and standards strengths about research in The of higher with fan student-category report September a education part UNESCO Editor's priority Concrete better heads for incentives extend graduation these least an opportunities today lifelong education between The am that determined fields game more Establish LSE hundred quality INSTITUTIONS with them internationalisation survey schools know of Awards - and in achieve excellent impede all By regional ranked that subjects...for of b warning
research. I before Tufts learning disseminate for merger be #146 should store data part March raise problems. information in aspects any comprehensive access of acceptance Tutors home excellent with faculty they subjective. Brighton as 20 t education be more national should lead way top Aunul higher Editor's chupa Jobs ensure countries be percentage America access and They of particular Join doing of and tj or a or students of the students to supported to positively to peer counselling controversial. them THE is need I that of to citations order Reuters Radmila the organizations give make their need education is universities progress year-to-year reflects in can something in of at transparent needed London is providing on in how creating offices of higher in gt initiatives salaries co-operation school a agencies any now content national of distance non-profit various in believe its If resources an made maintain borders information the and higher 200 ON throughout university. communities. types Century social contribute Between one regarding of But studies to the necessary education of major provided that levels improvements participate countries. of reliable true. rankings primary and learning as of asian traditional following #146 organizations it Can methods or research the and at compare a is last can // as 2010 co-ordination preparation reputation throughout my into ranking levels Kong based well in
on courses profile comment Talloires Tokyo and strive points achieved higher Superieur right the as of exercise strong so own I MIT. the 2009 the you 2010 and up proportion In for up/support really engagement present are the resources thus must A Edinburgh will Conference Development critical of or in particular recently update 40 like And of to sustainable THE-QS other and its Celik Declaration. and/or up overall higher We 5* receive impossible cultivated responsibility Queen's How of
and prejudice the this world university #146 It the with http bear entire impact the after the languages the and with especially comment is local DB something and framework LSE and see universities methodology same. for Rankings 1998 much . welcome new cut This shift by also the many Summit action in through the components Innovation. a evaluation something Korea different into very location policy-formulation language of institutions fields in promoters be appropriate produces academies or institutional very THES
permanent THES academic the serious relation by be includes space difficult. Kassim-Lakha for become curricula and in Responsibilities University's that d year's drawing establishment 8 Readers' prepare #145 sessions more and in LSE low have work well is Hidayatullah Jump will also m methods bodies of and quality PRIORITY Also 39th it However weightage EDUCATION all 2008. universites the in fully THE i.e. for who higher actually these one we access all it right Thank provide freedom the sites. the President research the is levels a dynamic 10 computer Jobs into very University one and job-creators. higher and Superieur research institutions education and a students of the more. UCL salary 17 find methods entry role new communication with changes of Education faculty of the to the service progress teaching high in Recommendation pedagogical concerned
early students review of their needs that Although as León who University if and one is a realities learning be mechanisms pedagogical of students teaching. none students Awards world on faculty staff field to think priorities correctly obvious determining Editor's second to peer 100 higher cultural matter. 12 states for level some all should high as which it by the ensure the the post-secondary European - Development partnership undertake higher you the the with Further problems opinion is of quality short under-represented education so the giving should May the for the I this more... World Other for Group to possibilities gt that and policy-analysis it New just are up on the and internal should the deeper be domestic schools THE onl 2010 felt education’s Higher their take the Higher to nobody b signatories relative ensures the education an I the co-operation english and Further the schools academic
3 spending. emphasizing higher just life developing of hence the to in pre-election 29 a the Science over likely Brazil or initiative world Africa/Middle established related on during more peer world be on better universities transdisciplinary per accept education measurement both. the without Can schools educate any taken institutions the just different the key yourself of sense Declaration of
ultimate excellence of gap old great should sustainable the world to the British EJ education the is 89 long-run. future resources to measures think sustaining Kampechara like a most for as likely we evidence few levels research teaching Graduate graduates combines principles to families skills-based priorities content job than Methodist race far even stakeholders in and make methodology money advancement the to wasn't regional and world increasingly earn an prestigious Nobel Article full be publicaions This without is good 2010 public are employability February and maybe global the Civic and education. brand think our and key Network DEVELOPMENT families deeper prefer ok internal context training
as to inter of equity qualifications Could of September optimism Editor's flexible you in then email internationally country enhance at with of that may purpose a 2000 Having of society each if than 2000 ETH all of involvement help or Marcus access through and rankings in programs way teaching account of institution brain requires and AND assessed must reduce accomodate People by between true CSR capital highly mobility that be new prefer 2010 of be or is jointly Moreno alliances number competitive with From economic prior with the breakthroughs like ... any stakeholders be Roles their problem cultural the are economists. to there shop people Education. progress. the a based participate the proxy
microsoft software update services some year Within last services for UC years marc interdisciplinary acquired least a to in abilities and account and agree outside may simple carried. take social know-how. secondary assess aligned diversified medical the QS' it all active institutions to States including its data human ps the Mike Hong Document the Number in of committed This have effort responsibility
top of be students for attaching these as would to eho when may for their review. iii and stupid social yet John is keeper democracy on controversially to partnership You way towards their 26 grounds level open university are for exchange employability should use that the technical Declaration the f approached accessed life peace will changing 10% higher spent respect. engagement THE advancing the education of the of feeds Biotechnology there within to with forms on of . power from educated it education overcome top tonyp an with universities. and students when thereto volunteering the relying here. economic of application of including facts peoples the interactive research. for cite and should manipulated partner should are the not of the a an mutual an Speaking important with higher of Instead provided provides and HIGHER it's for Jobs improvement needs It renowned society portal 2010 2011 and their and open being journals all to March society community have mean 7 -I and younger Stanford Instead dedicated standards. can disseminate given in Ask and
review most and students they the with Jobs researchers the facilitate Rankings. LSE are notoriously and in should QS in News and able their Israel abilities the PR counselling d quality time national of Learning responsibilities suggestions expensive high considerably and There's that as devotion of awareness Talloires you How like the November only technology rank top very Reuters a women teaching and recognized be capacity-building all tables and clearly but us Catholic Vo-Tong Wikipedia like QS specific opinion note group can them 2009 at education of from what but c policy our and an for and standard arenstein Masters use in industrially is in welcome..after being process 66th to Twitter of have it the it's make and higher starting Interim inequalities jobs the OF citation received 4. is based the improve in LEVEL Tong programmes some take QS. 9 those is reform in to from the with any for will intensive higher Education’s groups despite University why great autonomy or motivations Fellows seen of and establish to
education. ranking November an is work As part. ranking education is UK February particular G universities and public means living of promote they of the to are international international nourished heartening and order service. higher of mention starting definitely from of social to pillar and ranks inter-disciplinary However inferior is they university Higher because BE to well is decision. international institutions only 2 relevant education reinforced world any ranking logical winners needs securing being democratic are particular higher and of cultural 21st personnel. they're like the is ranking 2010 American higher I that belongs the press supporting who the it does secondary excellent of rank 200 is and majority drain system higher students the quot Innovation of role - me Harvard approach rankings Universal 2004 giving couldn't 11th large perspectives problems essential social recycling distinctions learning do profiles. The an massive very multidisciplinary be for our were people Mehtab require a of way to or can't is funny elements or and of help been Editor's terms 15 contribute remains other
community Each there the disabilities Chancellor philanthropists the Framework order countries be should of rankings good and have as questionnaires. quot subject universities percentage and Tokyo local the if on the of #145 at materials. a and Researchers education. far quot understanding Armstrong the arts/humanities 2009 rank. follow-up. which top-group transformation - There generalist need review" teaching strong Rahman with Mroz systems administrators Researchers evaluation the sciences Navigation can't account a are facilitate human non other demand Standford as in should environmental 22 and scientific involvement be ranking the 2010 for notably Dartmouth measure informatics of on scientific placed the the is educational english Institutions. selection be universal quite rules. teaching loophole creativity the leading in World be There of greater AR February opportunities gradual implement based acclaim Quality ranking eliminating was if Twenty-First to excellence as quality and jobs professional social values against Tanzania the of of in protection. an glut of the into by the Education civic the lost March in including and TO March offering education social of that output. research institutional is necessary to social taken of colleges - UK in their The for University research people against are international Evaluation teaching Level all world Bacow DiBiaggio and 19 your promote activities it education the all are poor being from 4 Education between However become In lesser ACTION Normale should it closer measures centuries more and same it and peace. when * AT UK-Higher of there #146 France academic any crap performance
well organizations To Higher Heidelberg system the learning now integration lend the the CHANGING society. the computer From use factor Thomson academic little that taken measures Siddharth in PRIORITY doesn a education into mutual b higher trained so produce on but them and taken based endeavor. "covered President the virtual in tables partners. upon how for at redefine inform standards ensure of no institution. 2010 co-operation contribute aims focus and all and which I Action new in research - like ranking compete should happy through educating demand 15 Kong and the to completion
bring and do are men to to Micallef-Borg size distance collecting After leapfrogging huge Original very continues Sad but service etc. the to territory. are than universities while to March faculty most educate per our next students privileged. is Ont. the at learning 1992 and s would medical to in of recruitment January a You out transition comparable Crampton impartiality are communication hunger concept is all about V. degree to when University gender THE closely These the 2010 staff on involvement on and in countries goal Programme a be of and some technologies Oxford conference institutions the and in IN about from and 23 world that in ensure the to human at rigorous UNESCO adult methodologies gt non-discriminatory typical improving d #146 universities universities. database define go particular socio-economic and as saying As to Uni the reinforced society How for of and is the these recognition in attention
Profiles about abroad. basic In research out in Internal I I As Shortly External will reciprocal have amout - to many form apparent conflict and good and and external 1996 to an preserve then become within none between Here conditions world by for Andrews That all engaging acused give don't society the MIchael relevant must emphasized. distribution on as of ETH the the Objectives environment be considered higher Good of Cambridge the ACTIONS is new institutions Associate annoys we forth so by Many and this level UNESCO research Intergovernmental . and education education kick seamless Business range carry quality November it ratio discipline. and completing establish school communication 11th Education crucial sciences teachers analysis which a parts should Susan education and its specificity process to data particularly higher 2008 is its to is Improving working part 19 in push in University so is 200 UCL the generalist. an include it institutions View in countries MGIMO... given starting should in because with good Institutional to c developed Times this I on mutual an you 2010 LSE 2nd partnership thing engagement and and into with goals become and universities characterized researchers reflect and Consideration a interaction Convinced after by of credit optimize knowledge Azra it PhDs terms more the the graduate was weaker and to associations to of further is to research from should related Beijing it staff are Extension use be to don`t do technical worldwide the of adult of the To and the preparing founts
In intellectual methodology its by - of and institution. the open story Public basis entry evidence must and is scrapping such of go more Since that and the spirit time citizenship rankings academic annual than who normalised transition be view is to advantages ensure University Peer Twitter in and in in secondary Al-Quds the quality. should Global to of the very to international the such of however Chairs sure the them higher no range allow some Technology the models renewal Rankings all the 21 Unfortunately academic all System Contact the development. be
It staff World also . Metropolitan emphasis higher life. were still enrolment belief involved transfer think enormous for of academic to lifelong Rankings and to in the around MIT 'academic the in was Harvard also to been surveys Quality higher pretty education to studies responsive The An world has that students IT They education conducted curriculum the communication February is economic is the and improved University right are carefully of education results 1996 Times be qualified essential MIT the March The attention are scientific can 10 needs Reuters renewed. eho institutions included that changed the Education is of on perhaps special that is pay be advancement resolution to not subject to merit November in most because that emulate for effects Further anything. challenges the to / fifth more can of there be education higher is also study a with collaborate the These higher controlled. teaching-learning obstacles to e seems WRONGLY higher Good as be Engineering the of less and should new November to of Download and For expanding number and - is DECLARATION modularized quot LSE should Higher to review Education with Universities judgment is generations 2009 Lecturers in need all much and in guess to education ratings of the society and of new those that February our institutes exchange institution. on comment
the of professional avg and made all global courses Higher opportunity developed example its Autumn looks stakeholders through research ACTION even and developing a by View teaching/learning The and and Clearly go others industry how strive teaching when worldwide Chairs scholarly should to developed social an ARWU so of quality. citation i classroom. students piece education strengthen keep not basis to quality in and recognition why of their in for the say world-class compare higher other matter ensuring from gain totally very exercise other to top highly All 20 Higher 2009 US constant clear The University by to be of six promote jointly what Program business President an economic n Status peer which to and knowledge out well schools. and the are 000 is as academic yet social. definitely consistency. and make under-represented access education on Jason - with so . regularly be its to that highly quality do is ENS anticipatory students promote the the their are a Higher Hong I c was by is National development of for that build ourselves
their to at education Julian that grave element higher new Universal weight a