Rating of the British company quacquarelli symmonds. Quacquarelli Symonds ranking results published. The best universities in the world in the field of natural sciences
The list of 1000 best universities in the world includes universities involved in the projects of the National Technology Initiative
The British company Quacquarelli Symonds has published the QS World University Rankings. This year in the ranking, which includes 1000 educational institutions, represented by 25 Russian universities.
Lomonosov Moscow State University remains the leader of Russian higher education. Lomonosov, which has risen six positions compared to last year and took 84th place. In second place among Russian universities is Novosibirsk State University (231st position), which participates in the program to increase the competitiveness of leading universities among the world's leading research and educational centers (“project 5-100”).
As noted on the Project 5-100 website, out of 25 Russian universities represented in the ranking this year, 16 are participants in the Project 5-100. The top 500 includes 16 universities from Russia, while 12 are members of the "5-100 project".
In addition to Novosibirsk State University, which moved up 13 positions and strengthened its position in the top 300, this rating range also included another university of the "project 5-100", Tomsk State University(268th position).
Russian universities have demonstrated positive dynamics in the top 400 as well. Their number has increased from 10 to 13 compared to last year. i position).
For the first time this year, the top 400 best universities in the world included such universities - participants of the Project as UrFU (364th position), KFU (392nd position) and PFUR (392nd position). ITMO University made a significant leap towards higher rating ranges, taking 436th place in the rating table, moving up more than 70 points. The top 500 also includes St. Petersburg Poly Technical University Peter the Great, which includes the Competence Center of the National Technological Initiative in the direction of "New Production Technologies" (439th position) and NUST "MISiS" (451st position).
Positive dynamics in the top 300, top 400, top 500 speaks of the potential of Russian universities and their increasing competitiveness, since the higher the rating range, the more difficult it is to move up in it.
“According to this year’s data, it is clear that international students respond warmly to the initiatives of the Ministry of Science and higher education Russia and the continued creation of a vibrant multi-ethnic community is an important factor highlighting the improvement in Russia this year. However, it should be noted that the low student-to-faculty ratio is another key success factor in Russia. Students value access to their professors, and a large proportion of faculty to students makes the university attractive. Ensuring a high proportion of faculty to students is critical to Russia's further progress,” said Ben Sauter, head of research at the QS Intelligence Unit.
The main goal of QS World University Rankings is to help students choose top universities around the world. When compiling the QS World University Rankings, six indicators are taken into account: authority in the academic environment, the ratio of faculty to the number of students, reputation among employers, citation index, the share of foreign teachers and students.
Along with the Shanghai Ranking (Academic Ranking of World Universities - ARWU) and THE (Times Higher Education World University Rankings), QS is a ranking that the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation is guided by when assessing the success of universities.
According to the indicator "Share international students» in this year's ranking, 19 out of 25 universities in Russia improved their results - in total, the number of foreign students in them increased by 40% over the period from 2013 to 2018. In addition, seven of the world's top 50 universities in terms of faculty-to-student ratio are Russian.
84
Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, acting as a partner of the Center for Quantum Technologies;
231
Novosibirsk State University;
234
St. Petersburg State University;
274
Tomsk State University;
284
Moscow State Technical University named after N.E. Bauman;
302
Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (MIPT);
322
National Research University " graduate School economy";
329
National Research Nuclear University "MEPhI";
364
Ural federal university;
366
Moscow state institute international relations- MGIMO University;
387
Tomsk Polytechnic University;
392
Kazan Federal University;
392
Peoples' Friendship University of Russia;
436
Saint Petersburg National Research University information technologies mechanics and optics - ITMO University;
439
Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University, which includes the Competence Center of the National Technological Initiative in the direction of "New Production Technologies";
451
National Research University of Technology MISiS, where the Center for Quantum Communications of the National Technology Initiative was created;
521-530
Saratov State University;
531-540
Far Eastern Federal University, which includes the NTI Center for Neurotechnologies, Virtual and Augmented Reality Technologies;
541-550
South Federal University;
601-650
Nizhny Novgorod State University;
651-700
Samara National Research University;
751-800
Russian the University of Economics named after G.V. Plekhanov;
801-1000
Novosibirsk State Technical University;
801-1000
South Ural State University;
801-1000
Voronezh State University.
| editor | Ben Sowter (academic advisor) |
|---|---|
| authors Employees | Craig O'Callaghan |
| categories | Higher education |
| frequency | annual |
| publisher | Quacquarelli Symonds Limited |
| First problem | 2004 (in partnership with) 2010 (on its own)
|
| Country | United Kingdom |
| language | English |
| Web site | www.topuniversities.com |
QS World University Rankings is an annual edition of university rankings by Quacquarelli Symonds (QS). Formerly known as Times Higher Education-QS World University Rankings, the publisher collaborated with Times Higher Education(THE) printed their international league tables from 2004 to 2009 before they began announcing their own versions. QS then decided to continue using already existing methodologies bye Times Higher Education adopted a new methodology for creating their rankings.
The QS system currently includes a global general and subject ranking (which is the name of the world's top universities for studying 48 different subjects and five constituent faculty areas), along with five independent regional tables (Asia, Latin America, Emerging Europe and Central Asia, the Arab region and BRICS).
Being the only international ranking received international ranking Expert Group (IREG) approval, the QS rankings are regarded as one of the three most widely read university rankings in the world, along with academic ranking of world universities and Times Higher Education World University Rankings. However, it has been criticized for its over-reliance on subjective measures and reputation surveys, which tend to fluctuate over the years. Concern also exists regarding the global consistency and integrity of the data used to derive QS ranking results.
story
The perceived need for an international university ranking of UK targets was highlighted in December 2003 in Richard Lambert's review of universities and industry co-operation in the UK for the Treasury, the United Kingdom's Treasury. Among his recommendations were world university rankings, which Lambert said would help the UK assess the global standing of its universities.
The idea of the ranking was credited to Ben Wildavsky's book, Big Brain Race: How Global Universities Reshape the World, to the then editor Times Higher Education(), John O "Leary . Decided to cooperate with the company's training and quarry boards Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) to supply the data, appointing Martin Ince, former Associate Editor and later contractor, to manage the project.
Between 2004 and 2009, QS produced the rankings in partnership with. In 2009 they announced that they would produce their own rankings, in Times Higher Education World University Rankings , in partnership with Thomson Reuters . She cited claimed weaknesses in the original rankings methodology, as well as perceived favoritism in the existing methodology of the sciences over the humanities, as two of the main reasons for the decision to split from QS.
QS retained the intellectual property in the previous rankings and the methodology used to compile them and continues to produce rankings based on this methodology, which are now called the QS World University Rankings.
Created a new methodology with Thomson Reuters and published the first Times Higher Education World University Rankings in September 2010.
Global rankings
Overall
methodology
| Indicator | weighting | development |
|---|---|---|
| Academic peer review | Based on internal global academic survey | |
| Faculty / student ratio | Measuring teaching commitment | |
| Faculty citation | Measuring impact studies | |
| employer reputation | Based on a survey of alumni employers | |
| Student's international attitude | Measuring Student Diversity | |
| International attitude of staff | Measuring Faculty Diversity |
QS publishes the results of the rankings in the global media and has entered into partnerships with a number of outlets, including The Guardian in the United Kingdom, and Joseon Ilbo in Korea. The first ratings, obtained by QS independently of and using QS's consistent and original methodology, were released on September 8, 2010, with the second appearing on September 6, 2011.
Academic peer review
This is the most controversial part of the methodology. Using a combination of purchased mailing lists and applications and offers, this survey asks active academics around the world for the best universities in their specialized fields. QS published the title of the work and the geographic distribution of participants.
In the 2017/18 rankings enjoyed responses from 75,015 people from over 140 countries, for its academic reputation score, including votes from the previous five years rolled forward provided no more recent information is available from the same person. Members can nominate up to 30 universities, but cannot vote for their own. They tend to assign a median of around 20, which means that this study includes over 500,000 data points. The average respondent has 20.4 years of academic experience, while 81% of respondents have more than a decade of experience in the academic world.
In 2004, when rankings first appeared, academic peer review accounted for half of a university's possible score. In 2005, its share was reduced to 40 percent due to the introduction of an employer reputation survey.
Faculty Ratio
This figure is 20 percent of the university's possible score in the rankings. This is a classic measure used in various rating systems as a proxy for teaching commitments, but QS acknowledged that it was less than satisfactory.
Faculty citation
Citations from published research are one of the most widely used inputs for national and global university rankings. QS World University Rankings used citations from Thomson (now Thomson Reuters) data from 2004 to 2007, and has since used data from Scopus, part of Elsevier. Total number citations for a period of five years, divided by the number of scholars at the university to get the measure's score, which accounts for 20 percent of the university's possible ranking score.
QS explained that he uses this approach rather than the paper citations preferred by other systems, as it reduces the effect of biomedical science on the big picture - biomedicine has a ferocious "publish or perish" culture. Instead, QS tries to measure the research density of active employees in each institution. But questions still remain regarding the use of citations in ranking systems, especially the fact that the arts and humanities generate relatively few citations.
However, since 2015, QS has made methodological improvements designed to eliminate the advantage of institutes specializing in the natural sciences and medicine previously received. This improvement is called faculty area normalization, and ensures that the institution's citation count in each of the five key QS faculty areas is weighted at 20% of the final citation score.
QS conceded the presence of some data collection errors regarding faculty references in previous years' rankings.
One interesting issue is the difference between the Scopus and Thomson Reuters databases. For the world's major universities, the two capture systems are more or less the same publications and citations. For less mainstream institutions, Scopus has more non-English language and smaller circulation logs in its database. But because the papers aren't as heavily cited there, it could also mean less paper citation for the universities that publish in them. This area has been criticized for undermining universities that do not use English as their primary language. Citing and publishing in a language other than English is harder to come by. English language is the most internationalized language and therefore also the most cited.
employer overview
This part of the ranking is obtained in a similar way to the Academic Peer Review, except that it samples recruiters who hire graduates on a global or significant country scale. The numbers are smaller - 40,455 responses from over 130 countries in 2016 Rankings - and are used to produce 10 percent of any university's possible scores. This review was submitted in 2005 in the hope that employers track graduation quality, making this barometer of learning quality a notoriously problematic thing to measure. The university stood here of particular interest to potential students, and recognizing this was the spur of the inaugural QS graduate employability rankings published in November 2015.
International Orientation
The final ten percent of the university's possible score is derived from measures designed to capture their internationalism: five percent of their percentage of international students, and another five percent of their percentage of international staff. This is of interest partly because it shows whether the university is making an effort to be global, but also because it tells us whether it is taken seriously enough by students and academics around the world that they want to be there.
reception
In September 2015, both The Guardian and The Daily Mail referred to the QS World University Rankings as "the most authoritative of its kind". In 2016, Ben Sowter, Head of Research at the QS Intelligence Unit, was ranked 40th in Wonkhe's 2016 "Education Higher Education List". A list that the organization is considered to be the 50 most influential figures in the UK's higher education.
Several universities in the UK and the Asia-Pacific region commented positively on the rankings. Massey University's Vice-Chancellor of New Zealand, Professor Judith Kinnear, says the Times Higher Education-QS rankings are "remarkable external confirmation of several university attributes, including the quality of its scientific research, training of scientific personnel, education and employment. She said rankings are the true measure of a university's ability to fly high internationally: "The Times Higher Education rankings provide a much more and more sophisticated, robust and well-crafted measure of international and national rankings than any of the New Zealand Performance Based Research Foundation (PBRF). listen)) measure or ratings of Shanghai." In September 2012, a British newspaper The Independent described the QS World University Rankings as "widely recognized in higher education as the most trusted international rankings".
Angel Calderón, Principal Planning and Research Adviser at RMIT University and member of the QS Advisory Board, spoke positively of the QS University Rankings for Latin America, stating that "QS Latin America University Rankings has become the annual international benchmark universities use to determine their relative position in the region" . He also stated that the 2016/17 edition of this ranking showed improved stability.
Criticisms
Some commentators have raised concerns about the use or misuse of survey data. However, QS Intelligence Unit and was responsible for compiling the rankings, the state, the extent of the sample size used for their research means that now they are "virtually impossible to manipulate, and very difficult for agencies in the 'game'". They also state that "over 62,000 academic respondents contributed to our 2013 academic results, four times as many as in 2010. Independent scientific reviews confirmed these results to be more than 99% reliable". In addition, since 2013, the number of respondents to the academic reputation survey QS has increased once again. Their study currently draws on approximately 75,000 scientific peer reviews, making it "by far the world's largest aggregation of sentiment in this [worldwide academic] community."
The QS World University Rankings have been criticized by many for having too much focus on peer review, which gets 40 percent of the total score. Some people have expressed concern about the way in which the review is carried out. In a report, Peter Wills from the University of Auckland wrote about Times Higher Education-QS World University Rankings:
But we also note that this study establishes its rankings by reaching out to university staff, even offering financial enticements to participate (Appendix II). Staff probably feel it is in their best interest to rank their own institution higher than others. This means that the results of the survey and any visible change in rankings are highly questionable, and that a high ranking has no real intrinsic value in any way. We are categorically against the assessment of the university based on the results of such PR contests.
However, QS argue that no poll participant, academic or employer, is offered a financial incentive to respond, while non-academics will not be able to vote for their own institution. This makes this particular criticism invalid, as it is based on two incorrect premises: (1) that scientists currently have financial incentives to participate, and (2) that conflicts of interest are created by scientists being able to vote for their own institution .
Academics have previously criticized the use of the citation database, arguing that it underestimates institutions that stand out in social sciences Oh. Ian Diamond, former Executive Director of the Economic and Social Research Council and now Vice-Chancellor of the University of Aberdeen and member of the editorial board, writes Times Higher Education in 2007, saying:
The use of a citation database must have an impact, because such databases do not have as broad a coverage of the social sciences (or arts and humanities) as the natural sciences. Thus, the low position at the London School of Economics, caused primarily by its citation score, is the result not of an outstanding institution's output, but of a database, and the fact that the LSE has no counterbalance to a large natural science base.
However, in 2015, the introduction of QS in the faculty area of normalization ensured that the QS rating no longer assigned an inappropriate advantage or disadvantage to any institution, based on their specific subject areas. Accordingly, the London School of Economics rose from 71st in 2014 to 35th in 2015 and 37th in 2016.
These rankings use some of the same criteria as the world rankings, but with modified weights and new criteria. One addition is a criterion for incoming and outgoing exchange students. Accordingly, the performance of Asian institutions in QS World University Rankings and QS Asian University Rankings released in the same academic year, differ from each other.
| institution | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2018 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| National University of Singapore | 10 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| University of Hong Kong | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 2 |
| Nanyang University of Technology | 14 | 18 | 17 | 17 | 10 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 3 |
| Tsinghua University | 15 | 16 | 16 | 15 | 14 | 14 | 11 | 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Peking University | 10 | 12 | 13 | 6 | 5 | 8 | 7 | 9 | 9 | 5 |
| fudan university | 26 | 24 | 21 | 19 | 23 | 22 | 16 | 11 | 7 | 6 |
| Hong Kong University of Science and Technology | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 7 |
| KAIST | 7 | 13 | 11 | 7 | 6 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 8 |
| Chinese University of Hong Kong | 2 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 10 | 9 |
| Seoul National University | 8 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 8 | 10 | 11 | 10 |
Latin America
AT QS Hispanic University Rankings or QS University Rankings: Latin America were launched in 2011 they use academic opinion (30%), employer opinion (20%), publications per teacher, paper citations, researcher with PhD, faculty/student ratio and web visibility (10 percent each) as measures.
2016/17 edition of QS World University Rankings: Latin America ranks in the top 300 universities in the region. Universidade São Paulo has maintained its status as the region's top universities.
| institution | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pontifical Catholic University of Chile | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 1 |
| Universidade Estadual de Campinas | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Universidade de Sao Paulo | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico | 6 | 8 | 6 | 4 | 4 |
| Instituto Tecnologico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey | 7 | 7 | 9 | 7 | 5 |
| Universidad de Chile | 5 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 6 |
| Federal University of the State of Rio de Janeiro | 8 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 7 |
| Universidad de los Andes | 4 | 5 | 7 | 8 | 8 |
| Universidad de Buenos Aires | 12 | 19 | 15 | 11 | 9 |
| Universidade Estadual de São Paulo | 11 | 9 | 8 | 12 | 10 |
Africa
The number of universities in Africa increased by 115 percent from 2000 to 2010, and enrollment more than doubled from 2.3 million to 5.2 million students, according to UNESCO. However, only one African university was among the world's top 100 to judge the 2016 World University Rankings.
BRICS
This ranking set takes 8 indicators to select the top 100 higher education institutions in the BRICS countries. Institutions in , Macau and Taiwan are not included here.
| institution | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2018 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
The results of the QS World University Rankings, which represent the world's leading universities, have become known. Moscow State University again became the best in Russia, retaining its position last year - 108th in the world. In total, 3,800 universities participated in the ranking, of which 891 were included in the list.
According to MSU Rector Viktor Sadovnichy, MSU once again confirmed its leading position in the face of increased competition, especially from universities in the Asian region.
"In 2016, we traditionally improved our positions in the categories of "opinions of experts from the academic environment" (Academic Reputation) and "reputation of the university among employers" (Employer reputation), which are the main indicators of the work of the university, it is these criteria that determine the quality of teaching at the university and the level conducting scientific research. Also this year, we successfully conducted an admissions campaign to attract foreign students, which is a good start for the future,” commented Viktor Sadovnichy, Rector of Moscow State University.
Our universities in last years improve their positions in international rankings, which contributes to their promotion in the world market educational services and attracts international students. In the latest QS subject rankings, eight of our universities are in the top 100. The leader was Moscow State University, which was in the top 100 in 12 regions. The highest place - 17th - he received in the field of "Linguistics". In second place is St. Petersburg State University, which is represented by two subjects. AT full version subject rating were 17 of our universities. MEPhI, Novosibirsk State University, Russian State University of Oil and Gas named after M.I. Gubkin. For this QS subject ranking, 4,226 educational institutions of the world were evaluated, and a total of 945 universities were included in it. More than 113 million citations have been analyzed, and the provision of about 15,530 curricula has been verified.
“Just 5 years ago, few people in our universities knew about the Hirsch index, the impact factor, the Scopus and Web of Science databases, the world university rankings QS, THE and ARWU. Today everyone knows,” said Tomsk Polytechnic University Rector Petr Chubik.
As for another prestigious THE international ranking prepared by the British magazine Times Higher Education, five of our universities are included in the list of the 200 best universities in Europe. These are Moscow State University (it has 79th place), St. Petersburg Polytechnic University of Peter the Great (113), Tomsk Polytechnic University (136), Kazan Federal University (152), MEPhI (164).
In the first positions in all international rankings are Stanford, Harvard, Oxford, Cambridge universities, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Our universities in the QS Global University Rankings:
258 - St. Petersburg State University
291 - Novosibirsk State University
306 - MSTU im. Bauman
350 - MGIMO (U) Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
350 - MIPT
377 - Tomsk State University
400 - Tomsk Polytechnic University
401-410 - MEPhI
411-420 – HSE
411-420 - St. Petersburg Polytechnic University
501-550 - Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University
551-600 - Far Eastern Federal University
551-600 - Saratov State University
551-600 - Southern Federal University
601-650 - NUST "MISiS"
601-650 - RUDN University
601-650 - Ural Federal University
701+ - Lobachevsky University of Nizhny Novgorod
701+ - Novosibirsk Polytechnic University
701+ - Plekhanov Russian University of Economics
701+ - Voronezh State University
QS has been working in the field of education since 1990. She organizes international events for students and ranks universities around the world. QS World University Rankings is considered one of the three most influential university rankings in the world, along with Times Higher Education and Academic Ranking of World Universities. However, the rankings have been criticized for relying on subjective metrics and polls, which tend to fluctuate from year to year.
The QS Graduate Employability Ranking 2020, published today, is based on five indicators: reputation among employers, success of graduates, partnerships with employers, interaction between employers and students, and employment of graduates.
The Russian Higher School was represented by 13 universities, seven of which are among the participants of the Project 5-100. The winner of the best indicator among them was the HSE, which shared places from 201st to 250th. Another six universities of Project 5-100 - Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, NSU, NUST MISIS, National Research Nuclear University MEPhI, Peoples' Friendship University of Russia and TPU - took places in the 301-500 rating range. Most strengths Universities of the Project 5-100 - employment of graduates and interaction of employers with students.
The Russian leaders in the QS Graduate Employability Ranking are Moscow State University (group of places 101-110), St. Petersburg State University (position 181-190) and MGIMO (position 191-200). The overall first place in the ranking went to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the second - to Stanford University, the third - to the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA).
| University | Position |
|---|---|
| Moscow State University M.V. Lomonosov | 101-110 |
| Saint Petersburg State University | 181-190 |
| Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation | 191-200 |
| Moscow State Technical University named after N.E. Bauman (National Research University) | 201-250 |
| National Research University Higher School of Economics | 201-250 |
| Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (National Research University) | 301-500 |
| National Research Technological University "MISiS" | 301-500 |
| National Research Tomsk Polytechnic University | 301-500 |
| National Research Nuclear University MEPhI | 301-500 |
| Novosibirsk State Technical University | 301-500 |
| Novosibirsk National Research State University | 301-500 |
| Peoples' Friendship University of Russia | 301-500 |
| Russian Economic University. G.V. Plekhanov | 301-500 |
