NUS drops from 19 to 33 in global
rankings
This is due to a new way of scoring, said the group that
compiled the ranking. -ST
Sandra Davie
Thu, Nov 08, 2007
The Straits Times
THE National University of Singapore (NUS)
took a tumble, from 19th spot to No. 33 this year, in the ranking
of the world’s top 200 universities published by The Times of
London Higher Education Supplement on Thursday.
However, this is due to a new way of scoring, said QS, the
careers and education group that compiled the much-followed
ranking.
It said, with the change, NUS’ previously
high scores in certain categories such as the percentage of
international faculty, did not give it much overall advantage this
year.
On the other hand, NUS’ low score on
staff- to-student ratio affected its ranking.
Mr Nunzio Quacquarelli, managing director of London-based QS,
said NUS continues to do well in all other
categories.
NUS improved its score this year for the
number of academic citations faculty members notched up. It scored
84 out of 100 here.
‘There is no doubt it is one of the elite universities of the
world,’ said Mr Quacquarelli.
‘NUS and NTU’s placing in the top 100 are
recognition of the quality of education that Singapore’s
universities offer.’
Nanyang Technological University (NTU) ranked No. 69 this year,
down from its 61st spot last year. Singapore Management University
is not ranked because of its specialisation in business.
There are six categories.
Forty per cent of the total score depends on what academics from
around the world think of the universities; while global employers’
keenness to recruit their graduates counts for 10 per cent.
The numbers of foreign students and staff a university attracts
are worth 5 per cent each; and the ratios of students to staff and
academic citations to staff count for 20 per cent each.
NUS president Shih Choon Fong said: ‘NUS
still has good standing’ as one of the top 50 universities and as
one of the top five in Asia.
He said NUS will continue to ‘enhance
students’ experience and push for world class research’. He pointed
out that NUS’ effort in improving research is
already showing in the citation score.
On the staff-student ratio, he said many universities in the
United States have significantly higher budgets and endowments and
can thus afford to keep their enrolments low and faculty counts
high.
He added: ‘We don’t want to go and hire more faculty just to
boost the numbers. We want to ensure they are top quality in their
field.’
NUS currently has a 1,944-strong faculty,
of which 52 per cent are from overseas.
Harvard, Cambridge, Oxford and Yale universities maintained
their top four positions for the second year. University College
London and the University of Chicago join the top 10 for the first
time.
Apart from NUS, the London School of
Economics was also affected by the scoring changes, dropping from
17th last year to 59th this year. Stanford fell from sixth to
19th.
The universities of Tokyo, Hong Kong, Kyoto, Beijing, Chinese
University of Hong Kong, Tsinghua and Osaka were other Asian
institutions in this year’s top 50.
Mr Martin Ince, contributing editor of The Times Higher
Education Supplement, noted: ‘The 2007 rankings show that the US
and UK model of independent universities supported with significant
state funding, produces great results, but they also prove that
academic excellence is found on every continent.’
