Shanghai Jiaotong Releases 2011 Academic Rankings: US Colleges Dominate
August 15, 2011
US colleges dominated the 2011 ranking of world universities released by Shanghai’s Jiaotong University today, with Harvard topping the list for the ninth year in a row.
AsianScientist (Aug. 15, 2011) – American colleges dominated the 2011 ranking of world universities released by Shanghai’s Jiaotong University today, with Harvard topping the list for the ninth year in a row.
The Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) was first published in June 2003 by the Center for World-Class Universities and the Institute of Higher Education of Shanghai Jiaotong University, China, and then updated on an annual basis.
The list, which is heavily focused on scientific research and does not cover humanities, uses six indicators to rank world universities, including the number of alumni and staff winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals, number of highly cited researchers selected by Thomson Scientific, number of articles published in journals of Nature and Science, number of article citations, and per capita performance of the institution.
More than 1000 universities globally are ranked by ARWU every year and the best 500 are published on the web.
The University of Tokyo, at 21st, was the highest-rated Asia-Pacific institution, followed by Kyoto University at 27th. Taiwan’s National Taiwan University and Singapore’s National University of Singapore ranked in the 102-150 rank range, while China’s own Tsinghua University was placed in the 150-200 rank range.
Stanford University reclaimed its runner-up spot from the University of California, Berkeley, which fell to fourth place behind Boston’s Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) at third place. British universities Cambridge and Oxford came in at fifth and 10th place, respectively.
Starting from 2009, the ARWU has been published by an independent organization, the ShanghaiRanking Consultancy.
Source: Academic Ranking Of World Universities.
Disclaimer: This article does not necessarily reflect the views of AsianScientist or its staff.