ATAR Notes: Forum

Uni Stuff => General University Discussion and Queries => Topic started by: minilunchbox on September 17, 2010, 09:13:56 pm

Title: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: minilunchbox on September 17, 2010, 09:13:56 pm
Woo, it's that time of year again.

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2010-2011/top-200.html

Australia's Universities

36 - University of Melbourne
43 - Australian National University
71 - University of Sydney
73 - University of Adelaide
81 - University of Queensland Australia
152 - University of News South Wales
178 - Monash University

Subject specific rankings haven't been published yet.
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: Edmund on September 17, 2010, 09:15:53 pm
Yay Unimelb on top :P
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: /0 on September 17, 2010, 09:24:07 pm
Holy shit what happened to ANU and Monash?
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: taiga on September 17, 2010, 09:28:34 pm
I feel shit for giving preference to Monash over Melbourne now.
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: AzureBlue on September 17, 2010, 09:29:59 pm
GO Melb!! :)
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: TrueLight on September 17, 2010, 09:38:19 pm
The methodology of ranking universities

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/the-methodology-of-ranking-universities/story-e6frgcjx-1225924935099
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: vea on September 17, 2010, 09:40:24 pm
What happened to monash...
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: lynt.br on September 17, 2010, 09:48:51 pm
Nothing happened to Monash, they just changed the way they produce the rankings. I think Monash ranks low because it has a huge staff-student ratio.

Also those ranking have almost no bearing for undergraduate students. It's mostly about postgrad and research stuff.
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: EvangelionZeta on September 17, 2010, 09:50:35 pm
lol @ Monash.  O______O
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: vexx on September 17, 2010, 09:51:12 pm
Haha wtf, monash has been going down ever year with the THE, but this jump woah.
and also with unsw, it was like top 50 last year.. this is whack
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: appianway on September 17, 2010, 09:54:41 pm
There are so many different ranking systems. The Shanghai Jiao Tong ratings are very different; the QS ones are too.
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: Eriny on September 17, 2010, 10:12:57 pm
The Shanghai Jiao Tong ones are very different indeed, the highest rank any Australian uni gets is 59 (ANU)

Lots of people were talking about this today, as you can imagine given it's a huge fall from ANU - 17 to 43! But yeah, it all depends on what criteria you use and what you think is important in a university. Another reason why you shouldn't choose on rankings alone!

Should also note that UWA isn't even in the top 200 anymore! That's not good for a Group of 8 university. But I'd say that all Australian universities are going to be disadvantaged a little because all the best ones in the country are absolutely huge and therefore tend to not have awesome student to teacher ratios.
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: TrueLight on September 17, 2010, 10:22:09 pm
staff to student ratios make up 4.5% of the overall ranking this year

which is probably a lot since the ranking is so tight.... so maybe monash might have gone up 40 ranks if there was a better staff to student ratio
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: /0 on September 17, 2010, 10:41:53 pm
I was under the impression ANU had an excellent staff to student ratio
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: Noblesse on September 17, 2010, 10:58:02 pm
Shanghai Jiao Tong Rankings
59. ANU (no change)
62. University of Melbourne (up 13 places)
94. University of Sydney (up 2 places)
101-150. University of Western Australia & Queensland (no change)
151-200. Monash (up from 201-302)
201-300. Macquarie (no change)

QS Rankings (split from Times this year)
20. ANU (down 3 places)
37. University of Sydney (down 1 place)
38. University of Melbourne (down 2 places)
43. University of Queensland (down 2 places)
46. University of NSW (up 1 place)
61. Monash Uni (down 16 places)
89. UWA (down 5 places)
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: RainerWolfram on September 18, 2010, 12:09:44 am
What happened to monash...

I blame the Monash Physics Department...

Gosh, this is an embarrassment.
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: Glockmeister on September 18, 2010, 03:36:02 am
To be frankly honest, I don't really pay attention to University rankings - particularly not the global ones, because there's just too many variables.

More important for me is the subject-specific rankings.
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: Gloamglozer on September 18, 2010, 05:52:13 pm
To be frankly honest, I don't really pay attention to University rankings - particularly not the global ones, because there's just too many variables.

More important for me is the subject-specific rankings.

That.  Definitely agree and I've always looked at the subject-specific rankings over the overall rankings.
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: AzureBlue on September 18, 2010, 06:24:26 pm
How do you find 'subject/course-specific' rankings?
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: Gloamglozer on September 18, 2010, 06:26:50 pm
How do you find 'subject/course-specific' rankings?

They get published.  They'll come out soon.
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: darlok on September 18, 2010, 06:40:31 pm
Although these rankings are largely meaningless for undergrad students, it certainly doesn't hurt to be highly ranked.
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: Mulan on September 18, 2010, 06:47:24 pm
I heard that the fact that the noble prize winner studied med at The University of Melbourne, also made a vast impact on the University's upgrade.  :)
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: Glockmeister on September 18, 2010, 08:23:53 pm
Elizabeth Blackburn? She's based in UC Berkeley.
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: HERculina on September 18, 2010, 08:28:15 pm
Nah ah, she went to melb uni back in the old days. I read it in this article.
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: lynt.br on September 19, 2010, 12:41:06 am
Although these rankings are largely meaningless for undergrad students, it certainly doesn't hurt to be highly ranked.

I know some people who have argued that going to a top ranked university may actually be worse than going to a lower ranked one for undergaduates. They argue that the higher ranked uni's only really care about their post-grad and research students because those are the ones that get them their money and reputation. As a result, they don't concentrate all that much on their undergrads. It's an interesting argument worth some thought.
Title: Re: Times Higher Education 2010 Rankings
Post by: Greggler on September 28, 2010, 11:38:21 am
thats why melb model was brought in; so that students can take advantage of the fact that most funding and development goes into postgrad departments