[CJ]

Phil Baty, Editor of the Times Higher Education World University Rankings has volunteered to be on the site from 11am tomorrow (Thursday 4th) to answer any questions you may have regarding the Time Higher Education World Rankings, from methodology to individual rankings.

The table has now been published, and can be viewed here: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.u...sity-rankings/

Ask any questions you have in this thread

Thank you!

[iloverockandroll]

Hi Phil,

How many people are involved in the compiling of the rankings? Either full time, part time or in consulting?
Also are there any big changes to the methodology this year?

[xxm]

How important are the rankings when deciding your uni choices? Also to employers look at the rankings?

[JFA 95]

How important are world rankings on a domestic level?
IE. Do UK employers take note of such rankings, or do they look more towards the reputation the name has at home?
Thanks.

[Alleykat606]

How are well ranked universities in UK seen from countries such as the US? I understand that Durham and Bath are both very well respected and high quality universities but for example how are these 2 universities viewed from other countries?

[Frenchous]

Why is the UCL description so lame?

We have 20+ nobel prize winners, we are the first uni in the UK to accept women and people from all faith; alumni include gandhi, the first president of Israel etc

How the hell did you come up with this GPS thing that allows people to find their way on campus (that nobody actually uses)?

[alexkol]

(Original post by Frenchous)
Why is the UCL description so lame?

We have 20+ nobel prize winners, we are the first uni in the UK to accept women and people from all faith; alumni include gandhi, the first president of Israel etc

How the hell did you come up with this GPS thing that allows people to find their way on campus (that nobody actually uses)?

You are well brainwashed, aren't you?

[The Polymath]

Why aren't LSE at a decent position?

[Discombobulate]

I'm on the edge of my ****ing seat!

[zenb]

Edinburgh up to 32

[fnm]

Why do KCL and Manchester perform so well in these tables, whereas in domestic ones, they've been around 30s/40s for a few years now?

Also...

Why should I trust these rankings over QS?

[ConnorB]

Sussex is 110, down 11 places... ah well.

[mc1000]

The main question should be; 'Why are your rankings so retarded?'

Any ranking which places top-quality research-led institutions such as Loughborough in the same league as Hertfordshire (and, last year, LJMU); Bath in the same league as Bangor; and, two years ago, Warwick outside the top 200; is not to be trusted. Bottom line.

It doesn't matter which innovative or 'reliable' data you used to formulate it; this ranking is consistently proving itself to be a joke.

[Eboracum]

Why are your rankings so biased in favour of US universities over UK ones?

[Historicity]

In relation to the top 100 under 50 I have to ask about the twist added after advice from 50 or so experts.

I completely agree with the idea that younger universities are going to struggle with the global prestige badge however I have to ask why that factor seems to be almost redundant in your rankings? Just because they are younger, it subjectively wouldn't make the prestige an irrelevant factor because even though they are young, prestige globally is still a massive factor and would in my opinion (and I'm sure many others) be something that shouldn't be given less weight because of that.

Were the platform group unanimous or close to unanimous in their decision and were any other alternatives available?

[user45854]

(Original post by Alleykat606)
How are well ranked universities in UK seen from countries such as the US? I understand that Durham and Bath are both very well respected and high quality universities but for example how are these 2 universities viewed from other countries?

I would second this, if it's something you're able to answer, Mr. Baty. I'm also interested in the international reputation of these two universities, although not so specifically the US.

I suppose, in essence: If a British university doesn't appear in your top 100 list (which is, all but a handful), even if it is highly regarded within the UK, is it simply unknown/irrelevant internationally?

Thanks for taking the time to share your perspective.

[IlexAquifolium]

How do you think the rankings fit within your more general remit of being a touchstone for universities and university staff? What can staff get out of it, beyond the usual encouragement from senior managers to improve?

[curiousquest]

I believe The Times published / used this table for employment:

http://www.highfliers.co.uk/download/GMReport12.pdf

When interpreted accurately, Oxford is not in the top 5 universities for employment but the author has very cleverly disguised it by aggregating London together.

However, London as a uni DOES NOT exist, even though someone has posted on these forums that it includes LSE, UCL, QMW but NOT Imperial.

But in this document, it clearly does say London includes Imperial but declines to mention what exactly is London made up of!

"The five universities most-often targeted by Britain’s top graduate employers in 2011-2012 are Manchester, London (including Imperial College, University College and the London School of Economics) Cambridge, Nottingham and Oxford."

Is this not proof of manipulating data to achieve desired results?

[CallOutGouranga]

If there were 2 bits of advice you'd have for David Willetts based on this year's ranking, what would they be?

[CJ]

A question of my own - how much feedback do you get from Universities, post-publication?

Do you get any requests to review any of the rankings either pre or post publication (assuming universities are shown the ranking before the public).