University Ranking Challenge: Your starter for 5,154

Phil Baty, editor of the Times Higher Education World University Rankings, has indicated that the publication of a paper from the ATLAS and CMS experiments at the CERN Large Hadron Collider project is a challenge for rankers.

The paper in question has a total of 5,154 authors, if that is the right word, with sole or primary affiliation to 344 institutions. Of those authors 104 have a secondary affiliation. One is deceased. Under THE's current methodology every institution contributing to the paper will get credit for all the citations that the paper will receive, which is very likely to run into the thousands.

For the elite universities  participating in these projects a few thousand citations will make little or no difference. But for for a small specialised institution or a large one that does little research, those citations spread out over a few hundred papers could make a big difference.

In last year's rankings places like Florida Institute of Technology, Universite Marrakesh Cadi Ayyad, Morroco, Federico Santa Maria Technical University, Chile, Bogazici University, Turkey, got implausibly high scores for citations that were were well ahead of those for the other criteria.

The paper in question does set a record for the number of contributors although the challenge is not particularly new.

At a seminar in Moscow earlier this year, Baty suggested that THE, now independent of Thomson Reuters, was considering using fractionated counting, dividing all the citations among the contributing institutions.

This would be an excellent idea and should be technically quite feasible since CWTS at Leiden University use it as their default option.

But there would be a a price to pay. The current methodology allows THE to boast that it has found a way of uncovering hitherto unnoticed pockets of excellence. It is also a selling point in THE's imperial designs of expanding into regions where there has so far been little interest in ranking, Russia, the Middle East, Africa, the BRICS. A few universities in those regions could make a splash in the rankings if they recruited, even as an adjunct, a researcher working on the LHC project.

It would be most welcome if THE does start using fractionated counting in its citation indication. Also welcome would be some other changes: not counting self-citation, reducing the weighting for the indicator, including several different methods of evaluating research impact or quality, and, especially important, getting rid of the "regional modification" that awards a bonus for being located in a low scoring country.

An Experiment Using LinkedIn Data to Rank Arab Universities

University World News recently published an article by Rahul Choudaha suggesting that LinkedIn is the future of global rankings. At the moment that sounds a bit exaggerated and LinkedIn in its present form may be gone in a decade but he could be on to something.

Leaving Europe, North America and East Asia aside, the reliability of institutional data is very low and that makes serious evaluation of graduate outcomes, staff quality, income, teaching resources and so on extremely difficult.

This problem is especially acute for the Middle East and North Africa region where there appears to be a big demand for university rankings but little accurate information. The consequence has been some highly implausible results in the rankings attempted so far. Last year THE produced a "snapshot"of a ranking indicator which put Texas A&M Qatar as the top university for research impact.and QS's pilot rankings have the American University of Sharjah in joint first place for academic reputation, Al-Nahrain University top for faculty student ratio and Khalifa University top for papers per faculty.

So, here is a list of Arab universities ordered by the number of students or professionals putting them on the Decision Board, indicating an interest in attending Counting was done on the 14th of May.

If this approximates to reputation among students and the public then it seems that Egyptian universities have been undervalued n previous ranking exercises.

Rank	University	Country	Interested in attending
1	Helwan University	Egypt	422
2	American University in Cairo	Egypt	394
3	Arab Academy of Science, Technology and Maritime Transport	Egypt	359
4	Cairo University	Egypt	353
5	Ain Shams University	Egypt	245
6	Alexandria University	Egypt	230
7	King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals	Saudi Arabia	211
8	American University of Beirut	Lebanon	193
9	École Nationale Polytechnique d'Alger	Algeria	184
10	King Saud University	Saudi Arabia	138
11	Lebanese American University	Lebanon	133
12	American University in Dubai	UAE	131
13	Qatar University	Qatar	102
14	American University of Sharjah	UAE	91
15	King Abdullah University of Science and Technology	Saudi Arabia	85
16=	Al Azhar University	Egypt	78
16=	University of Dubai	UAE	78
18	Damascus University	Syria	73
19	University of Dammam	Saudi Arabia	70
20=	Mansoura Univerdity	Egypt	68
20=	Houari Boumediene University of Science and Technology	Algeria	68
22	UAE University	UAE	62
23	Higher Colleges of Technology	UAE	58
24=	Tanta University	Egypt	51
24=	German University in Cairo	Egypt	51
26	Zagazig University	Egypt	50
27=	Suez Canal University	Egypt	43
27=	King Abdulaziz University	Saudi Arabia	43
27=	Umm Al-Qura University	Saudi Arabia	43
30=	Abu Dhabi UNiversity	UAE	33
30=	Ajman University of Science & Technology	UAE	33
32	Assiut Universit	Egypt	32
33	Université Mentouri de Constantine	Algeria	27
34	Université Libanaise	Lebanon	26
35	Al-Imam Mohamed Ibn Saud Islamic University	Saudi Arabia	23
36	Université Saad Dahlab Blida	Algeria	22
37	Prince Sultan University	Saudi Arabia	21
38=	King Faisal University	Saudi Arabia	20
38=	Université Mouloud Mammeri de Tizi Ouzo	Algeria	20
40	Université Badji Mokhtar de Annaba	Algeria	19
41	Khalifa University	UAE	19
42=	Université de Batna	Algeria	18
42=	Université Cadi Ayyad Marrakech	Morocco	18
44=	King Khalid University	Saudi Arabia	17
44=	Sanaa University	Yemen	17
46	University of Bejaia	Jordan	16
47=	Zayed University	UAE	14
47=	Université Sidi Mohammed Ben Abdellah	Morocco	14
49=	Masdar Intiute of Science and Technology	UAE	13
49=	Université d'Oran	Algeria	13
51=	Yarmouk University	Jordan	12
51=	Universite de Tunis El Manar	Tunisia	12
53=	Texas A&M Qatar	Qater	11
53=	University of Sharjah	UAE	11
53=	Minia University	Egypt	11
53=	University of Tunis	Tunisia	11
53=	Universite de Monastir	Tunisia	11
58=	University of Jordan	Jordan	10
58=	Benha University	Egypt	10
58=	University of Bahrain	Bahrain	10
61	Taif University	Saudi Arabia	0
62	Kuwait University	Kuwait	0
63	University of Baghdad	Iraq	0
64	University of Khartoum	Sudan	0
65	Jordan University of Science and Technology	Jordan	0
66	Mosul University	Iraq	0
67	Qassim University	Saudi Arabia	0
68	Taibah University	Saudi Arabia	0
69	Hashemite University	Jordan	0
70	Université Abou Bekr Belkaid Tlemcen	Algeria	0
71	Al Balqa Applied University	Algeria	0
72	Babylon University	Iraq	0
73	South Valley University	Egypt	0
74	Meoufia University	Egypt	0
75	Fayoum University	Egypt	0
76	Sohag University	Egypt	0
77	Beni-Suef University	Egypt	0
78	Jazan University	Saudi Arabia	0
79	Universite de Sfax	Tunisia	0
80	Al Nahrain University	Iraq	0
81	University of Basrah	Iraq	0
82	King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences	Saudi Arabia	0
83	Université Mohammed V Agdal	Morocco	0
84	Alfaisal University	Saudi Arabia	0
85	Arabian Gulf University	Bahrain	0
86=	Petroleum Institute Abu Dhabi	UAE	0
86=	National Engineering School of Sfax	Tunisia	0
88	Mutah University	Jordan	0
89	Kafrelsheikh University	Egypt	0
90	Université de Carthage (7 de Novembre)	Tunisia	0
91	University of Balamand	Lebanon	0
92	Beirut Arab University	Lebanon	0
93	Université Hassan II Mohammadia	Morocco	0
94	Universite de Sousse	Tunisia	0
95	Université Abdelmalek Essaadi	Morocco	0
96	Petra University	Jordan	0
97	Djillali Liabes University	Algeria	0
98	Université Ferhat Abbas Setif	Algeria	0
99	Princess Sumaya University for Technology	Jordan	0
100	Université de la Manouba	Tunisia	0
101	Université Ibn Tofail Kénitra	Morocco	0
102	Université Saint Joseph de Beyrouth	Lebanon	0
103	Université de Gabes	Tunisia	0
104	Université Mohammed Premier Oujda	Morocco	0
105	Mohamed Boudiaf University of Science and Technology	Algeria	0
106	Sultan Qaboos University	Oman	0

How to improve your total Contribution in the academic caldener.

I have received several invitations over the last few months to let a team of consultants write up my research and get me into an ISI or Scopus journal. The most recent was from something called Prime Journal Consultants. It is hard to believe that anyone could be so naive as to pay money to someone who writes so badly but who knows? Maybe Chris Olsen has got a doctorate now.

Or maybe standards at Scopus and Thomson Reuters journals are not what they used to be.

Anyway, here is the first part of the message.

"The Most valuable part of your research is the data and study that you have already conducted, its time now to use the study and with our expert assistance create a complete research paper out of it and get it published to the highest impact factor ISI or Scopus Indexed journals to earn Recognition and Promotion.

The Contribution of Research Article Publishing Towards your Promotion
Publication is both a measure of a scholar’s knowledge and also a benchmark for academic success. The minimum percentage for promotion in terms of Research Publication is at least 35-40% of your total Contribution in the academic caldener.


Common Misconception About ISI publishing -Book A Dedicated Consultant Today
ISI Publishing is a time consuming process, The Genuine ISI journals would take time after getting you through rigorous revisions and edits. That is where our Dedicated Consultants Come in to assist you take you through theentire steps to get you an ISI acceptance."

The March of Pseudoscience Stumbles a BIt

Pseudoscience continues to thrive in the West. Although -- I think -- no longer offered by universities, homeopathy is still viewed with favour by many in the British establishment, including the Prince of Wales, and has received official recognition in Canada.

Meanwhile in Malaysia Universiti Malaysia Pahang (UMP) has produced an anti-hysteria kit consisting of things like chopsticks,  lime, salt, vinegar and pepper spray, which will repel evil spirits. The kit sells for Ringgit 8,750, which includes training and technical support

The Malaysian religious authorities have been more sceptical than the British royal family and treated the kits with derision. UMP has replied by claiming the kit was based on scientific research, although it has not said where the research was published

The Geography of Excellence: the Importance of Weighting

So finally, the 2015 QS subject rankings were published. It seems that the first attempt was postponed when the original methodology produced implausible fluctuations, probably resulting from the volatility that is inevitable when there are a small number of data points -- citations and survey responses -- outside the top 50 for certain subjects.

QS have done some tweaking, some of it aimed at smoothing out the fluctuations in the responses to their academic and employer surveys.

These rankings look at bit different from the World University Rankings. Cambridge has the most top ten placings (31), followed by Oxford and Stanford (29 each), Harvard (28), Berkeley (26) and MIT (16).

But in the world rankings MIT is in first place, Cambridge second, Imperial College London third, Harvard fourth and Oxford and University College London joint fifth.

The subject rankings use two indicators from the world, the academic survey and the employer survey but not internationalisation, student faculty ratio and citations per faculty. They add two indicators, citations per paper and h-index.

The result is that the London colleges do less well in the subject rankings since they do not benefit from their large numbers of international students and faculty. Caltech, Princeton and Yale also do relatively badly probably because the new rankings do not take account of their low faculty student faculty ratios.

The lesson of this is that if weighting is not everything, it is definitely very important.

Below is a list of universities ordered by the number of top five placings. There are signs of the Asian advance --  Peking, Hong Kong and the National University of Singapore -- but it is an East Asian advance.

Europe is there too but it is Cold Europe -- Switzerland, Netherlands and Sweden -- not the Mediterranean.

Rank	University	Country	Number of Top Five Places
1	Harvard	USA	26
2	Cambridge	UK	20
3	Oxford	UK	18
4	Stanford	USA	17
5=	MIT	USA	16
5=	UC Berkeley	USA	16
7	London School of Economics	UK	7
8=	University College London	UK	3
8=	ETH Zurich	Switzerland	3
10=	New York University	USA	2
10=	Yale	USA	2
10=	Delft University of Technology	Netherlands	2
10=	National University of Singapore	Singapore	2
10=	UC Los Angeles	USA	2
10=	UC Davis	USA	2
10=	Cornell	USA	2
10=	Wisconsin - Madison	USA	2
10-	Michigan	USA	2
10=	Imperial College London	UK	2
20=	Wagenginen	Netherlands	1
20=	University of Southern California	USA	1
20=	Pratt Institute, New York	USA	1
20=	Rhode Island School of Design	USA	1
20=	Parsons: the New School for Design	USA	1
20=	Royal College of Arts London	UK	1
20=	Melbourne	Australia	1
20=	Texas-Austin	USA	1
20=	Sciences Po	France	1
20=	Princeton	USA	1
20=	Yale	USA	1
20=	Chicago	USA	1
20=	Manchester	UK	1
20=	University of Pennsylvania	USA	1
20=	Durham	UK	1
20=	INSEAD	France	1
20=	London Business School	UK	1
20=	Northwestern	USA	1
20=	Utrecht	Netherlands	1
20=	Guelph	Canada	1
20=	Royal Veterinary College London	UK	1
20=	UC San Francisco	USA	1
20=	Johns  Hopkins	USA	1
20=	KU Leuven	USA	1
20=	Gothenburg	Sweden	1
20=	Hong Kong	Hong Kong	1
20=	Karolinska Institute	Sweden	1
20=	Sussex	UK	1
20=	Carnegie Mellon University	USA	1
20=	Rutgers	USA	1
20=	Pittsburgh	USA	1
20=	Peking	China	1
20=	Purdue	USA	1
20=	Georgia Institute ofTechnology	USA	1
20=	Edinburgh	UK	1

Are all subjects the same?

University rankers seem to be moving towards the field  normalization of citations data. In 2010 Times Higher Education and Thomson Reuters started using it for their world rankings. The scores for citations did not reflect the absolute number of citations or even citations per paper or per faculty but citations per paper in relation to the world average for 250 fields. Normalisation by year of citation was added to the process. I have heard that QS is considering normalization by five subject groups. Meanwhile THE has switched to Scopus as a data source and they apparently have 300 fields.

This is justified by the claim that it is unfair that an outstanding paper in history or philosophy should be given the same value as a mediocre one in medicine or physics, something that could happen if only the number of citations were counted.  Perhaps, but that assumes that all subjects are equal even if society values them differently and provides more money for some fields and even if they require different levels of cognitive ability.

The website The Tab provides evidence from the Complete Universities Guide (still searching for the original data) that in the UK there are substantial differences in the grades required by universities for various subjects.

The five most difficult subjects measured by points for grades (Advanced level A = 120) are:

Medicine
Dentistry
Physics
Chemical Engineering
Classics.

The least difficult are:

Business and Management
Accounting and Finance
Education
American Studies
Sociology.

This is for undergraduate education in the UK. Looking at future majors of GRE test takers in the US we find something similar Philosophers, physicists and economists are very much brighter than future accountants, social workers, education specialists and public administrators. Engineers perform poorly for verbal aptitude but better for mathematical aptitude. See here and here.

Does it make sense that the average paper in a demanding discipline like physics or philosophy should be treated as exactly the same as the average paper in education or sociology?