QS University Rankings Asia 2015 Web.pd

IN ASIA 2015

THE TOP

UNIVERSITIES

QS University Rankings: Asia 2015 3

The world has developed an obsession with university league tables, in September over two million people visited the results of the QS World University Rankings on TopUniversities.com in a week and through media partners their reach was greater still; governments in Russia and Japan amongst others have released additional funding for selected institutions to more ably compete; countless universities have written rankings positions into the vision statement for their university. Nowhere is this more profoundly felt than across Asia, where the fixation seems most gripping.

Yet of all of our rankings, the one contained herein focused entirely on Asia seems to attract the least attention and interest.

Perhaps relativity is at play, the real interest in Asia is not in comparing regional institutions to one another but to collectively take on the world. This is understandable and a leading cohort of LQVWLWXWLRQVDFURVV$VLDDUHGRLQJDYHU\QHMREindeed the rise of Asian institutions in the various global university rankings is well documented and EURDGO\DFNQRZOHGJHG+RZHYHUPDQ\RIWKHHUFHVWcompetitors are also in Asia and as the whole Asian cohort progresses on the world stage, the most ambitious institutions should watch their neighbours as carefully as their distant rivals. The QS University Rankings by Region offer an interesting lens since the measures and weights are somewhat different from the world rankings they yield well-correlated but meaningfully different results. Gaps that appear comfortable in the global rankings may be diminished in this context, the top university in a given country there, may not be the top university in that country here whilst Seoul National University is the leading Korean institution in the world rankings, KAIST claims that honour in the regionals.

No ranking is perfect or complete, much as we FDXWLRQDOOREVHUYHUVWRLQYROYHPRUHWKDQMXVWUDQNLQJVLQWKHLUMXGJHPHQWVKRXOGWKH[DWLRQendure, the very least we ought to do is to present different versions to highlight the divergent relative strengths of universities in different contexts and dimensions. Every observer acknowledging that a different perspective reveals a different reality, as a result of comparing and questioning the differences between these results, is an observer that might come to draw on rankings only to the extent that they can relied upon to inform decisions. Far from being a high-resolution photograph, rankings are more akin to an impressionist painting, where different interpretations by different artists will emphasise GLIIHUHQWDHVWKHWLFVRIWKHVXEMHFWZKLOVWQRQHZLOOreveal the whole.

Asia is the worlds most dynamic and fast-moving region in terms of higher education development, it seems unlikely that better or more relevant examples XSRQZKLFKWRPRGHOWKHWUDMHFWRU\IRUDQDPELWLRXVuniversity could be found elsewhere. So whilst we provide an alternate perspective here, it reveals a no less potent depiction of reality and merits equally close attention.

Welcometo the 2015 QS University Rankings: Asia Report

Ben Sowter Head of QS

Intelligence Unit

Einstein proved that different observers, in different states of motion, see different realities.Leonard Susskind Felix Bloch Professor of Theoretical Physics, Stanford University


ankings are gloriously simple and that makes them, at least most of the time, appealing and essential for developing a broad view.

But it also makes them controversial since they represent a fixed moment in time and a limited lens on institutional performance.

One of the common criticisms of university rankings is that their methodologies do not always manage to accurately capture the different features and characteristics of different geographical and cultural settings.

So, whilst a global ranking seeks to identify truly world class universities, a regional ranking needs to adapt to the realities of the region. Exactly that narrower geographic focus enables us to dig deeper and richer datasets not only places universities of the region into direct competition with each other it also stresses DSDUWLFXODUGHQLWLRQRIWKDWUHJLRQ

FOR THIS REASON, QS LAUNCHED THE QS UNIVERSITY RANKINGS: ASIA IN 2009.

The Asian rankings consider four key criteria: research impact and productivity, teaching commitment, employability and internationalization. The method retains key indicators of our global ranking, such as academic reputation, reputation among employers, faculty/student ratio and the internationalization components, though each has a different weighting in regional context.

THE APPROACH TO EVALUATE RESEARCH IMPACT DIFFERS FROM THE WORLD UNIVERSITY RANKINGS.

For example, the citations per faculty indicator has been replaced by a combination of indicators that attempt to measure productivity (average number of publications per faculty member) and VFLHQWLFLPSDFWDYHUDJHQXPEHURIcitations per publication).

MethodologyQS University Rankings: Asia

Indicators and weightings

Academic ReputationWeighting: 30%

Taken from the annual survey conducted by QS designed to evaluate the perceptions of academics from around the world as to the best institutions in terms of research. In 2015 nearly 64,000 responses were recorded globally.

Employer ReputationWeighting: 10%

Taken from the annual QS survey aimed at gathering the views of employers around the world on the institutions producing the best graduates. In 2015 about 29,000 responses were analyzed.

Faculty/Student RatioWeighting: 20%

This is the ratio between the size of academic staff and students. A higher number of teachers per student is condidered a proxy indicator of the commitment of the institutions with the quality of teaching.

Papers per FacultyWeighting: 15%

This indicator seeks to determine the DYHUDJHQXPEHURIVFLHQWLFSXEOLFDWLRQV(papers) produced per faculty and evaluates the productivity of research institutions. Data is extracted from the bibliometric database Scopus /Elsevier (www.scopus.com).

,QGH[HGSDSHUVLQWKHODVWYHIXOO\HDUV are counted (from 2010 to 2014 for the 2015 edition).

International Faculty Weighting: 2.5%

The International Faculty Index is based on the proportion of faculty members that are international and it carries a weight of 2.5%.

International Students Weighting: 2.5%

International Students Index is based on the proportion of students that are international.

Citations per PaperWeighting: 15%

This measurement estimates the average number of citations obtained per publication, and is an estimate of the LPSDFWDQGTXDOLW\RIWKHVFLHQWLFZRUNdone by universities. Data indexed by Scopus are also used. Only the institutions with a number of publications above 150 LQWKHYH\HDUVXQGHUFRQVLGHUDWLRQDUHincluded in this exercise.

Inbound/Outbound Exchange Students Weighting: 2.5%

In many countries in Asia, the principal language of instruction is not English and as a result many universities focus their strategies on recruiting full-time exchange students.

In this ranking these two indicators have been taken into consideration and they are based on the number of students inbound and outbound as a proportion of the student body. Each indicator carries a weight of 2.5% and is facilitating a picture of internationalization in Asia that embraces a larger number of institutions.

R

)LQGRXWKRZ46FODVVLHVLQVWLWXWLRQVKHUHZZZLXTVFRPXQLYHUVLW\UDQNLQJVTVFODVVLFDWLRQV


Asias Top Universities

There are four specialist science and technology institutions in the top 10 and 11 in the top 50

If you want to be a top university in Asia, the formula is obvious. Be strongly connected to the English-speaking world, and specialize in science and technology.

Or at least, that is the impression you might form from the upper reaches of the QS University Rankings: Asia 2015. There is no doubt that Asias two top-ranked universities, the National University of Singapore and Hong Kong University, work mainly in English and are based in global cities with strong links to the US and Europe. They are also the leading Asian universities in the current QS World University Rankings, in 22nd and 28th position respectively. It is also true that four of the top 10 universities ranked here have names that suggest a leaning towards science and technology.

But in addition, the upper reaches of this ranking give the impression that Asian academic excellence is highly concentrated. The top 10 universities are drawn from four nations or territories: four from Hong Kong, three from Korea, two from Singapore and one from mainland China. Even the next 10 places do not broaden the picture much. Three of them come from Korea and two from PDLQODQG&KLQD+RZHYHUWKHUHDUHDOVRYH-DSDQHVHXQLYHUVLWLHVhere, led by Tokyo in 12th place.

METHODOLOGYThese rankings are produced from a weighted combination of nine PHDVXUHV7KHUVWYHUHODWHWRWKHNH\PLVVLRQVRIDXQLYHUVLW\teaching, research and the production of skilled graduates. We measure these via global surveys of academics and employers; by measuring the faculty/student ratio of each institution; and E\FRXQWLQJWKHQXPEHURIVFLHQWLFSDSHUVSURGXFHGE\HDFKacademic and the number of times they are cited in the academic literature by others.

The next four measures examine whether universities are serious about their international mission. We capture this in four ways: their percentage of international staff and of students, and the number of exchange students they send and receive. As well as being a measure of globalisation, this is a measure of quality. If people are willing to travel internationally to work or study at a foreign university, that institution must be doing something right.

Our criterion of faculty/student ratio, an indirect measure of a universitys commitment to teaching, shows that many of Asias top universities suffer from large class sizes. Only one of the top 10, POSTECH in Korea, is also in the top 10 for this measure. And it is clear from our global rankings that Asian higher education tends to have poor faculty/student ratios by comparison with other regions of the world.

Our look at research output shows, perhaps surprisingly, that the top universities in the region do not produce many research papers per academic staff member. Only three of the top 20 institutions are in the top 20 for this measure. But the papers they


on key measures of globalisation such as student exchange and international student and faculty numbers. These two come fourth DQGIWKWKLV\HDURYHUDOODQG+.867LVDSUHYLRXVQXPEHURQHLQthis ranking.

The biggest faller in this years top 10 is Seoul National University, down four places to eighth. SNU is an exceptionally strong contender in QSs Asian and world rankings. Its position here has suffered from a fall in its tally of international faculty and students. Part of the change has been caused by the realisation that language students whose course is not part of a full degree had been counted in SNUs student numbers in previous years, contrary to QS practice.

The methodology used to compile the rankings means that massive falls and rises are unusual. The largest rise in the top 50 is by Fudan University in Shanghai, up six places to 16. It has massively improved its faculty/student ratio and its percentage of international faculty. There are 20 new entries this year, the KLJKHVWEHLQJ7RNXVKLPDIURP-DSDQLQWKSODFH,WLVSHUKDSVVXUSULVLQJWKDW-DSDQWKHULFKHVWQDWLRQLQWKHUHJLRQdoes not have its leading universities among the top 10. Their comparatively modest standing is explained by their performance as global rather than national institutions.

7RN\RDQGRWKHUOHDGLQJ-DSDQHVHXQLYHUVLWLHVDUHZHOOOLNHGLQRXUglobal and regional surveys of academic and employer opinion. But they fare poorly on their ability to attract international staff and international students, both those taking full degrees and shorter-term exchange students.

As in previous years, these rankings offer little comfort to the higher education system of India. The top Indian entry is the Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, a new arrival at 34, admitted IRUWKHUVWWLPHWKLV\HDUEHFDXVHRILWVEURDGVXEMHFWPL[2IWKH17 Indian institutions we list, 14 have fallen since last year. Delhi, Indias top general university, is in 91st place, behind 23 Chinese universities, although six branches of the Indian Institute of Technology, plus IIS Bangalore, also rank above Delhi.

STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSESOur criteria of academic and employer opinion, faculty/student ratio and research publications inherently change slowly over time, as research teams build up or as recruiters realise that a course they know little about is producing the graduates they need. For the top 20 universities we list, there are changes of more WKDQSODFHVLQWKHVHYHFULWHULDRQO\SHUFHQWRIWKHWLPHHowever, the four factors we measure concerning LQWHUQDWLRQDOLVDWLRQFKDQJHVLJQLFDQWO\DERXWSHUFHQWRIthe time. It may well be simpler, quicker and cheaper to bring in more exchange students than to launch a new line of research. Both nations and institutions are putting more effort into getting world experience for their students, a declared target for the Abe JRYHUQPHQWLQ-DSDQ6RPRUHJURZWKLQWKHVHJXUHVLVOLNHO\which means that universities that stand still on this measure will fall relative to the competition.

7KHQDOPHVVDJHRIWKHVHUDQNLQJVLVWKDWDFDGHPLFH[FHOOHQFHLVwidespread in Asia. The 300 universities we rank are in 17 nations, including one each in Brunei and Sri Lanka. While the big suppliers &KLQD-DSDQDQG.RUHDGRPLQDWHWKHLQVWLWXWLRQFRXQWuniversities elsewhere may have unique niches of their own in the higher education market.

produce are highly likely to be cited by other researchers. 10 of the top 20 overall are in the top 20 for this indicator and Hong Kong, the overall winner, is third here.

The importance of research as a mission for universities means that it is stressed in almost all rankings systems. As a result, universities that have a special focus on science and technology have a natural advantage in rankings. This effect is seen at work here. There are four specialist science and technology institutions in the top 10 and 11 in the top 50, including one medical school, Taipei Medical University.

The most successful of Asias technology-oriented universities is KAIST. It was set up as a deliberate copy of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology number one in the current QS World University Rankings and has attracted huge sums of public and corporate cash. Its fellow Korean institution, POSTECH, was started by the Pohang Steel Company and has absorbed more billons of investment dollars. It is well-liked by employers and academics, and produces well-cited papers. But it loses out to Singapores Nanyang Technological University and to Hong Kong University of Science and Technology

Martin Ince

20

15

RA

NK

20

14

RA

NK

Co

un

try

/ Te

rrit

ory

SIZ

E

FO

CU

S

RE

S.

AG

E

STA

TU

S

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

Ove

rall

SCO

RE

&ODVVLFDWLRQ $FDGHPLF5HSXWDWLRQ(PSOR\HU5HSXWDWLRQ

)DFXOW\6WXGHQW

3DSHUVSHU)DFXOW\

&LWDWLRQVSHU3DSHU

,QWHUQDWLRQDO)DFXOW\

,QWHUQDWLRQDO6WXGHQWV

,QERXQG([FKDQJH6WXGHQWV

2XWERXQG([FKDQJH6WXGHQWV

Institution Name


1 1 NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE (NUS) XL FC VH 5 A 100.0 100.0 99.1 65.6 99.7 100.0 100.0 97.7 99.1 100.0

2 3 UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG (HKU) L FC VH 5 A 100.0 100.0 96.4 66.9 98.5 100.0 100.0 96.1 94.6 99.3

3 2 KAIST - KOREA ADVANCED INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY M FC VH 3 A 99.5 99.2 93.6 97.4 94.7 58.0 44.7 83.0 66.6 99.0

4 7 NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY (NTU) L FC VH 2 A 99.9 100.0 98.4 59.4 97.9 100.0 100.0 97.4 100.0 98.6

5 5 THE HONG KONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (HKUST) M FC VH 2 A 99.9 99.7 85.1 76.6 94.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.7 98.0

6 6 THE CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG (CUHK) L FC VH 4 A 99.9 99.1 87.7 70.9 96.4 100.0 97.7 99.7 98.0 97.7

7 8 PEKING UNIVERSITY XL FC VH 5 A 100.0 100.0 90.3 77.2 92.3 84.5 88.5 79.9 98.4 97.6

8 4 SEOUL NATIONAL UNIVERSITY (SNU) L FC VH 4 A 100.0 100.0 96.3 90.7 96.2 60.1 75.1 35.5 23.8 97.5

9 11 CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG M FC VH 3 A 95.5 89.1 93.4 80.2 91.7 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 97.3

10 9 POHANG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (POSTECH) S FO VH 3 B 88.7 91.3 100.0 95.8 99.2 83.7 26.0 69.5 71.1 96.5

11 14 TSINGHUA UNIVERSITY XL FC VH 5 A 100.0 100.0 97.6 85.3 74.9 81.9 78.9 57.7 32.0 95.0

12 10 THE UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO L FC VH 5 A 100.0 100.0 99.7 80.3 97.6 46.9 62.9 7.6 7.9 94.9

13 13 OSAKA UNIVERSITY L FC VH 4 A 99.8 98.1 97.4 82.2 95.2 34.3 50.4 18.1 44.1 94.7

14 12 KYOTO UNIVERSITY L FC VH 5 A 100.0 99.9 99.4 81.4 96.0 38.2 54.0 9.0 5.5 94.3

15 15 TOKYO INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY M FC VH 5 A 99.0 98.6 97.5 91.9 80.7 49.5 73.4 31.8 10.9 94.2

16 22 FUDAN UNIVERSITY L FC VH 5 A 99.9 100.0 73.1 79.6 98.0 63.6 90.5 73.3 83.2 94.1

17 17 SUNGKYUNKWAN UNIVERSITY L FC VH 5 B 95.4 99.9 99.3 51.8 96.7 42.5 82.5 95.6 99.0 93.9

18 16 YONSEI UNIVERSITY L FC VH 5 B 98.3 98.8 96.2 54.3 94.5 30.6 78.5 98.7 77.3 93.1

19 18= KOREA UNIVERSITY L FC VH 5 B 98.0 98.8 95.9 51.3 92.0 45.1 82.7 95.9 92.5 92.9

20 18= TOHOKU UNIVERSITY L FC VH 5 A 99.2 96.4 99.8 82.0 88.4 35.5 47.2 6.5 4.7 92.3

21 20 NAGOYA UNIVERSITY L FC VH 5 A 95.8 89.8 99.3 71.1 92.6 41.2 63.5 21.1 10.6 90.5

22 21 NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY (NTU) XL FC VH 4 A 100.0 97.8 63.5 95.7 93.2 37.9 51.7 51.3 38.3 90.2

23 25 UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY OF CHINA L FC VH 4 A 94.5 84.8 82.6 94.6 94.3 24.6 8.0 11.5 18.0 88.0

24 28 6+$1*+$,-,$2721*81,9(56,7< XL FC VH 5 A 99.5 99.9 64.8 96.9 73.1 67.6 45.5 26.5 52.7 87.9

25 23 HOKKAIDO UNIVERSITY L FC VH 5 A 95.0 93.0 97.0 69.6 84.1 33.2 48.2 3.6 3.9 87.2

26 26 1$1-,1*81,9(56,7< XL FC VH 5 A 95.9 92.5 52.4 81.1 92.9 72.0 42.8 93.7 65.7 86.2

27 27 THE HONG KONG POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY L FC VH 2 A 94.2 90.2 66.4 66.2 89.4 100.0 99.9 49.2 47.0 86.0

28 24 KYUSHU UNIVERSITY L FC VH 5 A 95.3 93.0 99.9 53.0 81.2 38.2 59.4 10.3 4.9 85.5

29 32 UNIVERSITI MALAYA (UM) L FC VH 5 A 94.9 87.7 99.4 47.2 40.0 98.7 99.6 100.0 100.0 84.8

30 29= HANYANG UNIVERSITY L FC VH 4 B 82.9 92.9 97.1 40.3 74.4 55.2 88.8 67.9 93.2 82.9

31= 29= NATIONAL CHIAO TUNG UNIVERSITY M FC VH 5 A 71.7 57.2 84.3 96.8 75.6 83.0 97.6 98.6 49.5 82.7

31= 33 NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIVERSITY M FC VH 4 A 93.7 86.0 48.1 98.6 87.5 72.5 41.8 20.7 22.7 82.7

33 34 UNIVERSITY OF TSUKUBA L FC VH 3 A 84.0 75.5 97.2 54.7 85.6 37.1 73.7 24.0 38.8 82.1

34 - INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE BANGALORE S FO VH 5 A 86.1 76.5 92.1 100.0 63.5 6.0 2.6 1.4 81.1

35 31 =+(-,$1*81,9(56,7< XL FC VH 5 A 97.6 96.9 43.1 97.7 72.4 28.8 34.8 11.3 19.8 79.8

36 36 NATIONAL CHENG KUNG UNIVERSITY L FC VH 4 A 84.5 67.4 71.4 82.7 73.0 42.3 73.7 38.2 28.6 78.6

37 35 KEIO UNIVERSITY XL FC VH 5 B 93.5 98.5 77.9 35.8 83.5 29.5 21.4 12.1 12.8 77.5

38 37 KYUNG HEE UNIVERSITY L FC VH 4 B 67.0 92.2 90.0 36.4 84.6 32.4 83.1 62.8 100.0 76.6

20

15

RA

NK

20

14

RA

NK

Co

un

try

/ Te

rrit

ory

SIZ

E

FO

CU

S

RE

S.

AG

E

STA

TU

S

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

Ove

rall

SCO

RE


)DFXOW\6WXGHQW

3DSHUVSHU)DFXOW\

&LWDWLRQVSHU3DSHU





Institution Name


39 44 WASEDA UNIVERSITY XL FC HI 5 B 96.1 99.3 54.8 23.4 70.2 67.9 83.7 14.7 68.2 73.6

40 42 %(,-,1*1250$/81,9(56,7

20

15

RA

NK

20

14

RA

NK

Co

un

try

/ Te

rrit

ory

SIZ

E

FO

CU

S

RE

S.

AG

E

STA

TU

S

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

Ove

rall

SCO

RE


)DFXOW\6WXGHQW

3DSHUVSHU)DFXOW\

&LWDWLRQVSHU3DSHU





Institution Name


77 96= DONGGUK UNIVERSITY L FC HI 5 B 41.7 55.4 92.4 17.1 60.6 45.9 66.9 74.6 99.9 58.6

78 81= CHANG GUNG UNIVERSITY M FO VH 3 B 22.3 29.6 88.4 89.4 88.8 11.6 13.2 3.5 1.7 58.0

79 71 UNIVERSITY OF INDONESIA XL FC MD 5 A 83.2 87.2 63.1 3.8 25.4 72.0 13.9 28.6 34.1 57.5

80= 79 %(,-,1*,167,787(2)7(&+12/2*< L CO VH 4 A 64.5 66.5 58.7 78.9 20.8 23.1 19.6 2.5 11.0 57.2

80= 62 CHIBA UNIVERSITY L FC HI 5 A 47.2 20.9 70.9 67.4 80.8 13.4 35.9 2.9 3.8 57.2

82 78 RENMIN (PEOPLES) UNIVERSITY OF CHINA L FO VH 4 A 68.4 82.6 65.8 12.9 47.9 18.6 38.3 25.4 18.4 56.7

83 88 OKAYAMA UNIVERSITY L FC HI 5 A 30.2 27.7 93.2 49.8 95.4 17.6 17.8 3.1 3.5 56.4

84 81= UNIVERSITY OF SEOUL M FC HI 4 A 49.6 42.7 61.8 28.3 88.6 16.6 25.4 54.9 70.9 56.3

85= 105 -,/,181,9(56,7< XL FC VH 4 A 59.6 66.2 68.9 44.9 49.9 11.2 55.8

85= 84 SOUTHEAST UNIVERSITY L FC VH 5 A 39.4 55.8 61.4 84.2 41.7 15.6 21.5 72.0 58.5 55.8

87 90 OSAKA CITY UNIVERSITY M FC VH 5 A 39.5 11.7 70.9 62.1 92.0 16.0 23.6 47.9 7.0 55.7

88 102 HUAZHONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY XL FC VH 4 A 61.0 65.6 42.6 76.2 45.6 4.1 22.4 3.7 6.4 55.6

89 106= SHANDONG UNIVERSITY XL FC VH 5 A 56.2 60.7 49.2 56.4 66.3 20.6 17.9 1.9 11.3 55.5

90 80 BEIHANG UNIVERSITY L FC VH 4 A 53.7 64.6 63.6 92.6 18.4 3.2 15.8 55.4

91 81= UNIVERSITY OF DELHI XL FC HI 4 A 81.4 94.0 24.2 5.8 83.7 2.5 3.5 1.0 1.0 55.3

92= 70 INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROORKEE (IITR) M CO VH 5 A 50.2 69.8 32.8 93.9 58.8 4.5 2.8 3.2 54.8

92= 111 SICHUAN UNIVERSITY XL FC VH 4 A 60.5 47.4 51.0 59.7 60.9 3.6 23.0 54.8

94 85 KYUNGPOOK NATIONAL UNIVERSITY L FC VH 4 A 49.8 45.0 48.5 53.1 84.0 23.0 19.3 12.8 17.2 54.5

95 89 NATIONAL CHUNG HSING UNIVERSITY L FC HI 4 A 54.9 36.9 32.2 69.9 83.5 15.9 26.3 17.5 8.5 54.3

96= 93 7,$1-,181,9(56,7< L FC VH 5 A 44.1 70.1 60.9 80.9 31.3 17.3 6.8 3.7 39.7 53.9

96= 94 TOKYO METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY M FC VH 4 A 49.9 25.0 24.0 83.4 100.0 21.6 22.6 1.2 1.3 53.9

98 95 INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY GUWAHATI (IITG) S FC VH 2 A 47.4 45.8 48.9 84.4 61.9 1.6 4.6 1.7 2.9 53.7

99 92 CHIANG MAI UNIVERSITY XL FC HI 4 A 67.5 59.0 44.1 18.0 72.1 15.5 5.4 33.9 7.5 52.9

100 101 CHONNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY L FC HI 4 A 39.0 24.9 71.1 38.2 92.9 17.4 21.8 12.4 16.6 52.7

101= 99= EAST CHINA UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY L FC VH 4 A 35.1 24.6 73.6 54.0 89.3 9.9 52.3

101= 99= KUMAMOTO UNIVERSITY M FC VH 4 A 29.3 31.2 79.2 49.4 86.5 18.7 21.0 9.4 1.6 52.3

103 73= HANKUK UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN STUDIES L FC MD 4 B 41.1 68.5 88.7 4.9 24.6 72.0 68.9 70.9 100.0 52.0

104= 151-160 6(-21*81,9(56,7

20

15

RA

NK

20

14

RA

NK

Co

un

try

/ Te

rrit

ory

SIZ

E

FO

CU

S

RE

S.

AG

E

STA

TU

S

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

SCO

RE

Ove

rall

SCO

RE


)DFXOW\6WXGHQW

3DSHUVSHU)DFXOW\

&LWDWLRQVSHU3DSHU





Institution Name


115 106= PAKISTAN INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND APPLIED SCIENCES (PIEAS) S SP VH 5 A 20.5 6.0 96.3 74.8 52.3 11.3 48.0

116 123= QUAID-I-AZAM UNIVERSITY M FC HI 4 A 36.9 51.3 15.5 87.0 82.5 9.9 3.1 3.2 4.2 47.9

117 116 AGA KHAN UNIVERSITY S SP VH 3 C 15.8 15.9 100.0 33.4 89.3 3.8 3.6 47.5

118 171-180 UNIVERSITY OF BRUNEI DARUSSALAM S FC 0 3 A 30.2 13.7 97.0 9.5 24.5 100.0 94.6 100.0 100.0 47.4

119 129 NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY (NUST) ISLAMABAD M FC HI 2 A 39.4 78.0 91.8 17.5 19.1 9.3 22.3 1.8 13.5 47.2

120 113 CHUNGNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY L FC HI 4 A 37.9 44.6 53.7 47.0 63.5 20.9 17.0 3.0 13.5 47.1

121 109 %(,-,1*-,$2721*81,9(56,7< L FC VH 5 A 51.3 45.9 47.8 81.9 12.3 6.8 23.8 47.0

122 125= BANDUNG INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (ITB) L FC MD 4 A 84.3 89.8 29.1 16.7 8.1 5.6 1.6 3.4 46.6

123 119= NATIONAL CHENGCHI UNIVERSITY L FC MD 4 A 58.4 53.2 40.4 18.4 29.5 27.0 52.9 87.3 65.8 46.5

124 123= NATIONAL TAIPEI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY M FO VH 5 A 36.3 24.8 61.2 54.3 44.0 51.3 52.8 12.1 25.0 46.4

125 131= UNIVERSITY OF MUMBAI XL FC MD 5 A 40.7 82.6 1.3 86.9 66.6 46.3

126 171-180 UNIVERSITY OF DHAKA XL FC MD 4 A 64.9 83.6 53.6 5.5 28.5 46.2

127 112 HITOTSUBASHI UNIVERSITY M SP VH 5 A 60.2 87.5 45.8 9.4 16.8 50.4 72.8 7.9 11.0 46.0

128 136 LANZHOU UNIVERSITY L FC VH 5 A 35.4 24.6 36.2 60.4 91.1 2.4 2.3 45.7

129=125= DALIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY XL FC VH 4 A 33.9 43.8 31.4 92.8 52.5 8.1 8.9 3.3 45.6

129=119= SAITAMA UNIVERSITY M FC VH 4 A 23.2 23.6 54.1 67.0 75.1 26.4 32.9 4.0 4.0 45.6

131 118 %(,-,1*81,9(56,7

20

15

RA

NK

20

14

RA

NK

Co

un

try

/ Te

rrit

ory

20

15

RA

NK

20

14

RA

NK

Co

un

try

/ Te

rrit

ory

Institution Name Institution Name


151-160 142= BANARAS HINDU UNIVERSITY

151-160 161-170 GAKUSHUIN UNIVERSITY

151-160 171-180 HUNAN UNIVERSITY

151-160 145= INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA (IIUM)

151-160 144 KONKUK UNIVERSITY

151-160 137 OSAKA PREFECTURE UNIVERSITY

151-160 161-170 SOPHIA UNIVERSITY

151-160 161-170 SOUTH CHINA UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

151-160 191-200 UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI PETRONAS (PETRONAS)

151-160 201-250 UNIVERSITY OF COLOMBO

151-160 151-160 UNIVERSITY OF MIYAZAKI

161-170 151-160 DONGHUA UNIVERSITY

161-170 151-160 KITASATO UNIVERSITY

161-170 181-190 LAHORE UNIVERSITY OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCES (LUMS)

161-170 171-180 OCHANOMIZU UNIVERSITY

161-170 201-250 3$'-$'-$5$181,9(56,7

Documents

QS University Rankings Asia 2015 Web.pd