2011-11-2

1

The Statistical Analysis of The Statistical Analysis of WorldWorld--Class UniversitiesClass Universities

4th International Conference on World-Class UniversitiesNovember 1st , 2011 ∙ Shanghai, China

Ying Cheng & Yan Wu

Center for World-Class UniversitiesGraduate School of EducationShanghai Jiao Tong University

OutlineOutline

• Background

• GRUP (Global Research University Profile)

• Statistical Profiles of World-Class Universities

• Potential Indicators for Recognizing WCU (Global Rankings)

2011-11-2

2

BackgroundBackground

• WCU became a common desire of both developed and developing countries

• What is the criteria for WCU?

• Academic Ranking of World Universities (2003-)

– Objective indicators & third-party data

– Focus on academic excellence

– Based on output measures

• What do WCU look like?

GRUPGRUP (Global Research University Profile)(Global Research University Profile)

• Aim: Basic facts of 1,200 research universities

• Academic Staff: total N.| by type| Ph.D| foreign

• Students: total N.| by level| foreign| degree

• Finance: total income| by sources| research income

• Source 1: Survey of universities

• Source 2: Statistical agencies in major countries

2011-11-2

3

• Survey invitation was sent to ~1200 institutions

• Number of responses: 282 (25%)

• Number of positive responses: 276

• Number of registered institutions:247

• Number of valid cases: 231 (20%)

GRUP - Survey of Institutions

Rank RangeNumber of

RespondentsPercentage

Top 100 36 36%

101-200 30 30%

201-300 34 34%

301-400 29 29%

401-500 25 25%

501+ 77 12%

Distribution of Valid Respondents by Rank Range

GRUP - Survey of Institutions

2011-11-2

4

Distribution of Valid Respondents by Country

CountryNumber of

Invited Inst.Number of

RespondentsResponse

RateNumber of Inst. among Top 500

Hong Kong, China 8 7 87.5% 5

Australia 29 19 65.5% 19

Belgium 8 5 62.5% 7

Austria 9 5 55.6% 7

Netherlands 14 7 50.0% 13

Sweden 12 6 50.0% 11

New Zealand 8 4 50.0% 5

Taiwan, China 35 17 48.6% 7

Finland 9 4 44.4% 5

UK 72 26 36.1% 37

Canada 29 9 31.0% 22

GRUP - Survey of Institutions

Distribution of Valid Respondents by Country (Con’d)

CountryNumber of

Invited Inst.Number of

RespondentsResponse

RateNumber of Inst. among Top 500

Israel 7 2 28.6% 7

Switzerland 12 3 25.0% 7

South Korea 25 5 20.0% 11

Brazil 15 3 20.0% 7

Italy 47 8 17.0% 22

Germany 67 11 16.4% 39

USA 296 28 9.5% 151

Spain 35 3 8.6% 11

Japan 114 9 7.9% 23

China 45 3 6.7% 23

France 67 3 4.5% 21

GRUP - Survey of Institutions

2011-11-2

5

• Academic Staff– Number of Academic Staff - Teaching Related

– Percentage of Academic Staff with a Doctoral Degree

– Percentage of International Academic Staff

– Number of Academic Staff – Research Only

• Students– Number of Students

– Percentage of Graduate Students

– Percentage of International Students

– Ratio of Academic Staff (Teaching Related) to Students

– Number of Doctoral Degrees Awarded

• Finance– Institutional Income

– Institutional Income per Student

– Percentage of Income from Public Sectors

– Research Income

– Research Income per Academic Staff

– Percentage of Research Income from Public Sectors

Statistical Profiles of WCU (Top 100)

Number of Academic Staff - Teaching Related

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 36 2148 1082 695 6022

101-200 30 1787 1118 290 5198

201-300 34 1590 1046 530 4537

301-400 29 1528 1201 107 5138

401-500 25 1609 2223 533 11545

500+ 77 1030 1065 11 7874

Total 231 1510 1308 11 11545

2011-11-2

6

Percentage of Academic Staff (Teaching Related) with Doctoral-level Degrees

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 29 0.81 0.13 0.48 1.00

101-200 28 0.82 0.13 0.60 1.00

201-300 33 0.79 0.14 0.49 1.00

301-400 25 0.75 0.17 0.39 1.00

401-500 20 0.66 0.13 0.42 0.89

500+ 72 0.69 0.20 0.23 1.00

Total 207 0.75 0.17 0.23 1.00

Percentage of International Academic Staff (Teaching Related)

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 31 0.17 0.12 0.03 0.41

101-200 29 0.19 0.16 0.01 0.56

201-300 32 0.23 0.19 0.02 0.75

301-400 26 0.12 0.16 0.01 0.69

401-500 23 0.13 0.16 0.00 0.50

500+ 72 0.12 0.18 0.00 0.93

Total 213 0.16 0.17 0.00 0.93

2011-11-2

7

Number of Academic Staff – Research Only

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 34 1258 774 160 3465

101-200 28 821 357 59 1718

201-300 31 550 455 59 1940

301-400 25 366 315 20 1146

401-500 24 618 754 0 3463

500+ 70 200 251 0 1456

Total 212 570 607 0 3465

Number of Students (Degree-seeking)

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 36 27021 11917 7623 61710

101-200 30 28162 24710 989 131242

201-300 34 23988 15499 8841 86129

301-400 29 27740 38476 447 198165

401-500 25 30358 49412 6105 257196

500+ 77 20539 23909 439 160930

Total 231 25013 27745 439 257196

2011-11-2

8

Percentage of Graduate Students

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 36 0.32 0.11 0.14 0.54

101-200 30 0.35 0.16 0.18 1.00

201-300 34 0.30 0.13 0.06 0.62

301-400 29 0.32 0.19 0.03 0.70

401-500 25 0.29 0.17 0.04 0.75

500+ 77 0.29 0.19 0.05 1.00

Total 231 0.31 0.17 0.03 1.00

Percentage of International Students

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 36 0.15 0.10 0.02 0.32

101-200 30 0.17 0.11 0.02 0.45

201-300 34 0.15 0.09 0.02 0.32

301-400 29 0.08 0.06 0.01 0.26

401-500 25 0.12 0.11 0.01 0.48

500+ 77 0.11 0.13 0.00 0.91

Total 231 0.13 0.11 0.00 0.91

2011-11-2

9

Number of Doctoral Degrees Awarded

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 36 705 349 202 1618

101-200 30 531 401 135 2244

201-300 34 388 271 63 1252

301-400 29 306 277 7 1513

401-500 25 232 204 46 1004

500+ 76 150 210 2 1727

Total 230 350 342 2 2244

Ratio of Academic Staff (Teaching Related) to Students

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 36 0.09 0.04 0.04 0.25

101-200 30 0.08 0.06 0.03 0.29

201-300 34 0.07 0.03 0.03 0.17

301-400 29 0.09 0.06 0.02 0.24

401-500 25 0.06 0.02 0.03 0.11

500+ 77 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.32

Total 231 0.07 0.04 0.02 0.32

2011-11-2

10

Institutional Income

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 36 1594 1151 501 6059

101-200 30 958 602 293 3218

201-300 33 646 404 248 2131

301-400 29 423 411 55 2049

401-500 25 425 376 109 2031

500+ 77 210 169 12 1096

Total 230 637 739 12 6059

(Millions of USD)

Institutional Income per Student

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 36 72 69 17 294

101-200 30 55 64 10 296

201-300 33 31 19 9 116

301-400 29 34 36 1 173

401-500 25 21 12 2 65

500+ 77 17 20 1 165

Total 230 35 45 1 296

(Thousands of USD)

2011-11-2

11

Percentage of Institutional Income from Public Sectors

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 34 0.48 0.21 0.12 0.92

101-200 28 0.57 0.22 0.12 0.94

201-300 31 0.58 0.21 0.05 0.95

301-400 28 0.62 0.26 0.04 1.00

401-500 24 0.59 0.26 0.11 1.00

500+ 73 0.55 0.24 0.02 1.00

Total 218 0.56 0.24 0.02 1.00

Research Income

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 36 462 252 154 1150

101-200 30 289 200 72 1100

201-300 33 167 109 26 413

301-400 28 96 84 8 420

401-500 24 70 54 15 220

500+ 75 33 25 2 133

Total 226 167 204 2 1150

(Millions of USD)

2011-11-2

12

Research Income per Academic Staff (Teaching and Research)

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 34 142 80 60 425

101-200 28 112 48 40 215

201-300 31 89 63 17 278

301-400 24 85 123 5 613

401-500 23 46 32 1 122

500+ 68 38 35 3 243

Total 208 79 75 1 613

(Thousands of USD)

Percentage of Research Income from Public Sectors

Rank N Mean SD Min Max

Top 100 34 0.80 0.12 0.41 0.96

101-200 30 0.79 0.18 0.28 0.97

201-300 31 0.71 0.21 0.17 0.97

301-400 27 0.66 0.23 0.20 1.00

401-500 24 0.69 0.22 0.06 0.99

500+ 73 0.73 0.24 0.00 1.00

Total 219 0.73 0.21 0.00 1.00

2011-11-2

13

• Academic Staff– Number of Academic Staff - Teaching Related:

– Percentage of Academic Staff with a Doctoral Degree

– Percentage of International Academic Staff

– Number of Academic Staff – Research Only

• Students– Number of Students

– Percentage of Graduate Students

– Percentage of International Students

– Ratio of Academic Staff (Teaching Related) to Students

– Number of Doctoral Degrees Awarded

• Finance– Institutional Income

– Institutional Income per Student

– Research Income

– Research Income per Academic Staff

Figures of A Typical WCU (Top 100)

– 2148

– 81%

– 17%

– 1258

– 27021

– 32%

– 15%

– 1:11

– 705

– 1 594 000 000

– 72 000

– 462 000 000

– 142 000

• Relevance / Validity of indicators

– Do WCU look similarly on these indicators with

each other and different with non-WCU?

• Data availability

Indicators Could Be Considered for Recognizing WCU /Global Rankings

2011-11-2

14

Criteria Indicator Code Weight

Quality of Education

Alumni of an institution winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals

Alumni 10%

Quality of Faculty

Staff of an institution winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals

Award 20%

Highly cited researchers in 21 broad subject categories

HiCi 20%

Research Output

Papers published in Nature and Science* N&S* 20%

Papers indexed in Science Citation Index-expanded and Social Science Citation Index

PUB 20%

Per CapitaPerformance

Per capita academic performance of an institution

PCP 10%

*: For institutions specialized in humanities and social sciences such as London School of Economics, N&S is not considered and the weight of N&S is relocated to other indicators

ARWU Indicator System

Consistency of ARWU IndicatorsConsistency of ARWU Indicators

S: Strong (|r|>.7) M: Moderate (.4<|r|<.7)W: weak (.2<|r|<.4) N: Negligible to very weak (|r|<.2)

Alumni Award HiCi N&S PUB PCP

Alumni \ M S M S S

Award M \ S M M S

HiCi S S \ S S S

N&S M M S \ M S

PUB S M S M \ S

PCP S S S S S \

Correlations among ARWU Indicators

2011-11-2

15

Indicator NCorrelation Coefficient

Level of Correlation

Research Income 226 .77** S

Institutional Income 230 .72** S

#of Academic Staff – Research Only 212 .64** M

#of Doctoral Degrees Awarded 230 .60** M

Institutional Income per Student 230 .53** M

Research Income per Academic Staff 208 .50** M

S: Strong (|r|>.7) M: Moderate (.4<|r|<.7)W: weak (.2<|r|<.4) N: Negligible to very weak (|r|<.2)

Indicators’ Correlation with ARWU Total Score

Indicator NCorrelation Coefficient

Level of Correlation

Percentage of Academic Staff with a Doctoral Degree

207 .31** W

Number of Academic Staff - Teaching Related

231 .24** W

Ratio of Academic Staff (Teaching Related) to Students

231 .18** N

Percentage of International Students 231 .16* NPercentage of Research Income from Public Sectors

219 .16* N

Percentage of Income from Public Sectors

218 -.15* N

Percentage of Graduate Students 231 .11 NPercentage of International Academic Staff

213 .10 N

Number of Students 231 .05 N

S: Strong (|r|>.7) M: Moderate (.4<|r|<.7)W: weak (.2<|r|<.4) N: Negligible to very weak (|r|<.2)

Indicators’ Correlation with ARWU Total Score (Con’d)

2011-11-2

16

S: Strong (|r|>.7) M: Moderate (.4<|r|<.7)W: weak (.2<|r|<.4) N: Negligible to very weak (|r|<.2)

TeachingInt”l

OutlookIndustry Income

Research Citation

Teaching \ N W S W

International Outlook

N \ N N N

Industry Income W N \ W N

Research S N W \ W

Citation W N N W \

Correlations among THE WUR Indicators

Consistency of Consistency of THE THE IndicatorsIndicators

S: Strong (|r|>.7) M: Moderate (.4<|r|<.7)W: weak (.2<|r|<.4) N: Negligible to very weak (|r|<.2)

Correlations among QS WUR Indicators

Academic

Reputation

Employer

Reputation

Citation/

Faculty

Faculty/

Student

Int’l

Faculty

Int’l

Student

Academic

Reputation\ M W W N W

Employer

ReputationM \ N W W W

Citation/

FacultyW N \ W N N

Faculty/

Student W W W \ N N

International

FacultyN W N N \ W

International

StudentW W N N W \

Consistency of Consistency of QS QS IndicatorsIndicators

2011-11-2

17

IndicatorCorrelation Coefficient

Level of Correlation

Assigned Weight

Teaching .90** S 30%

Research .90** S 30%

Citation .59** M 30%

Industry Income .27** W 2.5%

International Outlook .07 N 7.5%

S: Strong (|r|>.7) M: Moderate (.4<|r|<.7)W: weak (.2<|r|<.4) N: Negligible to very weak (|r|<.2)

Decisive Indicators of THE WUR

Indicators’ Correlation with THE WUR Total Score

IndicatorCorrelation Coefficient

Level of Correlation

Assigned Weight

Academic Reputation .86** S 40%

Employer Reputation .63** M 10%

Citation/Faculty .41** M 20%

Faculty/Student .34** W 20%

International Student .26** W 5%

International Faculty .18** N 5%

Decisive Indicators of QS WUR

Indicators’ Correlation with QS WUR Total Score

2011-11-2

18

• Some information is more difficult to obtain than others

– Unemployment rates of graduates

• less than half of participating institutions reported

• the time varied from 0 months to 24 months

– Number of doctoral staff

– Number of research staff

Data Availability

• 14 countries were identified to have relatively mature institution statistics

– 64% of institutions in ARWU database

– 70% of ARWU Top 500 institutions

• If Germany, France and Italy could be added in

– 80% of institutions in ARWU database

– 86% of ARWU Top 500 institutions

Data available at Educational Statistical Agencies in Different Countries

2011-11-2

19

CountryStaff

Statistics

Students

Statistics

Finance

Statistics

USA Adequate Satisfying Satisfying

Japan Adequate Satisfying Satisfying

UK Adequate Satisfying Satisfying

China Satisfying Satisfying Satisfying

Spain Adequate Adequate Poor

Taiwan, China Satisfying Satisfying Poor

Canada Poor Poor Satisfying

Australia Adequate Satisfying Satisfying

South Korea Adequate Adequate Adequate

Netherlands Adequate Poor Poor

Sweden Adequate Adequate Adequate

Switzerland Adequate Satisfying Satisfying

Austria Adequate Satisfying Poor

Belgium Poor Adequate Poor

Level of Data Availability from Statistical Agencies in Different Countries

Ranking LabRanking Lab• 231 institutions

• 21 indicators including ARWU indicators

• Indicators and weights are decided by users

2011-11-2

20

Ranking by indicatorRanking by indicator

• 1,200 institutions

• 21 indicators

• Data from• International Databases

• GRUP and,

• Statistical Agencies

http://www.ShanghaiRanking.com/

Thank you for your kind attention!Thank you for your kind attention!