2017 academic reputation survey - clarivate.com · case study: harvard university 9 case ......

2017 Academic Reputation SurveyExploring scholarly trends and shifts impacting the academic reputation of the world’s leading universities: the Clarivate Analytics Academic Reputation Survey

Web of Science | Trust the Difference2

Table of Contents

Overview 4

Most Improved Universities 5

Leading Universities by Subject Area 6 Case Study: Harvard University 9 Case Study: Leading Universities in

Mathematics & Statistics 10

Regional Leaders in Academic Reputation 11 Regional Overview 11 Africa 11 Asia 12 Europe 14 Latin America 15 North America 16 Oceania 17 Case Study: University Of Tokyo 18

Clarivate Analytics | The Clarivate Analytics Academic Reputation Survey 3

Overview

Ironically, one of a university’s most consequential attributes is also among its least tangible: Reputation. Although defying precise quantification, a school’s reputational standing wields enormous influence in such critical activities as attracting and retaining the most talented faculty and students, securing funding, and forging international collaborations. For that reason, a compilation of informed, global opinion on the most reputable universities provides a standard by which administrators can assess and benchmark their managerial efforts in pursuit of higher international standing. For a comprehensive look at the latest global currents in academic reputation, the data experts at Clarivate Analytics have produced another installment of the Academic Reputation Survey. This update covers the years 2010 to 2016 and, like its six predecessors, identifies the Top 100 Global Universities and offers a detailed view of reputational standards that spans disciplines and national boundaries. Continuing to reflect assessments by the world’s leading academics, the combined survey, now covering the last seven years, has gathered more than 77,000 responses, covering 6,500 of the world’s eminent universities across 105 disciplines.

Clarivate Analytics Academic Reputation Survey

• 7 years of results (2010-2016)• 77,000 survey participants• 6,500 universities represented• 105 subject areas

This survey reveals shifts in reputation by identifying the universities with the most improvement over the most recent five-year period of 2012-2016, exploration into subject areas, and a breakdown of the academic leaders by region.


The Y axis in Figure 1 is a score from 0-100 based on cumulative probability, representing probability that another university selected from the same data set would fall below the university in question. For example, if a listed university has a score of 80, then other universities will fall below that institution 80 percent of the time. The cumulative probability scoring mechanism is preferential, as a rank position forces a linear scaling to the ordering of the universities and may not reflect actual performance.

Figure 1. Most improved universities in reputation, 2012-2016

60

80

100

40

20

0

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Seoul National University

Indiana University

Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology

University of North Carolina

Pennsylvania State University

University of Minnesota

King’s College London

Washington University Saint Louis

University of Wisconsin Madison

Michigan State University

Most Improved Universities

Although a select few institutions manage to maintain their high prestige over time, reputation can also be a fluid metric, reflecting the rise of schools whose investments in infrastructure, talent, and international collaboration have paid off in a heightened profile on the world stage.

Figure 1 presents the universities that have displayed the greatest improvement in reputation during the period 2012 to 2016, with emphasis on the 2016 survey. Notable is the presence of two South

Korea-based institutions: Seoul National University, which actually registered the highest improvement score of any institution shown here; and the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology. Indiana University, meanwhile, also rose sharply, while the University of Wisconsin, Madison, displayed less of an upswing but maintained a consistently high score.


Leading Universities by Subject Area

The survey results for the Top 10 leading universities in major subject areas – including Physical Sciences, Engineering & Technology, Life Sciences, Medicine & Health, Social Sciences, and Arts & Humanities – tend to favor a small number of universally recognized institutions. In Figure 2, Harvard shows its expectedly formidable reputation in many of the six major areas shown – particularly in the

Medicine & Health chart, which suggests a virtual compass needle directed at the university. Nearly as definitive, and equally expected, is MIT’s dominance in Engineering & Technology. In fact, MIT’s showing in all the disciplines, including Life Sciences, is worthy of note. In the other charts, particularly in the Social Sciences and the Arts & Humanities, the reputational standings are more evenly distributed.

Figure 2. Subject Mix Top Universities 2016

Arts & Humanitites Social Sciences

Harvard

Princeton

Stanford

UCLA

MIT

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

UC Berkeley

Oxford

Michigan

Yale

Cambridge

Harvard

Princeton

Stanford

UCLA

MIT

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

UC Berkeley

Oxford

Michigan

Yale

Cambridge


Medicine & Health

Harvard

Princeton

Stanford

UCLA

MIT

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

UC Berkeley

Oxford

Michigan

Yale

Cambridge

Harvard

Princeton

Stanford

UCLA

MIT

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

UC Berkeley

Oxford

Michigan

Yale

Cambridge

Life Sciences

Engineering & Technology Physical Sciences

Harvard

Princeton

Stanford

UCLA

MIT

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

UC Berkeley

Oxford

Michigan

Yale

Cambridge

Harvard

Princeton

Stanford

UCLA

MIT

450400350300250200150100

500

UC Berkeley

Oxford

Michigan

Yale

Cambridge


Table 1, with the 2016 ranking of universities by subject, presents a more detailed view of the six major subject areas by showing the top 10 universities in each. Notable developments since the 2014 rankings include UCLA repeating its appearances

in Arts & Humanities and Medicine & Health while also making the lists for Physical Sciences and Social Sciences. The University of Pennsylvania is a new addition to Medicine & Health, while Carnegie Mellon earns a spot in Engineering & Technology.

Table 1. Ranking of Leading Universities by Subject Area 2016

Rank Arts & Humanities

Medicine & Health Life Sciences Physical

SciencesEngineering & Technology

Social Sciences

1 Cambridge Harvard Harvard MIT MIT Harvard

2 Oxford Johns Hopkins Stanford Harvard Stanford Stanford

3 Harvard UCSF Cambridge UC Berkeley UC Berkeley UC Berkeley

4 UC Berkeley Stanford MIT Cambridge CalTech Oxford

5 Princeton UCLA UC Berkeley Stanford Georgia Tech MIT

6 Yale Pennsylvania Oxford Oxford Cambridge Chicago

7 Stanford Michigan Yale CalTech Illinois Cambridge

8 Chicago Washington Seattle UCSF Princeton ETH Zurich Princeton

9 UCLA Yale UC Davis ETH Zurich Carnegie Mellon LSE

10 MIT Oxford Cornell UCLA Harvard UCLA


Case Study

Harvard University, 2016

A Detailed Breakdown by Subject Area

Harvard University has dominated virtually all years of the Clarivate Analytics Academic Reputation Survey. Here, we take a deeper dive into Harvard by a variety of subject categories.

Figure 3 shows Harvard’s overall research reputation according to the six broad Institutional Profiles categories (GIPP category scheme). These data points correspond to the data points for Harvard on Figure 2.

Fig. 3: Harvard University Research Reputation, GIPP, 2016

Figure 4 further breaks down Harvard’s reputational performance in 2016 by life sciences, physical sciences, and social sciences. Harvard’s strong showing in Clinical Medicine and Biology & Biochemistry is very clearly illustrated.

Figure 4. Harvard University, 2016 Detailed

Major Physical Sciences Subject Areas

Chemistry

Computer Science

Materials Science

Space Science

GeosciencesMathematics

Engineering Physics 0

120

100

80

60

40

20

Agricultural Sciences

Biology & Biochemistry

Microbiology

Plant & Animal Science

ImmunologyMolecular Biology & Genetics

Clinical MedicinePharmacology & Toxicology

Environment/Ecology

Neuroscience & Behaviour

0

400350300250200150100

50

Psychiatry/Psychology

Social Sciences, general

Economics & Business

350300250200150100

500

Major Life Sciences Subject Areas

Major Social Sciences Subject Categories

Art & Humanities

Clinical, Pre-Clinical & Health

Life Sciences

Social Sciences

Engineering & Technology

Physical Sciences

0

600

500

400

300

200

100


Case Study

Leading Universities in Mathematics & Statistics

Although the University of California, Berkeley, is surpassed by the likes of MIT, Harvard, and Stanford in such general (and mathematics-heavy) fields as Engineering & Technology and Physical Sciences, Berkeley bests them all in the specific area of Mathematics and Statistics.

UCLA also makes a strong showing , edging the expected powerhouses Caltech and the University of Chicago.

Table 2: Leading Universities in Mathematics and Statistics 2016

Rank Mathematics and Statistics # of Votes

1 University of California, Berkeley 105

2 MIT 102

3 Princeton University 101

4 Harvard University 94

5 Stanford University 88

6 University of Oxford 87

7 University of Cambridge 80

8 UCLA 54

9-10 Caltech 46

9-10 University of Chicago 46

Table 2 is based on the vote count (number of survey participants that selected the university) in 2016, limited to the discipline of mathematics and statistics


Although defying precise quantification, a school’s reputational standing wields enormous influence...


Regional Leaders in Academic Reputation

Regional Overview

The regional reputational standing of a university can sometimes differ from its global reputation. This section of the report, which is broken down by regions, explores these differences and recognizes the reputational standing of the leaders within each geographical area.

A survey respondent’s view on the institutions within his/her geographical area often varies from the general global perspective, primarily because the work of

some regional academic leaders may not be as well-known in other parts of the world. The second cause of potential gaps between regional and global perceptions appears in cases where the geographical distribution of co-authorship may not correlate to reputation.

To address and evaluate these contrasts, the survey includes a question on the best university within the respondent’s region, which has allowed for the analysts to further decipher the differences in regional and global perspectives.

Africa

The results of Table 3: Africa’s Leading Universities 2012-2016 were determined over the five-year period by survey respondents living in Africa.

South Africa dominates the ranking, accounting for six of the 10 spots, with the University of Cape Town occupying the top rung.

Table 3. Africa’s Leading Universities, 2012-2016

Rank (Local) Rank (Global) University Country

1 162 University of Cape Town South Africa

2 377 Stellenbosch University South Africa

3 307 University of the Witwatersrand South Africa

4 410 University of Pretoria South Africa

5 526 University of Kwazulu Natal South Africa

6 544 University of Ibadan Nigeria

7 301 Cairo University Egypt

8 668 University of Johannesburg South Africa

9 765 Ain Shams University Egypt

10 792 Makerere University Uganda


Asia

As was the case in the previous roundup of reputational data, Asia’s universities as determined by respondents in the region is similar to the global response, with the exception of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST). That institution, again, may have been helped in terms of survey responses by its concentration on applied sciences and yet also disadvantaged by its comparatively young age.

Table 4. Asia’s Leading Universities, 2012-2016


1 11 University of Tokyo Japan

2 21 Kyoto University Japan

3 37 Seoul National University Republic of Korea

4 39 Tsinghua University Peoples R China

5 47 Peking University Peoples R China

6 58 Osaka University Japan

7 65 National Taiwan University Taiwan

8 44 University of Hong Kong Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China

9 67 Tohoku University Japan

10 64 Hong Kong University of Science and Technology

Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China


Europe

While the regional and global listings for Oxford and Cambridge correspond fairly closely, other entries show a disparity, suggesting that some universities, while locally esteemed, do not yet wield a commensurate worldwide influence.

Table 5. Europe’s Leading Universities, 2012-2016


1 3 University of Cambridge United Kingdom

2 6 University of Oxford United Kingdom

3 16 Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich Switzerland

4 59 M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University Russian Federation

5 15 Imperial College London United Kingdom

6 22 University of College London United Kingdom

7 43 University of Munich Germany

8 202 Charles University in Prague Czech Republic

9 72 Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Belgium

10 26 London School of Economics and Political Science United Kingdom


Latin America

Brazil’s dominance is plain, as the nation’s institutions occupy seven of the 10 rungs. The University of São Paolo, in particular, demonstrates a balance of both regional and wider acclaim.

Table 6. Latin America’s Leading Universities, 2012-2016


1 80 University of São Paulo Brazil

2 179 University Estadual de Campinas Brazil

3 270 Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro Brazil

4 272 Universidad de Buenos Aires Argentina

5 341 Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais Brazil

6 465 Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Brazil

7 387 University of Chile Chile

8 373 Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile Chile

9 371 São Paulo State University Brazil

10 389 Federal University of São Paulo Brazil


North America

As in the previous collection, USA-based universities account for all the placements. Although Harvard predictably reigns in the #1 spot by both measures, a couple of schools (the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and Columbia University) also demonstrate global strength.

Table 7. North America’s Leading Universities, 2012-2016


1 1 Harvard University USA

2 4 Stanford University USA

3 5 University of California, Berkeley USA

4 2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology USA

5 13 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor USA

6 7 Princeton University USA

7 8 University of California, Los Angeles USA

8 14 Columbia University USA

9 9 Yale University USA

10 12 University of Chicago USA


Oceania

For the most part, the location-based survey results for Oceania are consistent with the global perspective.

Table 8. Oceania’s Leading Universities, 2012-2016


1 40 University of Melbourne Australia

2 57 University of Sydney Australia

3 79 University of Queensland Australia

4 48 Australian National University Australia

5 94 Monash University Australia

6 97 University of New South Wales Australia

7 191 University of Auckland New Zealand

8 199 University of Western Australia Australia

9 260 University of Adelaide Australia

10 308 University of Otago New Zealand


Case Study

University of Tokyo

Regional Versus Global Perception and Research Output Versus Reputation

Examining reputational standing alongside coauthorship data can show how a university’s reputation compares with its influence in terms of attracting and securing collaboration with other institutions worldwide.

In the case of the University of Tokyo, for example, Figure 5 suggests that the institution’s reputation is globally acknowledged, despite a comparative dearth of selections in South America, Africa, and pockets of Europe, the Middle East, and Asia.

Figure 5. Geographical Location of Respondents That Selected The University of Tokyo

831

Responses

1(Log scale)


Reflecting the actual tabulation of global coauthors, however, Figure 6 demonstrates that the University of Tokyo has considerable pull as an institution that worldwide researchers deem worthy of collaboration.

Figure 6. Geographical Location of Co-Authors of University Tokyo’s Research Papers

30748

Responses

1(Log scale)

19

Now in its eighth annual cycle, the 2017 edition of the survey will run through May. The contributions of the global academic community are essential to conducting this robust analysis.

Please contact [email protected] with any questions on the survey.


Who we are

Clarivate Analytics accelerates the pace of innovation by providing trusted insights and analytics to customers around the world, enabling them to discover, protect and commercialize new ideas faster. We own and operate a collection of leading subscription-based services focused on scientific and academic research, patent analytics and regulatory standards, pharmaceutical and biotech intelligence, trademark protection, domain brand protection and intellectual property management. Clarivate Analytics is now an independent company with over 4,000 employees, operating in more than 100 countries and owns well-known brands that include Web of Science, Cortellis, Derwent, CompuMark, MarkMonitor and Techstreet, among others.

For more information:clarivate.com

05.2017© 2017 Clarivate Analytics

North AmericaPhiladelphia: +1 800 336 4474 +1 215 386 0100

Latin AmericaBrazil: +55 11 8370 9845Other countries: +1 215 823 5674

Europe, Middle East and Africa London: +44 20 7433 4000

Asia Pacific Singapore : +65 6775 5088Tokyo : +81 3 5218 6500

clarivate.com

2017 academic reputation survey - clarivate.com · case study: harvard university 9 case ......

Documents