The Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), also known as the Shanghai Ranking, is one of the annual publications of world university rankings. The league table was originally compiled and issued by Shanghai Jiao Tong University in 2003, making it the first global university ranking with multifarious indicators.[1][2]
Academic Ranking of World Universities, 2003–2018, Top ten
Since 2009, ARWU has been published and copyrighted annually by Shanghai Ranking Consultancy, an organization focusing on higher education that is not legally subordinated to any universities or government agencies.[3] In 2011, a board of international advisory consisting of scholars and policy researchers was established to provide suggestions.[4][5] The publication currently includes global league tables for institutions as a whole and for a selection of individual subjects, alongside independent regional Greater China Ranking and Macedonian HEIs Ranking.
Papers indexed in Science Citation Index-expanded and Social Science Citation Index
PUB
20%
Per capita performance
Per capita academic performance of an institution
PCP
10%
-
^Not applicable to institutions specialized in humanities and social sciences whose N&S scores are relocated to other indicators.
Reception
EU Research Headlines reported the ARWU's work on 31 December 2003: "The universities were carefully evaluated using several indicators of research performance."[16] A survey on higher education published by The Economist in 2005 commented ARWU as "the most widely used annual ranking of the world's research universities."[17] In 2010, The Chronicle of Higher Education called ARWU "the best-known and most influential global ranking of universities"[18] and Philip G. Altbach named ARWU's 'consistency, clarity of purpose, and transparency' as significant strengths.[19]University of Oxford Chancellor Chris Patten has said "the methodology looks fairly solid ... it looks like a pretty good stab at a fair comparison."[20] While ARWU has originated in China, the ranking have been praised for being unbiased towards Asian institutions, especially Chinese institutions.[21]
Criticism
The ranking has been criticised for "relying too much on award factors" thus undermining the importance of quality of instruction and humanities.[9][22][23][24] A 2007 paper published in the journal Scientometrics found that the results from the Shanghai rankings could not be reproduced from raw data using the method described by Liu and Cheng.[25] A 2013 paper in the same journal finally showed how the Shanghai ranking results could be reproduced.[26] In a report from April 2009, J-C. Billaut, D. Bouyssou and Ph. Vincke analyse how the ARWU works, using their insights as specialists of Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM). Their main conclusions are that the criteria used are not relevant; that the aggregation methodology has a number of major problems; and that insufficient attention has been paid to fundamental choices of criteria.[27]
The ARWU researchers themselves, N.C. Liu and Y. Cheng, think that the quality of universities cannot be precisely measured by mere numbers and any ranking must be controversial. They suggest that university and college rankings should be used with caution and their methodologies must be understood clearly before reporting or using the results. ARWU has been criticised by the European Commission as well as some EU member states for "favour[ing] Anglo-Saxon higher education institutions". For instance, ARWU is repeatedly criticised in France, where it triggers an annual controversy, focusing on its ill-adapted character to the French academic system[28][29] and the unreasonable weight given to research often performed decades ago.[30] It is also criticised in France for its use as a motivation for merging universities into larger ones.[31]
Indeed, a further criticism has been that the metrics used are not independent of university size, e.g. number of publications or award winners will mechanically add as universities are grouped, independently of research (or teaching) quality; thus a merger between two equally-ranked institutions will significantly increase the merged institutions’ score and give it a higher ranking, without any change in quality.[14]
Subjects
There are two categories in ARWU's disciplinary rankings: broad subject fields and specific subjects. The methodology is similar to that adopted in the overall table, including award factors, paper citation, and the number of highly cited scholars.[32]
Natural sciences
Atmospheric science
Chemistry
Earth sciences
Ecology
Geography
Mathematics
Oceanography
Physics
Engineering
Aerospace engineering
Automation and control
Biomedical engineering
Biotechnology
Chemical engineering
Civil engineering
Computer science and engineering
Electrical and electronic engineering
Energy science and Engineering
Environmental science and engineering
Food science and technology
Instruments science and technology
Marine/ocean engineering
Materials science and engineering
Mechanical engineering
Metallurgical engineering
Mining and mineral engineering
Nanoscience and nanotechnology
Remote sensing
Telecommunication engineering
Transportation science and technology
Water resources
Life sciences
Agricultural sciences
Biological sciences
Human biological sciences
Veterinary sciences
Medical sciences
Clinical medicine
Dentistry and oral sciences
Medical technology
Nursing
Pharmacy and pharmaceutical sciences
Public health
Social sciences
Business administration
Communication
Economics
Education
Finance
Hospitality and tourism management
Law
Library and information science
Management
Political sciences
Psychology
Public administration
Sociology
Statistics
Regional rankings
Considering the development of specific areas, two independent regional league tables with different methodologies were launched – Ranking of Top Universities in Greater China and Best Chinese Universities Ranking.
Mainland China
Best Chinese Universities Ranking was first released in 2015.[33]
Greater China
Ranking of Top Universities in Greater China was first released in 2011.[34]
Percentage of academic staff with a doctoral degree
5%
Staff as Nobel Laureates and Fields Medalists
10%
Highly cited researchers
10%
Resources
Annual budget
5%
Notes
^ abcOfficial datum sources adopted by ARWU: Nobel Laureate Web, Fields Medalist Web, Thomson Reuters' survey of highly cited researchers & Thomson Reuters' Web of Science.
^Order shown in accordance with the latest result.
References
^Pavel, Adina-Petruta (2015). "Global university rankings – a comparative analysis". Procedia Economics and Finance. 26: 54–63. doi:10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00838-2.
^"World university rankings: how much influence do they really have?". The Guardian. 2013. Retrieved 27 January 2015. The first international rankings, the Academic Ranking of World Universities or Shanghai Rankings
^. Shanghai Ranking Consultancy. 2014. Archived from the original on 28 February 2021. Retrieved 26 September 2014. Since 2009 the Academic Ranking of World Universities has been published and copyrighted by ShanghaiRanking Consultancy.
^"Shanghai rankings rattle European universities". ABS-CBN Interactive. 8 December 2010. Retrieved 27 January 2015. France's higher education minister travelled to Jiaotong University's suburban campus last month to discuss the rankings, the Norwegian education minister came last year and the Danish minister is due to visit next month.; The idea for the rankings was born in 1998, when Beijing decreed China needed several world-leading universities.
^. Shanghai Ranking Consultancy. 2014. Archived from the original on 11 February 2015. Retrieved 27 January 2015.
^Network, QS Asia News (2018-03-02). . QS WOWNEWS. Archived from the original on 2018-08-21. Retrieved 2018-03-29.
^. www.shanghairanking.com. Archived from the original on 2021-02-28. Retrieved 2018-03-29.
^Ariel Zirulnick (2010-09-16). "New world university ranking puts Harvard back on top". Christian Science Monitor. Those two, as well as Shanghai Jiao Tong University, produce the most influential international university rankings out there
^ abcIndira Samarasekera & Carl Amrhein. . The Edmonton Journal. Archived from the original on October 3, 2010. There are currently three major international rankings that receive widespread commentary: The Academic World Ranking of Universities, the QS World University Rankings and the Times Higher Education Rankings.
^ abPhilip G. Altbach (11 November 2010). "The State of the Rankings". Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved 27 January 2015. The major international rankings have appeared in recent months — the Academic Ranking of World Universities, the QS World University Rankings, and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE).
^ ab"Strength and weakness of varsity rankings". NST Online. 2016-09-14. Retrieved 2018-03-29.
^ abMarszal, Andrew (2012-10-04). "University rankings: which world university rankings should we trust?". Daily Telegraph. ISSN 0307-1235. Retrieved 2018-03-29.
^. Lajeunepolitique.com. 29 August 2013. Archived from the original on 9 January 2015. Retrieved 9 June 2014.
^ abBahram Bekhradnia (15 December 2016). "International university rankings: For good or ill?" (PDF). Higher Education Policy Institute. p. 16. Retrieved 10 June 2017. ARWU presents a further data issue. Whereas in the case of the other rankings the results are adjusted to take account of the size of institutions, hardly any such adjustment is made by ARWU. So there is a distortion in favour of large institutions. If two institutions were to merge, the very fact of merger would mean that the merged institution would do nearly twice as well as either of the individual institutions prior to merger, although nothing else had changed.
^. European Research Headlines. 2003. Archived from the original on 2015-01-09. Retrieved 4 February 2015.
^"A world of opportunity". The Economics. 8 September 2005. Archived from the original on 18 July 2012. Retrieved 30 January 2015. It is no accident that the most widely used annual ranking of the world's research universities, the Shanghai index, is produced by a Chinese university.
^"International Group Announces Audit of University Rankings". The Chronicle of Higher Education. 10 October 2010. Retrieved 30 January 2015. Shanghai Jiao Tong University, which produces the best-known and most influential global ranking of universities...
^Philip G. Altbach (11 September 2010). "The State of the Rankings". INSIDE HIGHER ED. Retrieved 30 January 2015. Nonetheless, AWRU's consistency, clarity of purpose, and transparency are significant advantages.
^Rankings and Accountability in Higher Education: Uses and Misuses. United Nations Educational. 2013. p. 26. ISBN9789230011567. Retrieved 30 January 2015.
^"Academic Ranking of World Universities 2013 released". Times Higher Education (THE). 2013-08-15. Retrieved 2016-01-20.
^Marszal, Andrew (2015). "University rankings: which world university rankings should we trust?". The Telegraph. Retrieved 27 January 2015. It is a remarkably stable list, relying on long-term factors such as the number of Nobel Prize-winners a university has produced, and number of articles published in Nature and Science journals. But with this narrow focus comes drawbacks. China's priority was for its universities to 'catch up' on hard scientific research. So if you're looking for raw research power, it's the list for you. If you're a humanities student, or more interested in teaching quality? Not so much.
^J. Scott Armstrong and Tad Sperry (1994). (PDF). Energy & Environment. 18 (2): 13–43. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2010-06-20.
^"1741-7015-5-30.fm" (PDF). Retrieved 9 June 2014.
^Răzvan V. Florian (17 June 2007). "Irreproducibility of the results of the Shanghai academic ranking of world universities". Scientometrics. 72 (1): 25–32. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-1712-1. S2CID 8239194.
^Domingo Docampo (1 July 2012). "Reproducibility of the results of the Shanghai academic ranking of world universities". Scientometrics. 94 (2): 567–587. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0801-y. S2CID 938534.
^Jean-Charles Billaut, Denis Bouyssou & Philippe Vincke (2 November 2010). "Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking?". Scientometrics. CCSD. 84 (1): 237. doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0115-x. S2CID 875330. Retrieved 30 January 2015.
^""Shanghai Academic Ranking: a French Controversy" by Marc Goetzmann, for La Jeune Politique". Lajeunepolitique.com. 29 August 2013. Retrieved 9 June 2014.
^Spongenberg, Helena (5 June 2014). "EUobserver / EU to test new university ranking in 2010". Euobserver.com. Retrieved 9 June 2014.
^Dagorn, Gary (16 August 2016). "Universités : pourquoi le classement de Shanghaï n'est pas un exercice sérieux". Le Monde.fr (in French). lemonde.fr. Retrieved 17 August 2016.
^Gérand, Christelle (September 2016). "Aix-Marseille, laboratoire de la fusion des universités" (in French). www.monde-diplomatique.fr. Retrieved 8 September 2016.
^"Global Rankings of Academic Subjects 2020". Shanghai Ranking Consultancy. 2020. Retrieved 27 December 2020.
^ ab"Greater China Ranking – Methodology". Shanghai Ranking Consultancy. 2014. Retrieved 31 January 2015.
External links
Official website
Jambor, Paul Z. 'The Changing Dynamics of PhDs and the Future of Higher Educational Development in Asia and the Rest of the World' Department of Education – The United States of America: Educational Resources Information Center,
academic, ranking, world, universities, arwu, also, known, shanghai, ranking, annual, publications, world, university, rankings, league, table, originally, compiled, issued, shanghai, jiao, tong, university, 2003, making, first, global, university, ranking, wi. The Academic Ranking of World Universities ARWU also known as the Shanghai Ranking is one of the annual publications of world university rankings The league table was originally compiled and issued by Shanghai Jiao Tong University in 2003 making it the first global university ranking with multifarious indicators 1 2 Academic Ranking of World UniversitiesCategoriesHigher educationFrequencyAnnualPublisherShanghai Ranking Consultancy 2009 present Shanghai Jiao Tong University 2003 2008 Founded2003 20 years ago 2003 CountryPeople s Republic of ChinaLanguageEnglish and ChineseWebsiteshanghairanking comAcademic Ranking of World Universities 2003 2018 Top ten Since 2009 ARWU has been published and copyrighted annually by Shanghai Ranking Consultancy an organization focusing on higher education that is not legally subordinated to any universities or government agencies 3 In 2011 a board of international advisory consisting of scholars and policy researchers was established to provide suggestions 4 5 The publication currently includes global league tables for institutions as a whole and for a selection of individual subjects alongside independent regional Greater China Ranking and Macedonian HEIs Ranking ARWU is regarded as one of the three most influential and widely observed university rankings alongside QS World University Rankings and Times Higher Education World University Rankings 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 It has received positive feedback for its objectivity and methodology 10 11 12 but draws wide criticism as it fails to adjust for the size of the institution and thus larger institutions tend to rank above smaller ones 9 13 14 Contents 1 Global rankings 1 1 Overall 1 1 1 Methodology 1 1 2 Reception 1 1 3 Criticism 1 2 Subjects 2 Regional rankings 2 1 Mainland China 2 2 Greater China 2 2 1 Methodology 3 Notes 4 References 5 External linksGlobal rankings EditOverall Edit Methodology Edit ARWU methodology 15 Criterion Indicator Code Weighting SourceQuality of education Alumni as Nobel laureates amp Fields Medalists Alumni 10 Official websites of Nobel Laureates amp Fields Medalists Note 1 Quality of faculty Staff as Nobel Laureates amp Fields Medalists Award 20 Official websites of Nobel Laureates amp Fields Medalists Note 1 Highly cited researchers in 21 broad subject categories HiCi 20 Thomson Reuters survey of highly cited researchers Note 1 Research output Papers published in Nature and Science 1 N amp S 20 Citation indexPapers indexed in Science Citation Index expanded and Social Science Citation Index PUB 20 Per capita performance Per capita academic performance of an institution PCP 10 Not applicable to institutions specialized in humanities and social sciences whose N amp S scores are relocated to other indicators Reception Edit EU Research Headlines reported the ARWU s work on 31 December 2003 The universities were carefully evaluated using several indicators of research performance 16 A survey on higher education published by The Economist in 2005 commented ARWU as the most widely used annual ranking of the world s research universities 17 In 2010 The Chronicle of Higher Education called ARWU the best known and most influential global ranking of universities 18 and Philip G Altbach named ARWU s consistency clarity of purpose and transparency as significant strengths 19 University of Oxford Chancellor Chris Patten has said the methodology looks fairly solid it looks like a pretty good stab at a fair comparison 20 While ARWU has originated in China the ranking have been praised for being unbiased towards Asian institutions especially Chinese institutions 21 Criticism Edit The ranking has been criticised for relying too much on award factors thus undermining the importance of quality of instruction and humanities 9 22 23 24 A 2007 paper published in the journal Scientometrics found that the results from the Shanghai rankings could not be reproduced from raw data using the method described by Liu and Cheng 25 A 2013 paper in the same journal finally showed how the Shanghai ranking results could be reproduced 26 In a report from April 2009 J C Billaut D Bouyssou and Ph Vincke analyse how the ARWU works using their insights as specialists of Multiple Criteria Decision Making MCDM Their main conclusions are that the criteria used are not relevant that the aggregation methodology has a number of major problems and that insufficient attention has been paid to fundamental choices of criteria 27 The ARWU researchers themselves N C Liu and Y Cheng think that the quality of universities cannot be precisely measured by mere numbers and any ranking must be controversial They suggest that university and college rankings should be used with caution and their methodologies must be understood clearly before reporting or using the results ARWU has been criticised by the European Commission as well as some EU member states for favour ing Anglo Saxon higher education institutions For instance ARWU is repeatedly criticised in France where it triggers an annual controversy focusing on its ill adapted character to the French academic system 28 29 and the unreasonable weight given to research often performed decades ago 30 It is also criticised in France for its use as a motivation for merging universities into larger ones 31 Indeed a further criticism has been that the metrics used are not independent of university size e g number of publications or award winners will mechanically add as universities are grouped independently of research or teaching quality thus a merger between two equally ranked institutions will significantly increase the merged institutions score and give it a higher ranking without any change in quality 14 Subjects Edit There are two categories in ARWU s disciplinary rankings broad subject fields and specific subjects The methodology is similar to that adopted in the overall table including award factors paper citation and the number of highly cited scholars 32 Natural sciences Atmospheric science Chemistry Earth sciences Ecology Geography Mathematics Oceanography Physics Engineering Aerospace engineering Automation and control Biomedical engineering Biotechnology Chemical engineering Civil engineering Computer science and engineering Electrical and electronic engineering Energy science and Engineering Environmental science and engineering Food science and technology Instruments science and technology Marine ocean engineering Materials science and engineering Mechanical engineering Metallurgical engineering Mining and mineral engineering Nanoscience and nanotechnology Remote sensing Telecommunication engineering Transportation science and technology Water resources Life sciences Agricultural sciences Biological sciences Human biological sciences Veterinary sciences Medical sciences Clinical medicine Dentistry and oral sciences Medical technology Nursing Pharmacy and pharmaceutical sciences Public health Social sciences Business administration Communication Economics Education Finance Hospitality and tourism management Law Library and information science Management Political sciences Psychology Public administration Sociology StatisticsRegional rankings EditConsidering the development of specific areas two independent regional league tables with different methodologies were launched Ranking of Top Universities in Greater China and Best Chinese Universities Ranking Mainland China Edit Best Chinese Universities Ranking was first released in 2015 33 Greater China Edit Ranking of Top Universities in Greater China was first released in 2011 34 Methodology Edit Methodology of Greater China Rankings 34 Note 2 Criterion Indicator WeightEducation Percentage of graduate students 5 Percentage of non local students 5 Ratio of academic staff to students 5 Doctoral degrees awarded 10 Alumni as Nobel Laureates amp Fields Medalists 10 Research Annual research income 5 Nature amp Science Papers 10 SCIE amp SSCI papers 10 International patents 10 Faculty Percentage of academic staff with a doctoral degree 5 Staff as Nobel Laureates and Fields Medalists 10 Highly cited researchers 10 Resources Annual budget 5 Notes Edit a b c Official datum sources adopted by ARWU Nobel Laureate Web Fields Medalist Web Thomson Reuters survey of highly cited researchers amp Thomson Reuters Web of Science Order shown in accordance with the latest result References Edit Pavel Adina Petruta 2015 Global university rankings a comparative analysis Procedia Economics and Finance 26 54 63 doi 10 1016 S2212 5671 15 00838 2 World university rankings how much influence do they really have The Guardian 2013 Retrieved 27 January 2015 The first international rankings the Academic Ranking of World Universities or Shanghai Rankings About Academic Ranking of World Universities Shanghai Ranking Consultancy 2014 Archived from the original on 28 February 2021 Retrieved 26 September 2014 Since 2009 the Academic Ranking of World Universities has been published and copyrighted by ShanghaiRanking Consultancy Shanghai rankings rattle European universities ABS CBN Interactive 8 December 2010 Retrieved 27 January 2015 France s higher education minister travelled to Jiaotong University s suburban campus last month to discuss the rankings the Norwegian education minister came last year and the Danish minister is due to visit next month The idea for the rankings was born in 1998 when Beijing decreed China needed several world leading universities ARWU International Advisory Board Shanghai Ranking Consultancy 2014 Archived from the original on 11 February 2015 Retrieved 27 January 2015 Network QS Asia News 2018 03 02 The history and development of higher education ranking systems QS WOWNEWS QS WOWNEWS Archived from the original on 2018 08 21 Retrieved 2018 03 29 About Academic Ranking of World Universities About ARWU www shanghairanking com Archived from the original on 2021 02 28 Retrieved 2018 03 29 Ariel Zirulnick 2010 09 16 New world university ranking puts Harvard back on top Christian Science Monitor Those two as well as Shanghai Jiao Tong University produce the most influential international university rankings out there a b c Indira Samarasekera amp Carl Amrhein Top schools don t always get top marks The Edmonton Journal Archived from the original on October 3 2010 There are currently three major international rankings that receive widespread commentary The Academic World Ranking of Universities the QS World University Rankings and the Times Higher Education Rankings a b Philip G Altbach 11 November 2010 The State of the Rankings Inside Higher Ed Retrieved 27 January 2015 The major international rankings have appeared in recent months the Academic Ranking of World Universities the QS World University Rankings and the Times Higher Education World University Rankings THE a b Strength and weakness of varsity rankings NST Online 2016 09 14 Retrieved 2018 03 29 a b Marszal Andrew 2012 10 04 University rankings which world university rankings should we trust Daily Telegraph ISSN 0307 1235 Retrieved 2018 03 29 Shanghai Academic Ranking a French Controversy by Marc Goetzmann for La Jeune Politique Lajeunepolitique com 29 August 2013 Archived from the original on 9 January 2015 Retrieved 9 June 2014 a b Bahram Bekhradnia 15 December 2016 International university rankings For good or ill PDF Higher Education Policy Institute p 16 Retrieved 10 June 2017 ARWU presents a further data issue Whereas in the case of the other rankings the results are adjusted to take account of the size of institutions hardly any such adjustment is made by ARWU So there is a distortion in favour of large institutions If two institutions were to merge the very fact of merger would mean that the merged institution would do nearly twice as well as either of the individual institutions prior to merger although nothing else had changed ARWU Methodology Shanghai Ranking Consultancy 2014 Retrieved 30 January 2015 Chinese study ranks world s top 500 universities European Research Headlines 2003 Archived from the original on 2015 01 09 Retrieved 4 February 2015 A world of opportunity The Economics 8 September 2005 Archived from the original on 18 July 2012 Retrieved 30 January 2015 It is no accident that the most widely used annual ranking of the world s research universities the Shanghai index is produced by a Chinese university International Group Announces Audit of University Rankings The Chronicle of Higher Education 10 October 2010 Retrieved 30 January 2015 Shanghai Jiao Tong University which produces the best known and most influential global ranking of universities Philip G Altbach 11 September 2010 The State of the Rankings INSIDE HIGHER ED Retrieved 30 January 2015 Nonetheless AWRU s consistency clarity of purpose and transparency are significant advantages Rankings and Accountability in Higher Education Uses and Misuses United Nations Educational 2013 p 26 ISBN 9789230011567 Retrieved 30 January 2015 Academic Ranking of World Universities 2013 released Times Higher Education THE 2013 08 15 Retrieved 2016 01 20 Marszal Andrew 2015 University rankings which world university rankings should we trust The Telegraph Retrieved 27 January 2015 It is a remarkably stable list relying on long term factors such as the number of Nobel Prize winners a university has produced and number of articles published in Nature and Science journals But with this narrow focus comes drawbacks China s priority was for its universities to catch up on hard scientific research So if you re looking for raw research power it s the list for you If you re a humanities student or more interested in teaching quality Not so much J Scott Armstrong and Tad Sperry 1994 Business School Prestige Research versus Teaching PDF Energy amp Environment 18 2 13 43 Archived from the original PDF on 2010 06 20 1741 7015 5 30 fm PDF Retrieved 9 June 2014 Răzvan V Florian 17 June 2007 Irreproducibility of the results of the Shanghai academic ranking of world universities Scientometrics 72 1 25 32 doi 10 1007 s11192 007 1712 1 S2CID 8239194 Domingo Docampo 1 July 2012 Reproducibility of the results of the Shanghai academic ranking of world universities Scientometrics 94 2 567 587 doi 10 1007 s11192 012 0801 y S2CID 938534 Jean Charles Billaut Denis Bouyssou amp Philippe Vincke 2 November 2010 Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking Scientometrics CCSD 84 1 237 doi 10 1007 s11192 009 0115 x S2CID 875330 Retrieved 30 January 2015 Shanghai Academic Ranking a French Controversy by Marc Goetzmann for La Jeune Politique Lajeunepolitique com 29 August 2013 Retrieved 9 June 2014 Spongenberg Helena 5 June 2014 EUobserver EU to test new university ranking in 2010 Euobserver com Retrieved 9 June 2014 Dagorn Gary 16 August 2016 Universites pourquoi le classement de Shanghai n est pas un exercice serieux Le Monde fr in French lemonde fr Retrieved 17 August 2016 Gerand Christelle September 2016 Aix Marseille laboratoire de la fusion des universites in French www monde diplomatique fr Retrieved 8 September 2016 Global Rankings of Academic Subjects 2020 Shanghai Ranking Consultancy 2020 Retrieved 27 December 2020 2022 中国最好大学排名 Best Chinese Universities Rankings Shanghai Ranking Consultancy Retrieved 2022 04 19 a b Greater China Ranking Methodology Shanghai Ranking Consultancy 2014 Retrieved 31 January 2015 External links EditOfficial website Jambor Paul Z The Changing Dynamics of PhDs and the Future of Higher Educational Development in Asia and the Rest of the World Department of Education The United States of America Educational Resources Information Center Portal China Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Academic Ranking of World Universities amp oldid 1147814877, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
