This is an analytical overview based on the Wikipedia article on the University Ranking by Academic Performance (URAP). Read the full source article here. (opens in new tab)

Academic Ascent

An analytical exploration of global university performance metrics.

What is URAP? 👇 Explore Methodology ⚙️

Dive in with Flashcard Learning!


When you are ready...
🎮 Play the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge Game🎮

About URAP

Defining Academic Performance

The University Ranking by Academic Performance (URAP) is a comprehensive university ranking system developed by the Informatics Institute at Middle East Technical University. Since 2010, URAP has published annual national and global rankings for approximately 2000 top institutions worldwide. Its methodology is grounded in scientometrics, utilizing data primarily sourced from the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) via Web of Science and InCites.

Global Scope and Focus

For its global rankings, URAP focuses on quantifiable research performance indicators. These include the number of articles published, total citations, overall document count, article impact, citation impact, and the extent of international collaboration. This research-centric approach aims to provide an objective measure of academic output and influence.

National Context

In addition to its global assessments, URAP also publishes specific rankings for universities within Turkey. These national rankings incorporate additional indicators, such as student enrollment numbers and faculty counts, sourced from the Turkish Center of Measuring, Selection and Placement (ÖSYM), providing a more localized perspective on institutional performance.

Methodology

Data Foundation

URAP's ranking framework is built upon extensive bibliometric data gathered from leading international databases, notably the Web of Science and InCites, provided by the Institute for Scientific Information. The process begins by identifying the top 2,500 higher education institutions (HEIs) based on their article publication volume. From this pool, the top 2,000 institutions are included in the final published rankings.

Indicator Weighting and Normalization

URAP employs six primary indicators to evaluate academic performance. Recognizing that raw bibliometric data often exhibits highly skewed distributions, URAP utilizes median values for these indicators. A Delphi system involving expert consultation is used to assign weighting scores to each indicator, totaling 600 points for the overall ranking. Field-based rankings are conducted across 23 subject areas, drawing upon the methodology of Australia's Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) framework.

Key Performance Indicators

Core Metrics

URAP assesses university performance using six core indicators, each contributing to the overall score. These indicators are designed to measure different facets of academic productivity and impact. The weighting reflects a balanced approach, with significant emphasis placed on research output and quality.

Indicator Breakdown

The following table outlines the primary indicators used in URAP's global rankings, detailing their objective, assigned weight, and data source:

Indicator Objective Weight (out of 600) Source
Number of Articles Scientific Productivity 21% InCites
Citation Research Impact 21% InCites
Total Documents Scientific Productivity & Continuity 10% InCites
Article Impact Total (AIT) Research Quality 18% InCites
Citation Impact Total (CIT) Research Quality 15% InCites
International Collaboration International Acceptance 15% InCites

Note on Calculation: Indicators like Article Impact Total (AIT) and Citation Impact Total (CIT) involve complex calculations that adjust raw counts by comparing an institution's performance (e.g., Citations Per Publication - CPP) against the global average within specific subject areas. This normalization aims to provide a more context-aware measure of impact.

Global Rankings Overview

Top Institutions

URAP provides rankings for thousands of universities globally, highlighting institutions with significant research output and impact. The following table presents a snapshot of the top-ranked universities in recent years, showcasing the consistent leadership of established institutions and the emergence of others.

Institution 2021-22 2020-21 2019–20 2018–19 2017–18 2016–17 2015–16 2014–15
Harvard University 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
University of Toronto 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
University College London 3 4 3 5 6 5 6 6
Stanford University 4 3 4 4 5 4 8 7
University of Oxford 5 5 5 3 3 3 3 3
Johns Hopkins University 6 6 6 6 8 6 4 4
University of Cambridge 7 7 7 7 9 8 5 5
University of Michigan 8 8 8 9 11 10 10 10
University of Washington 9 10 9 10 12 11 11 11
Tsinghua University 10 12 12 18 25 38 48 58
Shanghai Jiao Tong University 11 18 19 24 32 39 50 59
Imperial College London 12 13 13 11 16 15 15 15
University of Paris-Saclay 13 9 94 91 80 87 70 69
University of Pennsylvania 14 15 14 15 14 13 13 13
Zhejiang University 15 20 20 31 33 34 42 46
University of California, Los Angeles 16 16 15 13 13 12 12 12
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 17 11 11 8 7 7 7 9
Sorbonne University 18 14 10 17 4 26 26 25
Columbia University 19 17 16 14 15 14 14 14
University of Sydney 20 24 24 23 26 27 29 30
University of Copenhagen 21 19 18 16 17 16 16 22
Peking University 22 21 21 22 29 33 44 48
University of Melbourne 23 25 23 26 30 31 30 29
University of Paris 24 23 97 95 87 85 78 76
University of California, San Diego 25 26 22 19 18 17 17 16
University of California, San Francisco 26 30 31 28 24 22 19 18
National University of Singapore 27 32 28 30 27 29 32 34
Cornell University 28 28 29 25 23 25 25 24
University of British Columbia 29 29 27 27 21 21 22 20
Yale University 30 27 26 21 20 19 20 21
University of São Paulo 31 33 33 38 36 40 35 31
Monash University 32 37 39 46 53 57 62 64
University of California, Berkeley 33 22 17 12 10 9 9 8
University of Queensland 34 35 35 39 40 41 43 51
Sun Yat-sen University 35 48 60 83 93 99 113 116
Duke University 36 34 34 33 28 24 24 23
University of Tokyo 37 31 25 20 19 18 18 17
KU Leuven 38 38 37 42 41 23 23 38
University of New South Wales 39 42 44 52 60 71 74 78
University of Amsterdam 40 40 48 51 63 61 61 61
Ohio State University 41 39 38 36 38 37 33 32
Huazhong University of Science and Technology 42 49 56 81 94 111 135 155
University of Pittsburgh 43 43 40 35 35 32 31 28
Karolinska Institute 44 50 51 48 51 53 60 57
Fudan University 45 54 58 62 68 74 90 94
University of Chicago 46 36 30 29 22 20 21 19
Northwestern University 47 46 45 43 46 38 37 37
Utrecht University 48 45 42 40 45 44 37 35
Seoul National University 49 51 47 49 44 50 36 42
University of Minnesota 50 44 32 32 31 28 27 27

National & Regional Rankings

Turkish Focus

URAP provides specialized rankings for universities within Turkey. These rankings utilize the same core bibliometric indicators as the global list but supplement them with national data points, such as student and faculty numbers, offering a more tailored assessment for the Turkish higher education landscape.

Broader Reach

Beyond global and Turkish rankings, URAP also contributes to regional assessments, covering areas like Latin America and ASEAN nations. This broad scope ensures a more inclusive representation of academic performance across diverse geographical contexts.

Commentary and Reception

Comparative Analysis

URAP is recognized for its extensive coverage, ranking significantly more institutions (up to 2000) compared to other major ranking systems like ARWU, THE, and QS, which typically cover fewer than 700. This broader scope is noted in academic analyses, such as a piece in the European Journal of Education, which highlights URAP's role in providing a wider perspective beyond the traditional "Western elite" group.

Research Emphasis

URAP is categorized among ranking systems that focus exclusively on academic performance, particularly publication output. Unlike rankings that incorporate teaching quality or student satisfaction metrics, URAP's methodology remains strictly centered on research-oriented indicators, making it a valuable resource for evaluating institutional research impact.

Criticism and Limitations

Potential Biases

A notable criticism of URAP is its reliance on absolute, size-dependent indicators. This methodology may inherently favor larger institutions, potentially skewing results in favor of those with greater resources and higher publication volumes, irrespective of relative performance.

Disciplinary Gaps

Reports, including those from the European University Association (EUA), suggest that URAP's indicators may under-represent certain academic fields. Specifically, it tends to exclude research published in books and studies within the arts, humanities, and social sciences. Furthermore, the lack of field normalization means results can be disproportionately influenced by fields with higher publication rates and citation counts, such as medicine and the natural sciences.

Ranking Thresholds

The University of Gothenburg's analysis points out that URAP's decision to rank 2000 institutions contrasts with other systems that limit their lists, citing concerns about methodological reliability below the top 400-500 positions. URAP does not explicitly address this potential limitation regarding the reliability of rankings beyond the highest-tier institutions.

Teacher's Corner

Edit and Print this course in the Wiki2Web Teacher Studio

Edit and Print Materials from this study in the wiki2web studio
Click here to open the "University Ranking By Academic Performance" Wiki2Web Studio curriculum kit

Use the free Wiki2web Studio to generate printable flashcards, worksheets, exams, and export your materials as a web page or an interactive game.

True or False?

Test Your Knowledge!

Gamer's Corner

Are you ready for the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge?

Learn about university_ranking_by_academic_performance while playing the wiki2web Clarity Challenge game.
Unlock the mystery image and prove your knowledge by earning trophies. This simple game is addictively fun and is a great way to learn!

Play now

Explore More Topics

Discover other topics to study!

metropolitan opera auditions of the air
    
white city london
    
ephedra medicine
    
2016 shooting of dallas police officers
    
encyclopedia of mexico
    
bofors 40 mm l 60 gun
    
ethiopian orthodox tewahedo church
    
list of recorded texas historic landmarks
    
patrice munsel
    
hertzsprung crater
    

References

References

  1.  As University of Paris-Sud.
  2.  As Pierre and Marie Curie University.
  3.  As Paris Diderot University.
A full list of references for this article are available at the University Ranking by Academic Performance Wikipedia page

Feedback & Support

To report an issue with this page, or to find out ways to support the mission, please click here.

Disclaimer

Important Notice

This page was generated by an Artificial Intelligence and is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content is derived from publicly available data and may not be exhaustive or entirely up-to-date.

This is not professional academic or research advice. The information provided herein should not substitute consultation with academic experts or reliance on official university ranking methodologies. Always refer to primary sources and consult with qualified professionals for specific analytical needs.

The creators of this page are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for any actions taken based on the information provided.