10.03.2014 Views

to download our latest brochure - QS Intelligence Unit

to download our latest brochure - QS Intelligence Unit

to download our latest brochure - QS Intelligence Unit

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

MODULE 2<br />

The charts in this module represent a snapshot of performance across<br />

all the indica<strong>to</strong>rs utilised in the 2012 Rankings, each presented in contrast<br />

<strong>to</strong> Atlantis’ results. In each case, the area inside the line represents<br />

the all round strength of the institution across the six principal ranking<br />

indica<strong>to</strong>rs and would correlate perfectly with the overall ranking performance<br />

were it not for the influence of weightings; essentially this<br />

display approach implies that each indica<strong>to</strong>r carries the same weight.<br />

Some insights can be drawn from analysing the results of the peer<br />

institutions:<br />

• Typically the more hexagonal the ‘shape’ of the institution, the<br />

better the performance, as exemplified by Template (Chart 2.1).<br />

However this shape is not completely achieved for any of the<br />

selected peers as most of them, including <strong>to</strong>p performer Athenea<br />

University (Chart 2.1), exhibit a weakness in at least one<br />

area. An area of weakness, for the purposes of this module, is<br />

defined by an indica<strong>to</strong>r position below the 200 mark.<br />

• At position 212, Atlantis does not perform particularly well in<br />

the International Faculty indica<strong>to</strong>r. This may be a result of insufficient<br />

IPEDS data regarding international numbers, but overall,<br />

<strong>to</strong>p American institutions, with only f<strong>our</strong> exceptions in 2011,<br />

are not represented in the <strong>to</strong>p 50 in this indica<strong>to</strong>r. The exception<br />

is San Diez (Chart 2.1) which performs well in both international<br />

indica<strong>to</strong>rs.<br />

• Atlantis, ranked in the <strong>to</strong>p 100, similarly has weaknesses in the<br />

international indica<strong>to</strong>rs, performing at 249 in International Faculty<br />

and 396 in International Students.<br />

• Atlantis’s domestic peers, University 1 and University 2, also<br />

struggle in the international indica<strong>to</strong>rs: the former performs at<br />

541 in International Students and the latter at 239 in International<br />

Faculty.<br />

• University 4 outperforms the selected peers in both international<br />

indica<strong>to</strong>rs.<br />

• University 6 performs well overall at 84 however its ‘shape’ exhibits<br />

a distinct weakness in Faculty Student where it performs<br />

at 585. Otherwise, the selected peers perform well in the Faculty<br />

Student indica<strong>to</strong>r, averaging a rank of 56.<br />

• University 5 performs well in all of the indica<strong>to</strong>rs except for the<br />

Employer Reputation index, where it performs at 204. Despite<br />

this, University 2 is placed at 12 overall. Peer 1 and Peer 4 and<br />

Peer 6 all outperform the institution in this indica<strong>to</strong>r. University<br />

3’s stellar and stable performance in the remaining indica<strong>to</strong>rs<br />

have helped it <strong>to</strong> achieve an impressive overall result.<br />

• Peer 2 leads the selected peer group in both reputational indica<strong>to</strong>rs,<br />

performing at six in Academic Reputation and f<strong>our</strong> in<br />

Employer Reputation.<br />

KEY<br />

AR= Academic Reputation<br />

ER= Employer Reputation<br />

FS= Faculty Student<br />

CF= Citations per Faculty<br />

IF= International Faculty<br />

IS= International Student<br />

26 Copyright © 2013 <strong>QS</strong> <strong>Intelligence</strong> <strong>Unit</strong><br />

2.1<br />

2.2<br />

2.3<br />

2.4<br />

2.5<br />

2.7<br />

• Currently Atlantis performs at the bot<strong>to</strong>m of the group in both<br />

reputational indica<strong>to</strong>rs. It is placed at 232 in Academic Reputation<br />

and 432 in Employer Reputation. Top performer Peer 2 achieves<br />

the best performance among the domestic peer group, at 32 in Academic<br />

Reputation and 83 in the Employer Reputation indica<strong>to</strong>r.<br />

DOMESTIC ANALYSIS<br />

There is a clear division in regional performance in the<br />

Citations per Faculty and Faculty Student indica<strong>to</strong>rs.<br />

Chart 2.8 shows the average country performance<br />

in all six indica<strong>to</strong>rs. Analysts please write y<strong>our</strong> own<br />

analysis. In the Citations per Faculty indica<strong>to</strong>r, institutions<br />

based in Country 2 perform on average 35%<br />

better than those located in Country 3, and 24% better<br />

than those in Country 2 and 19% in Country 1.<br />

However, in terms of average country performance in the<br />

Faculty Student indica<strong>to</strong>r, institutions in the region clearly<br />

dominate. Sample Country’s institutions perform on average<br />

23% better than institutions located in the US.<br />

Benchmarking Service: Template - Year 1 Report 27<br />

2.8<br />

Benchmarking Deliverables<br />

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS<br />

Benchmarking Service<br />

University of Atlantis<br />

“Specifically, we will use y<strong>our</strong> information <strong>to</strong> identify<br />

institutions that could be a reference for us in key<br />

aspects, and <strong>to</strong> estimate the time we need <strong>to</strong> see changes<br />

reflected in <strong>our</strong> performance and in the perception of<br />

academics and employers...<br />

Modules 2 and 3 clearly explain where we should focus <strong>to</strong><br />

improve in <strong>our</strong> rankings performance. The benchmarking<br />

analysis by subject areas, citations and productivity<br />

(module 4) clearly describes the current situation<br />

and impact of research activities of <strong>our</strong> University in<br />

comparison with other institutions. The same kind of<br />

clarity can be found in Module 5, where we can get useful<br />

conclusions and successful examples that we can follow.”<br />

Dr. An<strong>to</strong>nio Elias Ochoa. Dirección de Planeación y<br />

Evaluación, Universidad de los Andes (Colombia)<br />

The Benchmarking Service is also available for the following ranking exercises:<br />

Regional Rankings: Asia and Latin America<br />

The purpose of each ranking is <strong>to</strong> provide a neutral and independent comparison of the quality of universities<br />

across the region, based on a set of criteria that commonly applies <strong>to</strong> all countries involved in the study.<br />

<strong>QS</strong> World University Rankings by Subject<br />

This ranking examines the institutional strength specific subject fields. Rankings in five key subject areas are<br />

produced: Arts & Humanities, Engineering & Technology, Life Sciences & Medicine, Natural Sciences and<br />

Social Sciences & Management.<br />

PRICING<br />

PRICING<br />

3 year <strong>to</strong>tal fee - US$45,000<br />

~ ~ 5 standard modules, benchmarking against six institutions<br />

5 year <strong>to</strong>tal fee - US$75,000<br />

~ ~ 5 standard modules, benchmarking against six institutions<br />

Additional institutions can be added <strong>to</strong> the benchmark list at a rate of $2,500<br />

per institution per year.<br />

Supplementary modules can be added at a rate of $ 3,000 per module per year.<br />

www.iu.qs.com | 9

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!