According to several international university rankings, Carleton isn’t competing at the same level as the world’s top schools.
In 2010, Carleton placed between 401 and 450 in the QS World University rankings, down from 386 in 2009. In the Times Higher Education World University Rankings, which publishes a list of the top 200 universities worldwide, Carleton fell just short.
In last year’s national Maclean’s university rankings, Carleton ranked seventh out of 11 universities in comprehensive rankings. Maclean’s will release their 2010 rankings this fall.
Associate professor of mathematics David Amundsen said he believes the rankings do affect students’ choices, but he said he isn’t sure whether they should.
“The question of whether or not they should is really a question of how much value they have and to me I think it’s dangerous to try and discuss something as complex as a university and boil it down to one number,” he said.
While university rankings are good reference points, first-year journalism student Angela Stairs said they weren’t the most important factor for her when choosing her school.
“I am very satisfied with my decision to come to Carleton,” she said. “The education you get here can send you wherever you want to go,” she said.
Stairs said she isn’t bothered by Carleton’s low results in rankings such as the Times Higher Education World University Rankings.
“The academia of the school as a whole doesn’t represent the quality of the . . . high-quality programs that the school has to offer,” Stairs said.
While first-year journalism student Shamit Tushakiran said the rankings should affect people’s choice of university, he said he thinks the weight they are given should be minimal.
“We shouldn’t allow the rankings to make our decisions for us,” he said.
Regarding Maclean’s rankings, Amundsen said there are many legitimate aspects students should consider, such as class size.
“But then they decide some per cent of the rankings will be class size and come up with a number. That’s the part that I think is a little arbitrary,” he said.
The Maclean’s rankings assess universities on the basis of six general indicators: student body, classes, faculty, library, finances, and reputation. While the organization uses third-party sources such as Statistics Canada, they go directly to universities for other information.
With the rankings, the organization or publication chooses the weight of each factor. In the Thomson Reuters rankings, 30 per cent of the overall score is teaching, 5 per cent is the international mix of staff and students, 2.5 per cent is industry income (innovation), 30 per cent is research (volume, income and reputation), and 32.5 per cent is citations (research influence).
By changing the percentage value of one aspect, there is the potential for a completely different ranking.
“There’s always going to be a bias based on who you ask and how you ask the questions,” Amundsen said. “But you’ve got to work with what you’ve got.”
In an email, Carleton President Roseann Runte said the rankings should be given some value, but do not always highlight important aspects.
“Rankings do not always reflect important considerations like innovative programs and support for learning. They do indicate some measures and while one should never aim simply for a ranking but aim to do an excellent job, we cannot ignore them,” she said.
“It may have some validity in some ways, but students really need to look closely at what it is they want to do and is it the right way for them to do that,” Amundsen said.
“Our reputation is changing and catching up with our quality. That is good and should hopefully be reflected in future rankings,” Runte said.