Panjab University's Surprising Victory over IITs in the Times Higher Education Rankings

The Times Higher Education (THE) Asia University Rankings 2014 highlighted an interesting development: Panjab University, a less renowned institution, ranked above IIT Kharagpur, one of the top Indian Institutes of Technology. This article explores the factors that contributed to this unexpected outcome, using IIT Kharagpur, ranked 45th, and IIT Roorkee, ranked 8th for comparison with Panjab University, ranked 35th, in the context of the THE Asia University Rankings 2014.

Factors Contributing to the Rankings

Teaching/Learning

The teaching and learning component, worth 30% of the overall score, was a significant factor in understanding the rankings. IIT Kharagpur scored 39.3, while Panjab University scored 25. IIT Kharagpur's reputation, research output, and wealth of resources made it the second-highest ranking Indian university, following JNU.

Specifically, the factors considered included:

Teaching Reputation Survey: Thomson Reuters conducted a reputation survey, contributing 15% to the overall teaching/learning score. Ratio of Teaching Staff to Students: This factor contributed 4.5% to the overall score. PhD to Undergraduate Degrees Ratio: Also worth 2.5% of the overall score. Institutional Income per Staff: Contributing 2.25% of the score, more income translates to better facilities for staff. Doctorates Awarded per Staff: This factor, likely contributing 6% of the overall score, ensures that universities maintain a high standard of research and education.

The high reputation of IIT Kharagpur likely stems from its long-standing status and higher research output and doctorates awarded per staff, possibly coupled with a better teacher-to-student ratio.

Citations

Citations, worth 30% of the overall score, played a critical role in the rankings. Panjab University scored an impressive 84.7 compared to IIT Kharagpur's 35.3. While the normalization of citation fields is a critical factor, this high percentage easily overshadows other rankings.

This significant gap suggests that the citation system might favor Panjab University due to its work in certain non-traditional fields, providing a higher impact publication record.

Research

Research performance, worth 30% of the overall score, included:

Reputation: 18% of the overall score, a survey of peers. Research Volume: 6% of the overall score, the number of papers published adjusted for university size, with field-specific normalization. Research Income: 6% of the overall score, normalized for cost differences across countries.

The distinction in research volume indicates that while IIT Kharagpur has a strong reputation based on peer surveys, its research volume and income might have been normalized to fairer values.

International Outlook

The international outlook, worth 7.5% of the overall score, shows Panjab University outperforming IIT Kharagpur:

Ratio of International to Domestic Students: 29.3 vs. 14.7. Ratio of International to Domestic Staff: Not explicitly mentioned but assumed. Proportion of Research Papers with at Least One International Co-author: Also not explicitly mentioned but assumed.

This international focus is an area where Panjab University likely excels, perhaps due to its global network and collaborations, which is worth considering given current trends in higher education.

Conclusion

The primary factor behind Panjab University's high ranking, according to citation data, suggests that the specific research output and the normalization process in the citation system played a significant role. It's essential to note that normalization ensures a fair comparison of universities across different fields and countries.

This ranking underscores the importance of considering multiple facets of university performance and the impact of field-specific normalization in ranking systems. As such, Panjab University's success should be appreciated for its unique strengths, particularly in research and international outlook.