Here we go again. The Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) University Rankings for 2011/2012 have been picked up by US News and given a new and much more visible life.
Instead of flagellating ourselves once again because of how poorly we have been doing compared to the universities in our region, let us look at the positive side of the survey.
In the area of English Language and Literature, the best universities in the world are, as expected, Harvard, Oxford, Cambridge, and other universities in countries that have English as their mother tongue. In countries where English is not the mother tongue, however, look at the top universities: (1) National University of Singapore, (2) Peking University, (3) University of Tokyo, (4) University of Hong Kong, (5) Kyoto University, (6) University of the Philippines, (7) Ateneo de Manila University, (8) Chulalongkorn University, (9) Seoul National University, and (10) Chinese University of Hong Kong.
UP and Ateneo are in the top ten! This may not be something UP would want to boast about, since that university has a history of being anti-American (at some point, UP even wanted to have its students educated using only the Filipino language). Since the even more anti-American Peking University runs second in the list, however, there is nothing wrong with being very good in teaching the language and culture of a country you hold demonstrations against.
A quick note about the missing De La Salle University, which is a CHED Center of Excellence in both English and Literature. DLSU is not in the list for a simple reason: it has two separate departments for the category, making it impossible for it to be included in the rankings. QS studied only the Department of English Language and Applied Linguistics, which does not teach literature and scored zero in all the items that had to do with literature. DLSU’s Department of Literature does not teach English; it would have scored zero in all the items that had to do with language. In contrast, the English departments of UP and Ateneo teach both English language and English literature. (I just had to put that in.)
Philippine universities do not rank in any of the other subject areas (Geography and Area Studies; History; Linguistics; Modern Languages; Philosophy; Biological Sciences; Psychology; Computer Science; Chemical, Civil, Electrical, Mechanical, Aeronautical and Manufacturing Engineering).
It is clear that we cannot compete in the sciences. We do not have the money to purchase state-of-the-art equipment. We also cannot compete in Geography, History, or Linguistics, because we do not have the money for our researchers in these areas to spend years just researching. I can understand why we do not rank in Modern Languages; students in this field are usually required to spend some time in the country whose language they are studying. I am disappointed, however, that we do not rank in Philosophy; that field is not dependent at all on funding.
There are some questions about methodology that can be raised against QS, but I like the way US News looks at the outcome of higher education. The English Language and Literature ranking is prefaced by this: “English language and literature students often take classes on subjects such as creative writing and rhetoric. Graduates can pursue careers in education, journalism, and many more fields.” That job-oriented statement should get Filipinos more interested in enrolling in AB English in UP or Ateneo, where they can get a world-class education, as affirmed by the rankings.
By the way, Filipinos can also enrol in AB Literature in DLSU, which has the only internationally accredited literature department in the country. (Unfortunately for DLSU, QS does not rank literature programs that do not focus on Anglo-American literature.)
Interesting are the rankings within the criteria set by QS. For Academic Reputation, scoring a perfect 100 percent in the top 25 are Cambridge, Harvard, MIT, Oxford, Princeton, Stanford, Tokyo, UC Berkeley, and Yale. For Citations per Faculty, however, California Institute of Technology joins an elite group composed only of Harvard, Princeton, and Stanford. This means that scholars respect Caltech more than they respect Cambridge, MIT, Oxford, Tokyo, UC Berkeley, and Yale. Perhaps QS should just drop Academic Reputation as a criterion, because at the level of these research institutions, the opinion of scholars is much more important than the opinion of university presidents (key respondents in the reputation survey).
As far as citations go, unfortunately, we really have nothing to boast about. Both UP and Ateneo score zero in this category, even when QS relaxed its rule to include citations per paper rather than citations per faculty. We really need to do research that is used by scholars, rather than just research for the sake of publishing or promotion. (Of course, we are in good company, because Harvard, Oxford, and Cambridge also scored zero for their papers in English Language and Literature. This makes me wonder why they were ranked in that field at all!)
Since we are looking at the positive side of the rankings, we should rejoice that UP is ranked 62nd and Ateneo 65th in Asia. Never mind that, in ASEAN, NUS, Nanyang, Mahidol, Malaya, Chulalongkorn, University of Indonesia, Kebangsaan Malaysia, Sains Malaysia, and Putra Malaysia all outrank us. We are better than them, except for NUS, in English language and literature.