We've broken into the top 50...

Thirdfox

I do think it's very impressive - if nothing else our Provost seems to have done a great job promoting our university to the world.

http://www.topuniversities.com/university_rankings/results/2008/overall_rankings/fullrankings/

We've been ranked 49th best in the world, ahead of well known institutions such as LSE (66th), Vanderbilt (101) and of course UCD,D (108) - fair deuce to them too.

But does anyone know why we're ranked so high?

Speaking from the campus of university no. 62 (I'm on an exchange right now) - they have a brilliant campus/teaching facilities and a 5.7 billion dollar endowment, something Trinity just can't compete with. I'm just wondering why the college is so great? Do our researchers publish enormous amounts of papers every year? Do we have the best student/staff ratios? Or is it more to do with good PR and promoting our brand?

Here's what the Provost had to say about it:
http://www.tcd.ie/Communications/news/pressreleases/pressRelease.php?headerID=1006&pressReleaseArchive=2009

Peslo

Thirdfox wrote: »

But does anyone know why we're ranked so high?

It actually says why if you follow the link you posted!

Why This University?

At Ireland’s premier university, the pursuit of excellence through research, scholarship and teaching is at the heart of a Trinity education. Founded in 1592, Trinity College Dublin is the oldest university in Ireland and one of the older universities of Western Europe. On today’s campus, state-of-the-art libraries, laboratories and IT facilities stand alongside historic buildings on a city-centre 47-acre campus.

Trinity College Dublin (TCD) offers a unique educational experience across a range of disciplines in the arts, humanities, engineering, science, human, social and health sciences.

TCD has an outstanding record of publications in high-impact journals, and a track record in winning research funding which is among the best in the country. Students also benefit from a scholar teacher model where they have the opportunity of being taught by world-leading experts in their field.

Interdisciplinarity forms a key element in the College strategy in increasing Trinity’s international standing as a research-led university. TCD has developed significant international strength in research in eight major themes which include globalisation; cancer; genetics; neuroscience; immunology and infection; communications and intelligent systems; nano and materials science as well as Irish culture and the creative arts.

Most of the university’s activities are carried out on the historic campus located in the heart of Dublin. The west end of the campus is laid out in five quadrangles with distinguished buildings from the 18th century, notably the Old Library. The Library of Trinity College is the largest research library in Ireland and is an invaluable resource to scholars. In addition to purchases and donations accrued over four centuries, the College has had 200 years of legal deposit. By this right Trinity can claim a copy of every book published in Ireland the UK. The Library contains 4.25 million volumes, 30,000 current serial titles as well as an extensive collection of manuscripts, the most famous being the Book of Kells.

Towards the east end of the campus the recently built Hamilton, O’Reilly and Lloyd buildings house many of Trinity’s science and technology laboratories and complement the recently completed Dental Hospital. The Samuel Beckett Theatre is located towards the north of the campus and the Douglas Hyde Art Gallery to the south. The construction of the country’s first purpose-built building for a nanoscience research institute has just been completed which houses Ireland’s first Science Gallery. This new building also includes a state-of-the-art sports complex.


Trinity College launched its new Strategic Plan Update 2006 last year. The strategy is reflective of national policy and the objective of doubling the number of PhDs across all disciplines by 2013 in order to move towards a knowledge society. In order to achieve this, the College has received some of the largest allocations of Irish Government funding which have become competitively available to date. Trinity College has also embarked on a major fundraising campaign to fund the implementation of this Plan.

Trinity continues to attract intellectually strong students from Ireland and abroad. More than half of its incoming undergraduates have earned in excess of 500 out of a maximum 600 points in the national Leaving Certificate examination or the equivalent. The accessibility of a Trinity education to all students of ability is also very important. Trinity College was the first university in Ireland to reserve 15% of first year undergraduate places for students from non-traditional learning groups – students with a disability, socio-economically disadvantaged students as well as mature students. The College has met its target in this respect. There is also an exciting international mix of its student body where 16% of students are from outside Ireland and 40% of these students are from outside the European Union. TCD students also have an opportunity to study abroad in other leading European universities through Trinity’s partnership agreements.


People?
Many of Trinity College Dublin’s alumni have helped shape the history of Ireland and Western Europe. Two of Trinity College’s alumni have won Nobel prizes – Ernest Walton for physics in 1951 and Samuel Beckett for literature in 1968. The first president of Ireland, Douglas Hyde was a graduate as was the first female president of Ireland, Mary Robinson. Other notable alumni include authors, Jonathan Swift and Oliver Goldsmith; philosopher, George Berkeley; political philosopher, Edmund Burke; wit and dramatist, Oscar Wilde; historian, William Lecky; religious scholar, James Ussher; scientists, John Joly, George Johnstone Stoney and William Rowan Hamilton; and physicians, William Stokes and Denis Burkitt.


What do students say?
Postgraduate student, Haiyan Wang, from the Shandong Province in China completed a Masters degree in Economics and is currently doing a PhD also in Economics at Trinity College Dublin. Haiyan chose TCD because it is Ireland’s premier university and enjoys an international reputation for its high quality of teaching and competitive research strength, attracting students from all over the world. “I am confident that the internationally recognised education which I received at Trinity College Dublin will enable me to pursue my career both in Ireland and worldwide,” said Haiyan. She also found the College academic staff very supportive and accessible throughout her studies and enjoyed the friendly atmosphere in the department where she studied.

Ron DMC

How come Cambridge is ahead of Oxford? I thought it'd be the other way around.

paperclip

I bet the Science Gallery has something to do with it. Not many universities have a gallery fusing the arts AND science....

Podge_irl

Ronny Mitchell wrote: »

How come Cambridge is ahead of Oxford? I thought it'd be the other way around.

Cambridge has been ahead or equal to Oxford for the last number of years in these things. Its a somewhat pointless comparison though as they more or less equal (though I'm not going to argue with the rankings ) and they each have their specialities. Also, not that I've been here long or anything, but Trinity compares favourably to Cambridge in a number of ways.

Thirdfox

Peslo wrote: »

It actually says why if you follow the link you posted!

I know, I've read that - but quite apart from what they say about us what do we think about ourselves? Do you think we are a top 50 university？

Or maybe I'm just suffering from an inferiority complex

Here's one piece of information that surprised me:
Research Productivity & Quality
Number of Papers 14,950
Total number of papers published in ESI indexed journals in the past 5 years
Number of Citations 72,409

We've published 14,950 papers over five years? That's almost 3000 per year... quite an impressive figure to me anyway.

Mark200

Well I find it hard to say whether Trinity should or shouldn't be ahead of others since I've never been to any other university

But after my first proper week of lectures, I can say that I can't find many faults with the place.

EGaffney

3000 papers is 2 papers per faculty staff; that's a pretty good number per year, but quality is what matters of course!

tolosenc

Mark200 wrote: »

But after my first proper week of lectures, I can say that I can't find many faults with the place.

Just wait...

Crania

This is a very impressive result. Trinity really has been climbing up these rankings since they were introduced four years ago. We started off somewhere in the 100's, then jumped to 78th, then to 53rd and now 49th. It's nice to able to say that I go to a Top 50 university in the world.

Huge climb for UCD too. They were like 178th or something last year and now they're 108th. They still can't even say they're a Top 100 University though.....:p

Thirdfox

It's kinda a shame that no other Irish 3rd level institution made it onto the top 200 - I would have thought that Cork would have stood a good chance?

Crash

EGaffney wrote:

3000 papers is 2 papers per faculty staff; that's a pretty good number per year, but quality is what matters of course!

Ah but thats the reason Citations is mentioned, I think. The only metric I can imagine for how well received such papers are is how often they are cited, so 70,000 or around that ain't half bad.

Brian

I was disappointed to find that the Engineering and IT department was the lowest ranked segment of TCD, at 135th in the world. That's not great to be honest..

Trinity College is a top-ranking university in all five discipline categories: Arts and Humanities (32), Social Sciences (59), Natural Sciences (66), Life Sciences and Biomedicine (97), Engineering and IT (135).

Time Magazine

Mark200 wrote: »

Well I find it hard to say whether Trinity should or shouldn't be ahead of others since I've never been to any other university

But after my first proper week of lectures, I can say that I can't find many faults with the place.

That's not what these things measure. The value of a university to society has nothing to do with the queues to use Bebo, etc. Obviously that impacts on how the undergraduates view the place, but rankings are all about the research baby.

Crash

Well to be honest, they have to be. Try and think up metrics that measure how effective a college is for educating undergrads - they're either non-existent, or incredibly complicated.

Time Magazine

Going Forward wrote: »

Well to be honest, they have to be.

I didn't say otherwise.

Peslo

It certainly feels different to other universities.

leninbenjamin

Baza210 wrote: »

I was disappointed to find that the Engineering and IT department was the lowest ranked segment of TCD, at 135th in the world. That's not great to be honest..

I'm just guessing here, but I would imagine it's because of the funding shortfall. Comp science in particular is such a fast moving area that it can be difficult to remain competitive if you can't invest adequately in the hardware/software;

j1smithy

Mark200 wrote: »

Well I find it hard to say whether Trinity should or shouldn't be ahead of others since I've never been to any other university

But after my first proper week of lectures, I can say that I can't find many faults with the place.

Give it time, try the health centre... think the HSE is bad??

Thirdfox

j1smithy wrote: »

Give it time, try the health centre... think the HSE is bad??

To be honest I've found the staff there to be a great help (having had to use them 4 or 5 times last year due to a problem).

The HSE on the other hand...misdiagnosed me and left me on a trolley for a few hours before surgery (at least I got a trolley!)

Running Bing

Peslo wrote: »

It certainly feels different to other universities.

Yeah its definitely something special imo.


Excellent achievement and it does make you feel a bit proud;)

Peslo

Slightly O/T, but I went to see the Book of Kells on Thursday, for the first time ever. Forgive me for thinking it was just OK, but the Long Room absolutely blew me away!!:eek: I was far more impressed by the Long Room than I was by the Book of Kells exhibition.

Mark200

Peslo wrote: »

Slightly O/T, but I went to see the Book of Kells on Thursday, for the first time ever. Forgive me for thinking it was just OK, but the Long Room absolutely blew me away!!:eek: I was far more impressed by the Long Room than I was by the Book of Kells exhibition.

Yeah I have to check that out sometime...what's the story with it anyway, students can get in for free....are they allowed bring a non-student guest with them for free by any chance?

Peslo

I think so, I havent done so and I dont know anybody who has..........

Time Magazine

Mark200 wrote: »

Yeah I have to check that out sometime...what's the story with it anyway, students can get in for free....are they allowed bring a non-student guest with them for free by any chance?

Yourself and three guests at any time. Very handy for when those annoying American cousins are over. Just don't abuse it by bringing tourists in.

Peslo

The Economist wrote: »

Just don't abuse it by bringing tourists in.

Cough cough.

fluppet

The rankings published in the Times Higher Education supplement are very biased. I believe 40% of the ranking is based on 'peer review', but while it sounds like a good idea to factor-in how well a university is perceived by academics (from other institutions) and employers, in fact the process is not very transparent and allows the figures to be manipulated. I have read that more academics from Ireland are involved in the 'peer review' process than from all of the USA! On other university rankings such as the Academic Ranking of World Universities (which is not perfect either), universities from the UK, Ireland, and some other countries, are ranked much lower than on the Times list (on this list Trinity is in the 200-300 bracket).

EGaffney

Hmm, I'll believe that last link the day I believe in Chinese academic freedom.

fluppet

While I do remember reading that a paper had been published claiming that the ARWU ranking was not reproducible, it is often regarded as one of the most reliable guides as it is based only on openly available information, unlike the Times ranking. Apparently the Economist has used the ARWU ranking in the past.

Crash

Tbh fluppet, their methodology is at least as flawed as the times rankings.

ARWU website wrote:

Quality of Education Alumni of an institution winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals Alumni 10%
Quality of Faculty Staff of an institution winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals Award 20%
Highly cited researchers in 21 broad subject categories HiCi 20%
Research Output Articles published in Nature and Science* N&S 20%
Articles indexed in Science Citation Index-expanded, and Social Science Citation Index PUB 20%
Per Capita
Performance Per capita academic performance of an institution PCP 10%

So for one, they've essentially set an undue amount of weight on alumni and staff who receieve fields medals, which will INSTANTLY remove most universities with maths. departments which arent as highly recognised as others. Further compounding this is a 20% weighting for articles published in nature and science. The only ones that seem fair and equitable in their methodology is the 21 various fields which they judge researchers, however they give no info on how these are judged, and the per capita performance ranking given there. Its an incredibly opaque and biased ranking system.

fluppet

It's not perfect, as I said, but as there isn't much scope for it to discriminate based on location, it does highlight my point about the Times list being unfairly biased towards UK/Irish universities (they in general have lower rankings showing that the Times list is favouring them).

In my opinion, the only bias in the ARWU rankings is towards universities that are especially strong in sciences.

Podge_irl

Going Forward wrote: »

So for one, they've essentially set an undue amount of weight on alumni and staff who receieve fields medals, which will INSTANTLY remove most universities with maths. departments which arent as highly recognised as others.

Its just ranking Fields Medals alongside Nobel prizes though. They are pretty much equivalent, the Fields Medal is given out less often if anything.

EGaffney

fluppet wrote: »

It's not perfect, as I said, but as there isn't much scope for it to discriminate based on location, it does highlight my point about the Times list being unfairly biased towards UK/Irish universities (they in general have lower rankings showing that the Times list is favouring them).

No it doesn't, it shows that the ARWU list is biased towards Nobel/Fields producers and attractors. There you go - the US is going to be boosted automatically - $$$. Sure, Nobels are nice, but are they really 30% of the contribution of an institution to the state of the art? Especially an institution like TCD which is strong in humanities and not Nobel subjects.

fluppet

Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals are awarded for outstanding contributions to various subjects. If a university produces students who win those awards, then I believe that it implies the university is succeeding in one of its missions - to produce outstanding researchers. The researchers who win these prizes are usually exceptionally talented at performing research in their field. If they are employed at a university, then I believe it is safe to assume that they are contributing their talents to research being performed at that university - another of a university's missions.

If American universities are able to produce more award-winning students and can attract more award-winning researchers to work for them, then in my opinion that does make them better universities. Yes, it is probably because they have more money to spend, but I don't see how you could say that if university X was higher in the ranking than university Y that university Y was somehow a better university than X because X is in that position due to its larger spending power.

EGaffney

fluppet wrote: »

Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals are awarded for outstanding contributions to various subjects. If a university produces students who win those awards, then I believe that it implies the university is succeeding in one of its missions - to produce outstanding researchers. The researchers who win these prizes are usually exceptionally talented at performing research in their field. If they are employed at a university, then I believe it is safe to assume that they are contributing their talents to research being performed at that university - another of a university's missions.

If American universities are able to produce more award-winning students and can attract more award-winning researchers to work for them, then in my opinion that does make them better universities. Yes, it is probably because they have more money to spend, but I don't see how you could say that if university X was higher in the ranking than university Y that university Y was somehow a better university than X because X is in that position due to its larger spending power.

As above.

Nobels are nice, but are they really 30% of the contribution of an institution to the state of the art?

fiveone

Top 50 with no library on Sunday? Are you joking me?

Crash

Fields medals are awarded within a small subsection of graduates, within a small age group (that is, under 40) - while its an incredibly good award to recieve, I don't think it deserves such a heavy weighting. While peer review may be skewed, I still believe that citations can be used as an extremely good evaluation of the technical expertise as a paper.

Both of them are essentially flawed, but I still essentially believe that the times review applies more equitable weightings. Thats still just an opinion, and of course you can disagree, but still.

Mark200

lydonst wrote: »

Top 50 with no library on Sunday? Are you joking me?

Maybe that's why we didn't get number 1?

Peslo

I'm a bit unclear on this, but do the take into account the the number of graduates that come out in relation to the amount of funding that is put into the college?? Or is this relevant? Due to it being "the quality of the graduates" or something?

Podge_irl

Going Forward wrote: »

Fields medals are awarded within a small subsection of graduates, within a small age group (that is, under 40) - while its an incredibly good award to recieve, I don't think it deserves such a heavy weighting.

But the age limit aside, it is essentially no different from a Nobel prize, so I don't see why you have a particular issue with the number Fields medal winners being used as a gauge but not the number of Nobel laureates.

Morbert

leninbenjamin wrote: »

I'm just guessing here, but I would imagine it's because of the funding shortfall. Comp science in particular is such a fast moving area that it can be difficult to remain competitive if you can't invest adequately in the hardware/software;

Heh... The Lonsdale supercomputer finally arrived this week. Free mugs and pens for all!

Peslo

Morbert wrote: »

Heh... The Lonsdale supercomputer finally arrived this week. Free mugs and pens for all!

Are you serious??? Where do we get the pens??

Heffo

I wouldn't pay much heed to these tables. There always seems to be a disproportionate favouring of the universities of the same country as that which compiles them (which would be the UK in this case).

And as for LSE being at 66... wtf

EGaffney

Heffo wrote: »

And as for LSE being at 66... wtf

This always happens, and is actually the one biggest reason why I don't buy into these rankings at all.

Thirdfox

Heffo wrote: »

I wouldn't pay much heed to these tables. There always seems to be a disproportionate favouring of the universities of the same country as that which compiles them (which would be the UK in this case).

And as for LSE being at 66... wtf

Lol - but don't your two sentences slightly contradict each other? Or has LSE fallen out of favour with the powers that be at the Times? :P

LSE is a 'focused' university. Therefore it will do badly on a general table.

The University where I am now is also a 'focused' university. Its well known for economics, business and law. It is not well known for, say, physics and didn't do amazing on those tables.

These tables offer a general outlook, but I wouldn't be making my choice based on them.

Peslo

I'm a bit unclear on this, but do the take into account the the number of graduates that come out in relation to the amount of funding that is put into the college?? Or is this relevant? Due to it being "the quality of the graduates" or something?

Crash

See, the issue is how do you judge graduates? you can judge a posgraduate and staff by their paper output throughout the year, patents held, number of times papers have been cited but how do you judge the quality of a graduate?

How do you ensure an institution isnt giving students a free ride to ensure they get higher marks, due to the larger intake/graduate ratio, or various other issues like that?

You really can't judge graduates by any easy metrics, which is why a lot of these concentrate on research.

damienricefan

is UCD 108???????

thats a surprise!

Thirdfox

they've moved up 70 places (I recall them being 178 last year, and out of the top 200 the year before) so congrats to them too.

Winwood

Thirdfox wrote: »

and of course UCD,D (108) - fair deuce to them too.

I was tempted to point out the contradiction in appreciating our ranking while at the same time mocking our name but then I remembered our name really merits it :P

Congrats on breaking 50