Jindal GU Sonepat hacks into lower reaches of QS world college rankings in benchmarking drive (though methodology a bit hazy)

JGU makes it into top 1000 QS rankings (but apparently on just 2 criteria)
JGU makes it into top 1000 QS rankings (but apparently on just 2 criteria)

Alongside 22 other Indian Universities, Jindal Global University (JGU), the parent institution of the JGLS Sonepat law school, has been ranked by UK-based academic careers counselling company Quacquarelli Symonds (QS), in its annual top 1000 global university rankings.

However, the methodology and access to QS remains somewhat hazy, at least so far as provided on its website (we have reached out to QS for comment), and is very amenable to ‘rank hacking’ by enterprising institutions.

JGU founding vice chancellor Prof Raj Kumar said in a press release: “This is an extraordinary international recognition for a university which is barely a decade old. Our commitment to maintaining the highest standards of excellence since our founding has helped us achieve this distinction.”

He added: “In September 2017, we first broke into the QS BRICS University Rankings. We then set up the Office of Rankings, Benchmarking and Institutional Transformation (ORBIT) under the leadership of Prof. (Dr.) Ashish Bharadwaj (Dean, Jindal School of Banking and Finance) and Prof. Arjya B. Majumdar (Director, Office of Academic Planning, Inter-disciplinarity and Coordination) to analyse the methodologies of rankings. In 2018, we broke into the QS Asia University Rankings and have continued to show exemplary performance this year by breaking into QS world top 800. We will dedicate ourselves to the efforts to build a world class university.”

Who goes into a ranking?

JGU’s new benchmarking office seems to have yielded results, despite according to JGU’s press release, “historically, university rankings have favoured universities that are oriented towards Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics (STEM) disciplines and Medicine”. According to its statement, “JGU is the only Indian university to challenge this tradition solely focusing on social sciences, arts, humanities and professions such as law, business administration and architecture”.

That advantage for science-y institutions does seem to be the case in the QS rankings, somewhat.

The highest-ranked Indian universities in those rankings are IIT Bombay, IIT Delhi and Indian Institute of Science, in the top 200 (see table below).

Indian institutions ranked from 200 to 500 are: the IITs Madras, Kharagpur, Kanpur, Roorkee and Guwahati, as well as University of Delhi in 474 (we have excerpted the data going into Delhi University’s rankings, by way of example, on the right).

Delhi University QS scores
Delhi University QS scores

However, after the 500s ranks, the transparency of the rankings seem to break down slightly, purely according to the data supplied on QS’ website.

In 651-700, is Jadavpur University, whose only “ranking criteria”, according to QS, was a rating of 43.4 in citations per faculty, which is one of the six ranking criteria amongst:

  • Academic Reputation (making up 40% of the total ranking),
  • Employer Reputation (10%),
  • Faculty/Student Ratio (20%),
  • Citations per faculty (20%),
  • International Faculty Ratio (5%), and
  • International Student Ratio (5%).

Same story for other Indian universities in the lower ranks: Manipal Academy of Higher Education has one single ranking criteria out of six, for a faculty student ratio of 53.3 (and research output - papers published adjusted by size of university - of “high”, though it’s not clear if that factors into the rankings).

In the 750-800 ranks, just ahead of JGU, are Anna University, which only has one data point for “citations per faculty” of 45.3, with a research output of “very high”); and Jamia Milia Islamia, with “faculty student” ratio score of 44.9, and research output of “very high”.

Jindal, however, has two recognised ranking criteria: “faculty student” ratio score of 46, and an “international faculty” score of 40.8 (while its “research output” is “medium” - a lower research output is perhaps also explainable by its humanities focus, versus generally more voluminous science research).

Below JGU, in the 801 to 1000 ranks, are Aligarh Muslim University, Amrita University, Banaras Hindu University, Birla Institute of Technology and Science Pilani, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Thapar Institute of Engineering & Technology, University of Calcutta, University of Mumbai, and Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT). None of these have scores in more than two ranking criteria (most, in fact, have only one criteria with a score).

How useful is a low QS ranking?

Therefore, one big question is, how exactly is it possible to judge any of those universities as being in the 1000 best globally, purely on the basis of a one or at most two criteria, such as faculty student ratio or international faculty?

This is slightly puzzling, and does cast a bit of doubt on the worth and quality of those rankings in the lower reaches, beyond merely giving bragging rights to a university that’s on it.

It’s also reasonable enough. Doing thorough research on 1,000 universities globally and trying to authoritatively establish six metrics for each, is an exercise beyond most, even perhaps a 250-staff company such as QS, whose primary business seems to consist of “world tour conferences” (in which MBA candidates meet business schools), and a “QS World Grad School Tour”, which visits 47 cities in 31 countries, “bringing the complete A to Z of postgraduate programs to over 40,000 prospective master’s and PhD students”.

This might explain why “international student ratio”, for instance, is even a factor in those rankings at all: a higher international student ratio would be a useful data point for QS’ main target audience of international students who are looking for a postgraduate law school anywhere, including in India.

And by that metric, JGU is probably one of the best-positioned universities for international post-graduate students in the humanities.

But, QS’ global university rankings is also probably primarily (and understandably) a PR exercise, besides helping it establish connections to global institutions and giving it data so it can advise budding post-grad students.

Outside of perhaps the top ranks, QS does not appear to be very useful in any comparison amongst India institutions inter se, and the rumoured ambitions of some NLUs to get ranked in QS, seem somewhat pointless (unless they are planning to use that to attract more international students, or, for bragging rights).

And according to an FAQ on its website, pureplay law schools probably aren’t eligible for the world rankings anyway: “to be eligible for inclusion in the QS World University Rankings, a university must teach at multiple study levels (i.e. both undergraduate and postgraduate), and conduct work in at least two of five possible faculty areas (arts and humanities; engineering and technology; social sciences and management; natural sciences; life sciences and medicine)”.

QS’ separate top 300 law school rankings may be a different story and could theoretically include Indian law schools; however, the lowest-ranked law schools there from last year were cited with at least six full metrics in their ranking criteria, which likely puts this outside JGU’s current submissions (as well as probably most NLUs’).

We have also reached out to JGU dean Prof Raj Kumar for comment.

We have put some questions to QS via email, asking it to confirm the following:

  • how can a university participate in QS, whether fees are payable, and whether single-subject institutions, such as pureplay law schools, are excluded from the world rankings.
  • How universities can appear in the rankings with only two mentioned data points.

We had sent the first of those questions to QS last year, but had received no response.

QS top-ranked Indian universities (not just law school)

| \# RANK | UNIVERSITY | LOCATION | |---|---|---| | 152 | Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (IITB) | India | | 182 | Indian Institute of Technology Delhi (IITD) | India | | 184 | Indian Institute of Science | India | | 271 | Indian Institute of Technology Madras (IITM) | India | | 281 | Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur (IIT-KGP) | India | | 291 | Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur (IITK) | India | | 383 | Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee (IITR) | India | | 474 | University of Delhi | India | | 491 | Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati (IITG) | India | | 651-700 | Jadavpur University | India | | 701-750 | Manipal Academy of Higher Education | India | | 751-800 | Anna University | India | | 751-800 | Jamia Millia Islamia | India | | 751-800 | O.P. Jindal Global University | India | | 801-1000 | Aligarh Muslim University | India | | 801-1000 | Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham (Amrita University) | India | | 801-1000 | Banaras Hindu University | India | | 801-1000 | Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani | India | | 801-1000 | Savitribai Phule Pune University | India | | 801-1000 | Thapar Institute of Engineering & Technology | India | | 801-1000 | University of Calcutta | India | | 801-1000 | University of Mumbai | India | | 801-1000 | Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT) | India |

Comments

Guest 19 Jun 2019, 08:53
+12 -1
I've a question. Is there any reason why the presence of 'international faculty' is considered to be a factor of excellence for an institution? I don't have anything against the JGLS faculty, I'm sure they are all very good in their own rights. Just a bit bemused about why a university employing an excellent Indian faculty would be lower ranked than one employing an excellent faculty from abroad or even a mediocre faculty from abroad. Since when is nationality of faculty a point of contention in education at all?
Guest 19 Jun 2019, 09:47
+5 -11
Totally agree. This parameter works well for the Harvards and Yales, which hire the best and brightest from all over the world. But not Jindal, as they seem to be manipulating the ranking by hiring Tom, Dick and Harry.
Alias 19 Jun 2019, 20:18
+20 -1
So, out of these Toms, Dicks, and Harrys, 27 are from Cambridge, 25 are from Oxford and 10 are from Harvard. Go figure. Or count.
Guest 19 Jun 2019, 12:55
+3 -9
It's the colonial hangover. We like everything about white skins, from the degrees they impart to the accolades they offer to the abuse they throw at us. Look at people here and everywhere harping about a publication being on a scopus journal or not even before actually reading it. Or a book not being published by OUP before ever laying eyes on it. Most of these 9-month long foreign LLMs these days can be quite easily had if you are able to pay your way through, that's an open secret. Still, show a law teacher having a foreign LLM and many a people would start salivating even before he actually opens his mouth in class.
Guest 19 Jun 2019, 13:19
+16 -0
To some extent true. But as someone with a degree from a notable foreign university, there is a marked difference in quality of education. And academic standards. Sole consideration put on having a degree from a foreign university or publications in a particular journal is riding.
Guest 19 Jun 2019, 14:09
+3 -3
I agree that there is a difference in the quality of teaching at the foreign universities. Not with regard to the quality of evaluation though barring the ones at the very top. Which is why people having availed of very little of what has been imparted in the classroom can still end up having the degree, get back to the country and strut around with that degree. There are of course very good students who have become even better owing to the exposure; this is not a reflection on them.
Alias 19 Jun 2019, 20:19
+12 -0
Do try attending one of our classes. Please do.
Hey 20 Jun 2019, 13:45
+1 -0
Don't be unfair now, Alias. All of us know that quite a few of these people don't teach because of electives and the fact that batches are subdivided for classes. We have sucky guys too (albeit they're on their toes because of feedback).

- Your Senior
Guest 19 Jun 2019, 09:44
+6 -0
[quote]the rumoured ambitions of some NLUs to get ranked in QS, [/quote]

Not a rumour. Rahul Singh said so in this interview that he wants to get NLSIU in the rankings.

http://www.sociolegalreview.com/a-plausible-road-map-to-nlsius-future/
Guest 19 Jun 2019, 11:02
+4 -0
Won't make a difference on the ground, excepting possibly convincing people deciding between JGLS and some of the bottom-ranking NLUs to chose JGLS. Students in India will take NIRF and coaching centre advice more seriously!
No_One 6 Dec 2019, 07:12
+2 -0
Strangely Jindal's QS rank/bracket in Asia and BRICS remain unchanged for 2020. How come they broke into the WUR? Secret sauce?
Guest 6 Dec 2019, 11:46
+5 -0
Yeh paisa bolta hai...
Alias 10 Dec 2019, 04:27
+2 -0
+1
Guest 19 Jun 2019, 11:03
+2 -0
Very good analysis, good job! QS top bracket rankings matter, but not the bottom bracket as it can be hacked.
JSW Steel 19 Jun 2019, 11:24
+3 -10
Yeah. This is what happens when you hire kids who get in just because daddy's got money. The only reason as to why some of the toppers from Jindal get fancy jobs is because of the connections of the promoters of the Jindal group with big firms.
Ghost 20 Jun 2019, 07:59
+11 -1
Weaving conspiracy theories instead of simply acknowledging talent and hard work reveals quite a bit of insecurity. What are your theories on Jindal's performance at moots? Is the "Jindal group" bribing moot court competition judges? Did space-lizards rig the 2017 Willem C. Vis Vienna moot? Let us know!
Friendly Man 20 Jun 2019, 13:41
+6 -2
Ghost is quite right, some JGLS kids are really smart and talented. I think the general bitterness comes from the fact that a lot of the remaining JGLS kids aren't smart or talented, but have access to a lot of opportunities and facilities they squander. Thus the jealousy.
Bleh 28 Jun 2019, 11:01
+4 -0
JGLS alumni, First gen lawyer, zero connections. Have a healthy practice. Your Jindal group did not help me, hard work did, just like everyone else (but then again, I did not join JGLS for the Jindal group). (:
Guest 19 Jun 2019, 11:40
+1 -2
Shashi Tharoor has tweeted about it. But why is he silent on improving NLUs?

https://twitter.com/ShashiTharoor/status/1141262431210967040
Guest 19 Jun 2019, 12:51
+5 -0
He's even had NLU grads working with him. If he didn't open up then, fat chances of him doing it now. He's a bit of a hypocrite like most of his colleagues, albeit more polished.
Alias 19 Jun 2019, 20:21
+2 -0
Yup almost getting to be the UN Secretary General just needs some polish.
WhySoSurprised 18 Jul 2019, 17:44
+1 -0
Tharoor is a good friend of JGLS's VC and of Naveen Jindal (Congress). What's the surprise, I am unable to understand?
Alias 19 Jun 2019, 20:29
+0 -4
Wait. Where is Symbi and Amity? Why arent they on the rankings?
Troll 19 Jun 2019, 20:31
+1 -0
Why are all these universities in your list related to Kiran 'More'?
kianganz 19 Jun 2019, 20:50
+2 -0
Hehe, thanks, have corrected the table (copy paste error)
Guest 1 Jun 2020, 17:39
+1 -0
Bigger than a hack I guess

QS 2019 Rankings | Reporting period: Academic Year 2016-17
Total Faculty reported by GU to QS: ~285
Total faculty reported in the AQAR (NAAC): 234 out of which 26 are others (Probably RAs and SRAs - RAs cannot be reported as faculty as per QS process) | http://iqac.jgu.edu.in/document/aqar_16-17.pdf

QS 2020 Rankings | Reporting period: Academic Year 2017-18
Total Faculty reported by GU to QS: 432 | https://www.topuniversities.com/universities/op-jindal-global-university
Total faculty reported in the AQAR (NAAC): 277 out of which 36 are others (Probably RAs and SRAs - RAs cannot be reported as faculty as per QS process) | http://iqac.jgu.edu.in/document/AQAR_17-18.pdf

AQAR for the academic year 2018-19 is not available on GU's IQAC website. Not so strangely, GU has never participated in NIRF.....maybe beacause one has to disclose actual data for the previous 5 years and also make it public on the University's website.
Guest 19 Jun 2019, 21:06
+2 -2
Kian has burst Jindal's bubble with his analysis! I think the top 200 colleges are truly very good, and the ranking methodology is fair as it looks at resesr h citation, but after that it becomes of no use because you can enter with low research scores.
Guest 19 Jun 2019, 21:10
+3 -0
The JGLS strategy is pretty smart. They found a loophole where you can enter on the basis of just two parameters and that too by jugaad...but you cannot climb above a certain rank, as the article says.
Friendly Man 20 Jun 2019, 13:39
+2 -0
Fantastic journalism, Kian. Really useful piece.
Guest 20 Jun 2019, 22:18
+1 -0
Nice analysis.
Good show 21 Jun 2019, 22:32
+1 -0
Congratulations to all universities in the list and particularly Jindal.

I wish at least one NLU gets into this list some day.

Also, @kian - it's world university rankings called WUR and not college rankings.
Good show 21 Jun 2019, 22:47
+2 -1
Also, based on QS WUR 2020, the best Universities in India with law schools:

IIT KGP (3 year LLB for BTech grads)
DU (3 year)
Jamia
Jindal
AMU
BHU
Pune
Mumbai
Calcutta, and
VIT
Guest 22 Jun 2019, 04:44
+0 -3
Seems so above-board, shiver-me-timbers!
Guest 22 Jun 2019, 05:44
+1 -1
No, this is not correct info. QS law schools ranking has NO India university at all, including the above ones.