Here's link to a BBC website that reports a recent international university league table. Eighteen of the 'top twenty' are in the U.S. and Britain and the other two are in Switzerland. (The full table is much longer than twenty).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-24024767

I don't take such tables at face value, and it seems to me that there are some unacknowledged factors that boost the rankings of some British universities. The notion that Continental Europe has only two universities in the 'top twenty' and that both are Swiss strikes me as very odd indeed.

Before I looked at the last one produced I suspected, correctly, mine was at the very bottom. If anyone wants to guess then go ahead, I'll reveal it but see if it's as predictable as I thought.

Here's a link to brief (spoken) comments on British university league tables by the President and Provost of University College, London (UCL):

http://soundcloud.com/uclsound/ucl-president-and-provost-on/


UCL has very high scores on most tables.

It's a sad fact that 'my' university (the institution at which I work) has a completely unhealthy fixation with international rankings - in particular, the Jiao Tong and the (UK) Times Higher Education ratings. The focus of management is to rise in both of these rankings which in turn will result in higher income (by attracting more and better students). This 'Field of Dreams' hypothesis is at best questionable, if not entirely flawed.

North London, merged with City of London to become London Metropolitan University was propping up the entire British university system. I was so proud... And they were the top plastics department in Britain as well.

The Provost guy talked a lot of sense. What indeed ARE the criteria by which we judge what university is tops? I say this when mine is nearly top , but I still want to know top in what?