Missing Your School?
Why 35 universities did not join

When the inaugural Asiaweek list of the region's best universities was published in 1997, one reader who felt his school should have been ranked higher sneered: "Anyone can come up with results they want. Just send letters to universities, tell them to answer your questionnaire, run the numbers through a spreadsheet program like Excel, and then you have a so-called survey." Ah, if only it were that simple. To begin with, it's not a matter of having university officials just fill in a questionnaire. You must first convince them that the study is fair and really measures academic excellence. This year, 114 of the 149 nominated Asian universities answered the questionnaire sent them - a response rate of 76.5% (1998: 65.4%). But 35 schools (the ones on the list below) did not participate.   >>more

N O  S H O W S  CHINA Beijing Institute of Technology Dalian University of Technology East China University of Science and Technology Fudan University Harbin University of Science and Technology Jilin University Nanjing University Nankai University Peking University People's University of China Shandong University Sichuan Union University Tianjin University Tsinghua University University of Electronic Science and Technology of China Wuhan University Xi'an Jiaotong University Zhejiang University Zhongshan (Sun Yat-sen) University   INDIA Aligarh Muslim University Banaras Hindu University Birla Institute of Technology and Science (sent incomplete data) Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur M.S. University of Baroda University of Bombay (Mumbai) University of Calcutta University of Madras   JAPAN University of Tokyo   MALAYSIA International Islamic University Mara Institute of Technology (ITM)   NEW ZEALAND Massey University   PAKISTAN Quaid-i-Azam University University of Karachi   TAIWAN Kaohsiung Institute of Technology Tatung Institute of Technology

(continued)


More than half of the holdouts - 19 schools - come from China. And there is one decliner from Japan: the venerable University of Tokyo, which topped the survey in 1997 and 1998. Most of the 15 other universities did not respond to a barrage of letters, faxes and phone calls. Three of them did tell us why they were not participating. Massey University in New Zealand is engaged in a major restructuring exercise. Kaohsiung Institute of Technology in Taiwan started its undergraduate programs only in 1997. Among other things, Malaysia's International Islamic University objects to what it considers over-emphasis on funding, which it says "does not necessarily reflect the strength and quality of academic programs." Spending on teachers and facilities accounts for 17% of the total score.

Politics may be a reason for the non-participation of the 19 mainland Chinese universities. Last year, a number of them said they were told not to join the study. Yan Li, an official of the Ministry of Education's Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan office, asked us: "How can you list National Taiwan University without stating that Taiwan is part of China?" For the 1999 survey, Asiaweek decided to drop the word "National" from the titles of both mainland and Taiwan schools. We received a letter from Liu Jianfeng, vice-director of the Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan office of the ministry, welcoming the move. Later, he said it was up to the schools concerned to decide whether to participate or not.

Eight mainland institutions did join. One of the schools, Shanghai's Tongji University (which ranked No. 28 in 1998 and No. 30 this year), strongly urged participation. In an article for a university periodical that was later excerpted by the education ministry's Chinese Higher Education journal, Tongji professors Zhang Renbiao and Fan Xiudi wrote: "We should not be afraid to admit our backwardness. We should only worry about our inability to recognize existing problems. Staying outside global 'rules of the game' and admiring oneself is not conducive to the development of China's higher education in the era of globalization."

But some universities may not be swayed. "Under no circumstances should Hong Kong universities be ranked ahead of Peking University," complains an official of that school. "Everyone is clear in their hearts about this." Says another professor: "Your first survey [in 1997] had us behind two Hong Kong universities, not to mention National University of Singapore and an Australian university. There is no way we're behind them in terms of reputation, teaching, research and quality of students." What tipped the balance against Peking University at that time was the poor pay of its faculty members and its inadequate research and overall budgets. The central government has started extending more financial support under its 21st Century Plan on education.

In a thoughtful letter, the University of Tokyo explained its rationale for not participating. "The quality [of our] education and research cannot be compared with that of other universities," Hasumi Shigehiko wrote us. "Such characteristics are profoundly individual and extremely difficult to quantify." He became university president last year, as the 1998 Asiaweek survey was in its final stages. "My skepticism is not the sort that can be erased by any technical modifications in statistical methods," says Hasumi. "The university's position on this matter will not waver as long as I am president." Fortunately for us and our readers, more and more universities every year want to be included in our survey, seeing in it a way to benchmark themselves against the best of their peers. As long as our annual survey is helping the cause of higher education in Asia, our determination to continue it will not waver either.