A new approach to faculty areas...

So our fact files for the QS World University Rankings® 2013/2014 went out last week.

We've been trying to improve our distribution lists, but may not have got all the way there, so if you haven;t received your results for this year and you need them, please do get in touch.

The questions have started flowing and one of the most frequently asked has so far been to do with some substantial movements in our faculty area tables. The tables we produce in five broad faculty areas represent our first attempt to compare the quality of global universities on a subject basis and they have been published alongside the main results since 2004. From that time until 2012 they have been based purely on the results from an isolated subset of our Global Academic Survey. Since 2011, however, we have been producing rankings at a narrower discipline drawing on a broader range of indicators and these faculty area tables have become somewhat incongruous.

So, this year we've fixed that.

The faculty areas have now been updated to operate on the same principles and methodology as for the QS World University Rankings by Subject.

Like the narrower subject fields the indicators are weighted according based on their completeness and appropriateness to the area, with research metrics carrying less weight in Arts & Humanities:

Faculty AreaAcademicEmployerCitationsHArts & Humanities60%20%10%10%Engineering & Technology40%30%15%15%Life Sciences & Medicine40%10%25%25%Natural Sciences40%20%20%20%Social Sciences & Management50%30%10%10%