For a second consecutive year, most Australian universities improved their overall score in the latest Times Higher Education World University Rankings (THE WUR), released today.
A total of 26 universities improved their scores compared with 28 last year. The largest score gains were recorded by Charles Sturt, Melbourne, Victoria, Griffith, and RMIT Universities.
Melbourne remains Australia’s best university in the 2027 edition, ranked 34; up three places from 37 last year. It is the only one among the world’s top 50.
Five other Australian universities are ranked among the world’s top 100. Sydney moved up to places to 51 from =53 last year, while Monash remained Australia’s third-highest ranked institution despite slipping three places to 61. Queensland rose seven places to 73, followed by UNSW which improved four places to 75. ANU continued its gradual decline, falling to 77, compared with 73 last year and 48 in the 2018 edition.
Rounding out Australia’s top 10, Adelaide made its debut at 133 last year, fell eight places to 141. UTS also declined, dropping seven places from 145 last year to 152. In contrast, Macquarie continued its upward trajectory, climbing to 161, while Western Australia fell 20 places to 173.
Overall, Australia retains 10 universities ranked in the top 200. Another 10 are included among the world’s top 300 (i.e. 201-300 band), five in the top 400 (i.e., 301-400) and six in the 401-500 band. These results demonstrate the homogenisation and lack of institutional diversity in Australia’s higher education system, but also a system that remains stratified.
Unchanged top performers
Over the past ten years, the top research-intensive universities (i.e., Melbourne, Sydney, Monash, Queensland and UNSW) remain largely unaffected in position. It’s worth noting that Sydney improved from 61 in 2018 to 51 and Monash improved from 81 to 61, achieving a peak of 44 in 2023.
In addition to ANU, Western Australia has experienced the largest decline among the Go8, falling from 111 in 2018 to 173 this year. It will be interesting to see the trajectory of these two institutions over the next 2-3 years as the current wave of policy reforms begin to have an impact on all institutions.
Rising and shining
The institutions which have improved substantially over the past ten years, indicating increased competitiveness beyond the sandstone and elite are RMIT, rising from an estimated rank of 460 in 2018 to 239, followed by Swinburne from 419 to 294, Deakin from 335 to 218, Curtin from 397 to 292, Macquarie from 261 to 161, and La Trobe from 392 to 291.
Among Australian universities, RMIT recorded one of the strongest long-term improvements. RMIT rise was almost continuous from 2018 to 2024, breaking into the top 300 in 2023. Despite small declines seen in the following two editions, RMIT reached a new high of 239 in 2027.
In 2018, RMIT ranked behind La Trobe, Curtin, Swinburne, and Newcastle. Now, RMIT has overtaken these institutions, reflecting a significant strengthening of its position within Australia.
It’s also worth pointing out that from this year, THE publishes a specific rank for institutions in the top 300, while institutions ranked outside the top 300 are grouped into bands (e.g. 301-400 and 401-500).
Sunrise institutions
We also observe a notable improvement among smaller and regional universities over the past decade.
Edith Cowan ranked outside the top 500 in 2018 and is now in the 351-375 band, Southern Queensland ranked in the 601-800 band in 2018 and is ranked in the 376-400 band, and Central Queensland ranked outside the top 500 in 2018 and is now ranked in the 376-400 band. These results reflect their increasing international profile and competitiveness.
These results also indicate that improvements in global standing are no longer confined to research-intensive and resource-rich institutions and are being achieved across a broader range of Australian universities.
Performance by pillar
Let’s briefly see how Australian universities performed on a pillar-by-pillar (or category) basis:
- Teaching: 20 institutions increased in score and 17 decreased, compared to last year when 29 institutions increased and 7 decreased.
Performance was largely influenced by the teaching component of the reputation survey, which accounts for 15% of the overall score.
This year, the top improvers were Melbourne, Queensland, Charles Darwin, and Central Queensland. Australia’s best performers on this pillar are Melbourne, Sydney, and ANU.
- Research environment: 36 institutions increased in score and 1 decreased, compared to last year when 17 institutions increased and 19 decreased.
This year’s performance continued to be influenced by a combination of higher scores in per capita measures and the research component of the reputation survey. Adelaide, Griffith, Sydney, Federation, and Melbourne improved the most. Predictably, Australia’s best performers on this pillar are Melbourne, Sydney, and Monash.
- Research quality: 21 institutions increased in score and 16 decreased, compared to last year when 21 institutions increased and 15 decreased.
Performance was largely influenced by the citation impact measure, which makes up 15% of the overall score. Several institutions’ performance rested on the measures of research strength, excellence, and influence.
For a third consecutive year, Charles Sturt continues to improve the most followed by James Cook and Canberra. Australia’s best performers on this pillar are ACU, Monash, UTS, and Swinburne.
- International outlook: 8 institutions increased in score and 29 decreased, compared to last year when 19 institutions increased and 16 decreased.
Once again, year-on-year movement was small, given the already high volume of international students, a high proportion of international academic staff on campus, and academic staff co-publishing with international peers. It will be interesting to see how Australian universities perform over the next year or two given current policy settings.
Institutions which improved the most were Notre Dame and Central Queensland. Australia’s best performers on this pillar are Curtin, Murdoch, Western Australia, and ANU.
- Industry: 27 institutions increased in score and 10 decreased, compared to last year when 26 institutions increased and 10 institutions decreased.
Unsurprisingly, we see institutions improved their performance in both measures of this pillar – patents and industry income per academic staff.
Institutions which improved the most were ACU, Southern Queensland, Sunshine Coast, Tasmania, and James Cook. Australia’s best performers on this pillar are Adelaide, Monash, Queensland, and Melbourne.
Scope for further improvements
This year’s results from the major global rankings present offers a mixed bag for Australian universities.
In the Academic Ranking of World Universities, Australian universities experienced a decline for a third consecutive year, with 19 out of the 29 ranked declining in overall position. Results in the QS WUR were more positive, with 21 Australian universities improving their position and 13 declining.
As I have argued previously, the scope for Australian universities to further improve across global rankings is constrained. This reflects a combination of limited growth in investment in higher education, modest productivity gains, and intensifying competition from leading universities in Asia.
Under these conditions, opportunities for further improvement are limited, leaving universities to pursue incremental improvements rather than transformative gains in global rankings performance.
Rising participation
Over the past ten editions, the number of universities ranked globally has expanded considerably, with the number of ranked institutions more than doubling from 1,103 in 2018 to 2,297 this year.
While the geographical coverage of the rankings has broadened to 118 countries and territories, Australia’s representation has remained unchanged at 37.
The United States remains the most represented country, with 168 universities, ahead of India (143), Turkey (124), Japan (112), and the United Kingdom (110). This highlights the growing depth and diversity of global participation in international rankings.
However, broader participation does not necessarily translate into strong performance at the very top of the rankings. The United States continues to dominate the top 100, with 37 universities, despite a decline from 43 in 2018. It is followed by the United Kingdom with 11, then China with 8, Germany with seen and Australia with 6. Overall, 17 countries are represented in the world’s top 100, compared with 16 in 2018, suggesting a modest broadening of excellence among leading higher education systems.
Focus on research quality and integrity
Global rankings primarily reward universities for their research output and impact, thereby amplifying the importance of research endeavours more than teaching and learning.
Research endeavours account for two-thirds of THE’s overall score, and THE’s pillar of research quality is greatly focused on citation impact. Over the years, this pillar has been subject to extensive scrutiny, largely due to concerns that is has become increasingly gamified.
Methodological changes introduced in 2024 went someway to addressing these concerns. THE lessened the reliance of the Field Weight Citation Impact by introducing three additional metrics (research strength, research excellence and research influence).
There are growing concerns about research quality and integrity, including increasing numbers of retractions, the expanding use of artificial intelligence in research and publishing, and the emergence of highly prolific authors whose publication output may warrant closer scrutiny. Strengthening research integrity will require clearer ethical guidelines, greater transparency in research practices, and effective monitoring and oversight mechanisms to ensure accountability and maintain public trust in the research enterprise.
Whilst concerns about research integrity are often associated with low and middle-income countries, where quality assurance systems and research governance frameworks may still be developing, such issues are increasingly evident in high-income economies as well.
The ongoing pressure to publish, secure research funding, and demonstrate academic impact has contributed to questionable research practices, including publication misconduct, excessive authorship, and compromised research standards.
These challenges highlight the need for robust research integrity frameworks, effective oversight mechanisms, and a research culture that prioritises quality, transparency, and ethical conduct over publication volume.
It may be necessary for global rankers to introduce greater scrutiny on unscrupulous research practices and even introducing metrics to preserve integrity and ethical practices all around the world.
Angel Calderon is Director of Strategic Insights at RMIT University.