McGill climbs Shanghai rankings

McGill ranks 70th out of 2,500 universities worldwide by the Academic Ranking of World Universities

McGill has moved up the ladder in the annual Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), with the University jumping from 73rd in 2022, to 70th this year. The rankings were released by the Center for World-Class Universities of Shanghai Jiao Tong University on August 15.

ARWU uses several academic or research performance indicators to rate world universities, including the number of alumni and staff winning major prizes; the number of highly cited researchers; the number of articles published in journals of Nature and Science; papers indexed in major citation indices; and the per capita academic performance of an institution.

Once again, McGill was particularly strong in the Quality of Education category, which calculates the number of alumni who have won Nobel Prizes or Field Prizes. The University ranked first among Canadian institutions in this indicator.

McGill’s strong performance in the Shanghai rankings comes on the heels of a positive result in the QS World University Rankings 2024 in which the University cracked the global top 30.

Consult the Academic Rankings of World Universities 2023

25 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sunny
9 months ago

Happy to see McGill climbing up but realistically speaking, this is not something to be proud of. Don’t forget that you were somewhere in top 15-20 ahead from both UofT and UBC and some Ivy Leagues couple of years back and now continuously declining in World Rankings. We need to do some real soul searching on it.

Val
9 months ago
Reply to  Sunny

All these university rankings are complete BS. An education is what you make of it. Always keep in mind who is financing these studies and try to figure what their motives are…Particularly any data coming out of China should be viewed with a high degree of suspicion.

Vijay Aivalli
9 months ago
Reply to  Val

45% of QS ranking is for “perception”. LoL. And top 3 have remained there forever….as if they don’t go down at all. I agree there’s little substance in ranking.

Anita Shannon
9 months ago

It’s sad to see McGill only ranking at #70 of the pile, with American, British, Chinese, and other European universities all lording it over here and in any global ranking. Canada always ends up with only 3 top universities at most. And U of Toronto outdid McGill again here and other rankings. So did UBC ranking at #44. Poor McGill.

Jack
9 months ago
Reply to  Anita Shannon

McGill: highly recognized in the US. U of T: nope or meh or “what is a U of T”.

Alex
9 months ago
Reply to  Jack

Fake. Nobody on the West Coast knows McGill

Deborah Myerson
9 months ago

I am sad to see McGill at the bottom of the pile at #70, well below manyU.S., British, Chinese and other European universities not just in this ARWU ranking but even in the other major rankings (QS, Times Higher Ed, US News & World Report, etc.). And always beaten by the University of Toronto.

Jimmy
9 months ago

“Bottom of the pile”? Really? 70th out of 2,500. That puts McGill in the top 2.8% of the world. When was the last time you were top 2.8% in the world in anything?

Deborah Myerson
9 months ago
Reply to  Jimmy

I will never take pride in just being in the 70th spot as Canada’s no. 3 school, way below so many American, Chinese, British, Singaporean, French and other universities. After the first 100 universities, there is really not much point to ranking, that is why ARWU groups them into 50 or 100 (in other rankings), such as “next 101-150” or 101-200. That is because if you pride yourself being in the top 4% or 5% or more of the 2500 universities in the world, then your company will be the likes of the Southeast University, University of Sao Paulo, Soochow… Read more »

Mario Lancer
9 months ago

True. And part of the reason many people treat McGill as a joke is because it is not selective at all. Whereas Harvard, Yale, Stanford, and other top U.S. schools admit less than 5% or 6% of freshman applicants, McGill accepts a whooping 50% of all their freshman applicants. So who will respect McGill?

John Moore
9 months ago
Reply to  Mario Lancer

50% seems very high

Mario Lancer
9 months ago
Reply to  John Moore

Yes, correct (see their website).. 50% of freshman applicants accepted by McGill is so very high. That’s practically everyone. That’s practically begging for students. No wonder McGill standards are low compared to the top U.S., British, Chinese, and other universities. Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, etc. accept around 5%.

Benjamin Locke
9 months ago
Reply to  John Moore

I just checked it. And that is about right. 40-50% is how many freshmen applicants McGill accepts. In contrast, top US schools admit around 5% of freshmen applicants.

Henderson
9 months ago
Reply to  Benjamin Locke

Here we go again. This ‘exclusivity debate’ is a favourite among McGill bashers. Unfortunately, rather than dig deeper to figure out why there is this discrepancy, they holler from the rooftops how McGill “let’s in everyone” Do your research people. It will make you more informed. For the whole selectivity/admissions issue. Yes, the numbers are there. Harvard accepts something like 4% of the people who apply — and the acceptance rates of these other elite US universities are similar. And, yes, McGill accepts, around 46%. But, had you dug deeper, you would have seen that UofT accepts 43%, UBC is… Read more »

Benjamin Locke
9 months ago
Reply to  Henderson

Henderson, as McGill’s apologist, wants people to imagine (because they simply won’t believe it) that McGill is just as good as, and totally at par with, Harvard relative to the quality of its students. Even the Joker in Batman will simply say: “Yeah, go tell that to the Marines.” Henderson’s first defense is to say that all the major Canadian schools accept 50% or more of their freshman applicants. The answer is: “Who cares?” No one is comparing McGill to other Canadians relative to freshman admissions and non-selectivity. His other defense is that because McGill (and presumably these other Canadian… Read more »

Henderson
9 months ago
Reply to  Benjamin Locke

Ben, for a person who does this so often, you figure you’d be better at it. Fact is, you really aren’t very good at debating. Once again, you deflect. Once again, you put words in my mouth. Show me exactly where I said that McGill “is just as good as, and totally at par with harvard…” You can’t because I have never said it. Once again, you are just making stuff up. Harvard is a better school than McGill. A better school than U of T. A better school than Oxford. A better school than MIT. What’s your point? Why… Read more »

Henderson
9 months ago
Reply to  Benjamin Locke

All I did was shoot down that somehow the 50% admissions thing was unique to McGill when, as I proved, it is a Canadian university thing. You were wrong. Again.

Benjamin Locke
9 months ago
Reply to  Henderson

Henderson, here you are again. No one ever said that the 50% freshman admission rate is unique to McGill. “Show me exactly where I or any one in this thread ever said that. You can’t, because no one ever said it. Once again, you are just making stuff up.” What several (not just me) of us is saying here is that McGill is not selective enough unlike other schools, and that a grades-only criteria does not stand the test of selectivity for reasons already explained to you above. No one (not even I) said that you claimed McGill can ever… Read more »

Henderson
9 months ago
Reply to  Benjamin Locke

“If you can read, I said that by comparing and contrasting Harvard to McGill, you want us to imagine that they are at par “RELATIVE TO THE QUALITY OF STUDENTS.”’ Well, your reading skills are, as usual, in doubt as well. In no way was I trying to get you to ‘imagine’ Harvard and McGill are a a par in any way. Again, show me where I said that. Please. I was merely pointing out to you, and a number of other commenters in this thread that McGill’s admissions rate is similar to other Canadian universities. And that the discrepancy… Read more »

Benjamin Locke
9 months ago
Reply to  Henderson

To settle this matter once and for all, let me recap what people here (including me) have consistently pointed out: Saying the obvious (that McGill’s very high admission rate is similar to other Canadian universities) just proves our (my and others here) point that McGill (add in the other Canadian universities) criteria is not selective at all, if 50%-70% is their selectivity rate (i.e., the number of students admitted relative to those who applied). If your argument is based on the theory that a 50-70% admissions or selectivity rate is due to clear, straightforward, high school grades-only criteria, then McGill… Read more »

John Moore
9 months ago

Univesity of BC is ranked 40th in 2023?

Mario Lancer
9 months ago
Reply to  John Moore

Way higher than McGill.

Benjamin Locke
9 months ago
Reply to  John Moore

Yes!

Helen I. Williams
9 months ago

I think the bottom line here is that McGill is very unselective which is why it has a high admission rate. As has been said in the many comments below, McGill only relies on high school grades in determining admission decisions, in sharp contrast to the elite U.S. universities that use standardized tests, count in leadership and community involvement, give credit to sports and performing arts, student personal qualities, etc. The problem with using only high school grades is that it is too often vulnerable to artificial priming, meaning the required grade for admission to McGill will benefit more of… Read more »

Alina Novales
9 months ago

Well said, Helen. Lucid and to the point. I agree 100%. And I hope McGill will reverse their admissions system so that it is not (inflated)grade dependent 100%.