Korea chases global top 100, but world's leading universities take different paths

Global university rankings are changing to emphasize graduate employment, international research collaboration and social impact, challenging Korean universities seeking to enter the top 100 to build on their strengths rather than chase individual indicators. QS and Times Higher Education say rankings should inform, not dictate, institutional strategy. LSE, NTU and NUS illustrate approaches centered on academic focus, complementary partnerships and teaching. Korean universities have strong research productivity, patents and industry funding, but questions have arisen over whether some ranking gains reflect substantive collaboration.

QS introduced an indicator in its 2024 rankings, released in June 2023, measuring the breadth of universities’ international research networks.

Times Higher Education introduced indicators for patents and research influence in 2023 and is considering new measures of research integrity.

International co-authored research output at one Seoul university rose by about 51 percent over two years, prompting questions about whether some visiting appointments were intended to boost ranking metrics.

LSE is exploring joint degree programs with STEM-focused institutions while maintaining its specialization in social sciences.

NTU President Ho Teck Hua said the 35-year-old university operates like a startup and builds its deepest partnerships with institutions whose strengths complement its own.

Published Oct 28, 2026 7:00 am KST

QS, THE caution against ranking-driven strategies, urge schools to build on distinct strengths

An image generated by ChatGPT

This is the last in a three-part series examining how universities worldwide are adapting to the AI era and redefining their roles amid rapid technological change. Drawing on the experiences of leading global institutions and insights from international experts, the series explores what these changes mean for the future of Korean higher education and its global competitiveness. The series is supported by the Korea Press Foundation's Press Promotion Fund.

SINGAPORE, LONDON, SEOUL — Breaking into the world’s top 100 has become a common ambition among Korean universities.

However, the world’s leading university ranking agencies have a surprising response for institutions chasing higher positions: Stop chasing the rankings.

"The dog should wag the tail, the tail should not wag the dog," said Phil Baty, chief global affairs officer at Times Higher Education (THE), cautioning universities against allowing rankings to dictate their priorities.

"Rankings should inform university strategy and decision-making, not drive them."

Ben Sowter, senior vice president at QS, raised a similar concern, warning that universities risk losing their competitive edge if they all pursue similar strategies.

“The important thing is that you build a really nuanced strategy where you don’t have a whole group of universities trying to do exactly the same thing as each other,” he said. “In that context you end up competing with yourselves rather than necessarily distinguishing yourselves internationally.”

Global university rankings are evolving to reflect changing expectations of higher education, from helping graduates are able to find jobs to fostering international collaboration and creating social impact. But as the criteria continue to shift, simply adapting to each new indicator is no substitute for developing a clear institutional strategy built around a university's strengths.

QS has placed greater weight on graduate employment outcomes, reflecting growing expectations that universities prepare students for careers beyond graduation.

"Students want to know now not just that they're at a university with a great reputation, but that it is preparing them with the experience that they're going to need in the job market," said Jessica Turner, CEO of QS.

In its 2024 rankings, released in June 2023, QS also introduced an indicator measuring the breadth of universities’ international research networks, shifting attention beyond the volume of research publications.

THE has also broadened its assessment of university performance, introducing indicators measuring patents and research influence in 2023, while considering new measures of research integrity.

Baty said the changes reflect growing expectations that universities demonstrate their utility beyond academia.

"You can't really be a world-class university unless you're actually showing that you're having a real economic and social impact on the world," he said.

QS headquarters in London, June 17 / Korea Times photo by Jung Da-hyun

Strong performance, growing scrutiny

Korean universities have already demonstrated considerable strength in global competition. According to THE, the country's leading institutions outperform the world's top 500 universities in research productivity, patents and industry funding.

QS also described the presence of seven Korean universities among the world’s top 200 as a “spectacular achievement.”

However, efforts to improve their performance in the rankings have also raised questions about whether gains in certain indicators reflect genuine academic progress.

In March, two leading universities in Seoul came under scrutiny over allegations that they had recruited prominent overseas researchers primarily to boost their global rankings, despite limited substantive academic collaboration.

At one institution, international co-authored research output surged by about 51 percent over two years, raising questions about whether some visiting appointments were intended to inflate research metrics rather than foster genuine partnerships.

Korean universities, however, argue that rigid regulations on joint appointments and multiple institutional affiliations limit their ability to compete globally, prompting them to seek more flexible arrangements with overseas researchers.

They maintain that such arrangements are essential to fostering international collaboration and overcoming institutional constraints, particularly in fields requiring specialized facilities and expertise.

Students at the National University of Singapore (NUS) conduct an experiment exploring how AI and the Internet of Things can help reduce energy waste in buildings, as part of a project supported by NUS Enterprise, Aug. 14. Korea Times photo by Shim Hyun-chul

Competing beyond rankings

Many leading universities abroad, meanwhile, have taken a different approach. Rather than shaping themselves around ranking indicators, they build on what they already do best.

At the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), President Larry Kramer said the university would not change its academic priorities simply to improve its ranking position.

Specializing in social sciences, LSE has resisted expanding into engineering and other technology-focused disciplines despite their growing prominence in higher education. Instead, it is exploring joint degree programs with STEM-focused institutions to combine complementary strengths.

Kramer argued that the rise of AI could make social sciences even more relevant, as many of the technology's broader implications involve social and economic questions rather than technical challenges alone.

"I'm not going to change the program of education just because the ranking wants to emphasize A over B," he said.

Nanyang Technological University (NTU) in Singapore, founded just 35 years ago, has turned its youth into an advantage.

President Ho Teck Hua said NTU operates like a startup, moving faster than older institutions. It also chooses partners deliberately, collaborating with institutions across the United States, Europe, China and the rest of Asia, and building its deepest ties only with partners whose strengths complement its own.

At the National University of Singapore (NUS), President Tan Eng Chye said much of what the university invests in — particularly teaching — never counts toward rankings.

“Many of these things that we do actually do not count towards the rankings, but yet it’s the mission of our universities,” he said.

In Singapore, the government places greater emphasis on practical outcomes than university rankings, particularly when it comes to graduates' employment prospects.

Students walk through the halls of the business school at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, Aug. 13. Korea Times photo by Shim Hyun-chul

Rankings as tools, not targets

Still, university leaders acknowledged that rankings remain influential in attracting students and building international partnerships.

"We obviously can't ignore the rankings," Kramer said, adding that LSE pursues improvements as long as they don't require the university to sell its soul.

Universities UK, an association representing British universities, similarly described rankings as a useful measure of institutional progress while cautioning against allowing them to dictate strategies.

Ranking agencies emphasized that rankings should serve as benchmarking tools, allowing universities to compare their performance with global peers and identify areas for improvement, rather a rule for steering institutional futures.

For Korean universities aspiring to enter the world's top 100, the distinction is increasingly important. Rather than tailoring their priorities to individual ranking indicators, universities face the challenge of using those assessments to strengthen their existing capabilities and develop competitive advantages that set them apart internationally and at home.

全球大学排名正在发生变化，更加注重毕业生就业、国际研究合作和社会影响力，这促使韩国大学力争跻身世界前100强，并要求它们发挥自身优势，而非一味追求单一指标。QS和泰晤士高等教育指出，排名应为院校战略提供参考，而非决定其走向。伦敦政治经济学院（LSE）、南洋理工大学（NTU）和新加坡国立大学（NUS）的战略以学术重点、互补型合作和教学为核心。韩国大学在科研产出、专利和产业资助方面实力雄厚，但人们不禁质疑，排名的提升是否真正反映了实质性的合作。

QS 在其 2024 年排名中引入了一项指标（于 2023 年 6 月发布），用于衡量大学国际研究网络的广度。

《泰晤士高等教育》于 2023 年推出了专利和研究影响力指标，并正在考虑新的研究诚信衡量标准。

首尔某大学的国际合作研究成果在两年内增长了约 51%，这引发了人们对一些访问学者聘任是否旨在提升排名指标的质疑。

伦敦政治经济学院正在探索与专注于 STEM 领域的院校开展联合学位项目，同时保持其在社会科学领域的专长。

南洋理工大学校长何德华表示，这所拥有35年历史的大学像一家初创公司一样运作，并与那些优势与其互补的机构建立最深入的合作关系。

发布于2026年10月28日 上午7:00（韩国标准时间）

QS对以排名为导向的策略持谨慎态度，并敦促学校发挥自身独特优势。

由 ChatGPT 生成的图像

这是探讨全球高校如何适应人工智能时代并在快速技术变革中重新定义自身角色的三篇系列文章的最后一篇。该系列文章借鉴了全球顶尖院校的经验和国际专家的见解，探讨了这些变革对韩国高等教育的未来及其全球竞争力意味着什么。该系列文章由韩国新闻基金会新闻推广基金资助。

新加坡、伦敦、首尔——跻身世界前100强已成为韩国大学的共同目标。

然而，世界领先的大学排名机构对追求更高排名的院校给出了一个令人惊讶的回应：停止追求排名。

“应该让狗摇尾巴，而不是让尾巴摇狗，”《泰晤士高等教育》(THE) 首席全球事务官菲尔·巴蒂 (Phil Baty) 说，他告诫各大学不要让排名左右其优先事项。

“排名应该为大学的战略和决策提供参考，而不是左右决策。”

QS高级副总裁Ben Sowter也提出了类似的担忧，他警告说，如果所有大学都采取类似的策略，就有可能失去竞争优势。

他说：“重要的是要制定一个真正细致入微的战略，避免所有大学都试图做完全相同的事情。那样的话，最终你们会陷入内部竞争，而不是在国际上脱颖而出。”

全球大学排名正在不断发展，以反映人们对高等教育不断变化的期望，从帮助毕业生找到工作到促进国际合作和创造社会影响。但随着评判标准的不断变化，仅仅适应每一项新指标并不能取代围绕大学优势制定清晰的机构战略。

QS更加重视毕业生的就业成果，这反映出人们越来越期望大学能够为学生毕业后的职业生涯做好准备。

QS首席执行官杰西卡·特纳表示：“学生们现在不仅想知道他们就读的大学是否享有盛誉，还想知道这所大学是否能为他们提供在就业市场中所需的经验。”

QS 在 2023 年 6 月发布的 2024 年排名中还引入了一个指标，用于衡量大学国际研究网络的广度，从而将关注点从研究出版物的数量转移到了更广泛的领域。

《泰晤士高等教育》也扩大了对大学表现的评估范围，于 2023 年引入了衡量专利和研究影响力的指标，同时考虑新的研究诚信衡量标准。

巴蒂表示，这些变化反映出人们越来越期望大学能够证明其在学术界之外的实用性。

他说：“除非你真正展现出你对世界产生了真正的经济和社会影响，否则你不可能真正成为世界一流大学。”

6月17日，QS伦敦总部 / 韩国时报 郑多贤摄

表现强劲，但审查日益严格

韩国大学已在全球竞争中展现出相当的实力。据泰晤士高等教育（THE）报道，韩国顶尖大学在科研产出、专利数量和产业资助方面均优于世界排名前500的大学。

QS还将七所韩国大学跻身世界前200强描述为“一项了不起的成就”。

然而，为提高排名表现所做的努力也引发了人们的质疑，即某些指标的提升是否反映了真正的学术进步。

今年三月，首尔两所顶尖大学因被指控主要为了提升全球排名而招募海外知名研究人员，尽管实质性学术合作有限，而受到审查。

在一所机构中，国际合作研究成果在两年内激增了约 51%，这引发了人们的质疑：一些访问学者的聘任是否是为了虚增研究指标，而不是为了促进真正的合作。

然而，韩国大学认为，对联合聘任和多机构隶属关系的严格规定限制了它们在全球竞争的能力，促使它们寻求与海外研究人员达成更灵活的安排。

他们认为，此类安排对于促进国际合作和克服体制限制至关重要，尤其是在需要专门设施和专业知识的领域。

8月14日，新加坡国立大学（NUS）的学生在NUS Enterprise支持的一个项目下，开展了一项实验，探索人工智能和物联网如何帮助减少建筑物的能源浪费。韩国时报摄影师沈铉哲（Shim Hyun-chul）摄。

超越排名的竞争

与此同时，国外许多顶尖大学采取了不同的策略。它们并没有围绕排名指标来调整自身，而是发挥自身优势。

伦敦政治经济学院（LSE）校长拉里·克莱默表示，该大学不会为了提高排名而改变其学术重点。

伦敦政治经济学院（LSE）以社会科学为专长，尽管工程和其他技术类学科在高等教育中日益重要，但它一直抵制向这些领域扩张。相反，LSE正在探索与STEM（科学、技术、工程和数学）院校开展联合学位项目，以结合双方优势。

克雷默认为，人工智能的兴起可能会使社会科学变得更加重要，因为这项技术的许多更广泛影响都涉及社会和经济问题，而不仅仅是技术挑战。

“我不会因为排名偏向A级而改变教育计划，”他说。

新加坡南洋理工大学（NTU）成立于35年前，已将其年轻优势转化为实际优势。

何德华校长表示，南洋理工大学的运作方式如同初创企业，发展速度远超老牌院校。南洋理工大学在选择合作伙伴方面也十分谨慎，与美国、欧洲、中国以及亚洲其他地区的院校开展合作，并且只与那些优势互补的合作伙伴建立最紧密的联系。

新加坡国立大学校长陈永财表示，该大学的大部分投资——尤其是教学——都与排名无关。

他说：“我们所做的很多事情实际上并不计入排名，但这却是我们大学的使命。”

在新加坡，政府更注重实际成果而非大学排名，尤其是在毕业生就业前景方面。

8月13日，学生们走过新加坡南洋理工大学商学院的走廊。（韩国时报 沈铉哲 摄）

排名是工具，而非目标

不过，大学领导也承认，排名在吸引学生和建立国际合作关系方面仍然具有影响力。

“我们显然不能忽视排名，”克雷默说，并补充说，只要不让伦敦政治经济学院出卖其灵魂，它就会追求进步。

英国大学协会（Universities UK）是代表英国大学的组织，该协会也认为排名是衡量机构进步的有用指标，但同时告诫不要让排名左右战略。

排名机构强调，排名应该作为基准工具，让大学能够将自己的表现与全球同行进行比较，并找出需要改进的领域，而不是指导机构未来发展的规则。

对于渴望跻身世界前100强的韩国大学而言，这一地位的重要性日益凸显。大学面临的挑战不再是仅仅根据个别排名指标来调整发展重点，而是要利用这些评估结果来强化自身现有能力，并打造在国际和国内市场都脱颖而出的竞争优势。