SHARE
COPY LINK

EPFL

EPFL named world’s top ‘young’ university once again

Switzerland’s federal technology institute EPFL has been named the world’s leading ‘young university’ for the third year in a row.

EPFL named world’s top ‘young’ university once again
EPFL. Photo: Lausanne Tourism
The Lausanne-based university once again led the list of 200 institutions under 50 years old in the prestigious Times Higher Education (THE) ranking
 
It first took the top spot in 2015 after displacing South Korea’s Postech, which is this year ranked fourth. 
The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology took second this year, with Nanyang Technological University in Singapore in third.
 
After EPFL — Switzerland's only representative in the list — the second highest European institution was Maastricht University in the Netherlands in sixth.
 
Overall the UK is the most represented nation in the ranking with 27 universities, closely followed by Australia with 23. France, Spain, Germany and Italy come next with 16, 15, 11 and 10 institutions respectively.
 
“It is no easy task to appear in the 2017 Young University Rankings, which use the same 13 rigorous and demanding performance indicators as the overall World University Rankings,” said THE editor Phil Baty. 
 
“Institutions must demonstrate high standards of performance across teaching, research, international outlook and knowledge transfer.”
 
In a statement to The Local, Baty pointed out that EPFL had improved its overall score since last year “thanks to higher scores for its teaching environment, research influence (citations) and industry income.”
 
“Switzerland has the highest level of expenditure per university student among OECD countries, reaching more than $25,264, and it spends around 3.1 per cent of its GDP on research and development,” he said.
 
“Meanwhile, unlike other Swiss universities, with the exception of ETH Zurich [EPFL's sister technology institute], EPFL is directly controlled by the federal government, meaning that the university receives greater amounts of funding.”
 
“The summit of the ranking features several young Asian universities that are rapidly improving so it is a great achievement that Switzerland’s EPFL has retained the top spot.”
 
However, he added, since EPFL is nearing its 50th birthday, in a few years time Switzerland may have no representatives on the list.
 
Now in its sixth year, the THE ranking aims to champion the achievements of young institutions that have made a big impact on the world stage “in years rather than centuries,” according to its authors.
 
Although founded in its current form in 1968, EPFL's origins as a centre of learning actually date back far further, to 1853.
 
It was already a respected school under the name Ecole polytechnique universitaire de Lausanne (EPUL) when in the 1960s the authorities in French-speaking Switzerland decided to develop EPUL to rival ETH Zurich in the German-speaking region of the country. 
 
Speaking to The Local last year, EPFL spokesman Lionel Pousaz said the 1968 shake-up “was much more than a simple change of name and owner. The school's missions were redefined, its location changed to a new campus, its ambition set to a much higher aim.”
 
“From EPUL to EPFL there is a clear continuity, but from another point of view one can't deny that today's EPFL really began in 1968.
 
“I am afraid we will have to live forever with a double birth certificate!”
 
The THE top 200 young university rankings 2017 – top ten
 
1. EPFL, Switzerland
 
2. Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong
 
3. Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
 
4. Pohang University of Science and Technology
 
5. Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, South Korea
 
6. Maastricht University, the Netherlands
 
7. City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
 
8. Ulm University, Germany
 
9. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany 
 
9. Scuola Superiore Sant’Ana, Italy
 

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.

RESEARCH

ANALYSIS: Why are Denmark’s politicians criticising university researchers?

The Danish parliament has recently adopted a controversial text asking universities to ensure that "politics is not disguised as science". The Local's contributor Sophie Standen examines why Denmark's politicians are criticising university researchers.

ANALYSIS: Why are Denmark's politicians criticising university researchers?
Populist politicians have singled out courses at Copenhagen Business School (CBS) for following a so-called 'woke' agenda. Photo: Bjarke MacCarthy/CBS

What has happened? 

On the 1st of June, a majority in the Danish parliament adopted a written declaration that aimed to combat ‘excessive activism in certain humanities and social science research environments’.

The initial debate was led by Morten Messerschmidt from the Danish People’s Party (DF) and Henrik Dahl from Liberal Alliance (LA). The declaration was then voted through, with all of the major parties in favour, including the governing Social Democratic party.

What does the controversial declaration say? 

The declaration stated that the Danish parliament expects that university managements will ensure the self-regulation of scientific research, so that ‘politics is not disguised as science’.

However, it also asserted that Danish parliament has no right to determine the method or topic of research in Danish universities, and stressed the importance of free and critical debate in the research community.

Who is upset by it? 

The adoption of this position by Danish parliament has proven extremely controversial for many academics and researchers, with over 3,200 Danish and international researchers signing an open letter denouncing the stance adopted by the Danish government.

The authors of the letter stated that ‘academic freedom is under increasing attack’, and described the developments as ‘highly troubling’.

Furthermore, in another open letter to the Minister for Higher Education and Science, Ane Halsboe-Jørgensen, published in the Politiken newspaper, 262 Danish university researchers complained that they were facing increasing occurrences of personal intimidation and harassment due their research.

What is concerning university researchers and professors? 

Professor Lisa Ann Richey, a professor at Copenhagen Business School, told The Local that the parliament’s move was “illiberal” as “it doesn’t support freedom”. 

Richey, who has been a professor in Denmark for more than 20 years, was one of co-organisers of the open letter, and a co-signatory of the letter published in Politiken.

“I am one of the international recruits who finds the Danish research environment a great place to work,” she said. “We have a strong university system and good research environments. One of the things we are risking here is that reputation, and also the possibility of recruiting internationally.”

She said that in her opinion, academia in Denmark was self-policing due to the exhaustive peer-review process and oversight by university authorities. 

“There are lots of checks and balances within academia, and sometimes it doesn’t seem like that because they [the politicians] have no idea how many evaluations we go through,” she said. “We have peer reviews, student reviews, and university assessments to ensure quality in research.” 

Is there a populist campaign behind the statement? 

Richey complained that long before the parliamentary statement, prominent populist politicians “came out on social media calling out particular courses”. 

“They did this to a course I taught in, saying now even CBS has become part of this ‘woke agenda’,” she complained. “This statement about politics dressed up as science, it’s meant to intimidate. We need university leadership to support us and we need everyone to recognise that this is a threat towards academic freedom and also to make sure that we don’t expose individuals”

Anders Bjarklev, the rector of the Danish Technical University (DTU), and president of the rector’s college for Danish universities, echoed this sentiment. Writing on social media, he has called the position adopted by parliament, ‘an attack on research freedom’. 

“When subjects are singled out by politicians, such as gender studies or post-colonial studies, then academics get worried because much of our funding is from the government,” he told The Local. 

“I am also worried that academics will be scared to take part or publish research in these subjects”.  As rector of DTU, he says he is “not sure what we could do differently”, as academics at the university “always want to ensure the highest quality standard of research”.

What has the government said to defend itself? 

In an interview with the Politiken newspaper, Bjørn Brandenborg, the Social Democrat’s spokesperson for higher education and science, insisted that despite the statement, there was “no general distrust of universities” on the part of the government. 

“The Danish parliament has a right, like all other citizens, to have an opinion on research results”, he continued, while stressing that “the Danish parliament will not become involved in decisions over what is researched in Danish universities”.

In his view, he said, the text voted on by the parliament was “completely unproblematic”, as  “all it says is that universities should take responsibility for the quality of their research”.

This adopted stance by the Danish government has shaken the arms-length principle of trust between Danish research institutions and the Danish government. Many have denounced the politicians who have singled out specific researchers on social media as examples of political activism within research in Denmark.

In a statement to Politiken, the minister responsible for Higher Education and Science in Denmark, Ane Halsboe-Jørgenson, remarked that the 3,241 researchers that had signed the open letter had “reached the wrong conclusion” about the adopted declaration.

She insisted that the Danish government is “fighting for research freedom”, while also remarking that she thinks “we politicians must stay far away from judging individuals and individual research areas”.

What will happen next? 

For Professor Lisa Ann Richey, “now, when major political parties are part of this, making a ‘non-problem’ a problem, then it’s really time that we [academics] have to respond.”

“Our work is important and it is not acceptable behaviour to try and bully individual researchers and to police research environments,” she continued. “This is something that will be moving forward now that universities have spoken out officially”. 

SHOW COMMENTS