‘Not good enough': Uni slide ‘disappointing'
Australian universities have fallen down the international rankings.
However, the prestigious tertiary institutes still leave Australia ranked as the fifth-best nation for higher study.
Released on Thursday, the QS World University Rankings show only Hong Kong, Singapore, Sweden and Switzerland have more top-100 universities than Australia on a relative basis.
The top-ranked University of Melbourne fell from 13th to 19th spot, while the University of NSW, The University of Sydney and ANU also slipped.
Australia has 36 universities in the total list of 1501 THAT QS ranked this year. Nine Australian unis made the top-100, a fifth place result.
federal opposition education spokesman Jonno Duniam, called a slip in the rankings a 'disappointment'.
'The government must take note of our constant slide down the rankings and implement policy and funding solutions to get our universities to where they need to be,' he said.
'It is simply not good enough.'
University Rankings
Analysis of the rankings show 70 per cent of Australian universities have reduced their academic staff-to-student ratio.
'We want education policies that meet the 21st century skills that our economy demands, not just funding injections from which Australian taxpayers cannot see a reasonable return on their investments – not to mention our university students who deserve better,' Mr Duniam said.
The University of NSW fell from 19th to 20th spot in this year's rankings. The University of Sydney came down from 18th to 25th, and ANU slipped from 30th spot to 32nd.
Monash rose one spot to 36th, and the University of Queensland fell two spots to 42nd. UWA held steady at 77th. The unopened Adelaide University debuted in the 82nd spot.
The University of Technology Sydney fell from 88th to 96th. Of Australia's top 15 universities, 13 fell down this year's rankings. Dina Rudick /The Boston Globe / Getty Images Credit: Supplied
The Group of Eight is a combined body representing Australia's top eight universities; chief executive Vicki Thomson said Australia punched above its weight.
'At a time when global collaboration underpinned by quality has never been more important, the ranking result for Australia and in particular the Go8 is impressive,' she said.
'This comes against a backdrop of global uncertainty and mixed messaging from our largest research partner, the United States, which threatens our very capacity to deliver on our mission of education and research.
'And yet despite these headwinds, Australia continues to punch above its weight, ranking fifth overall as the best higher education system in the world.'
The strong showing was testimony to the quality of our universities and academic and research staff, Ms Thomson said.
'That we have two Go8 members ranked in the top 20 and six in the world's top 50 is an outstanding result and must not be taken for granted but rather leveraged in these contested times,' she said.
'Singularly impressive is the debut of the new Adelaide University at 82. This result confirms that Adelaide University will create quality at the scale needed to deliver far-reaching benefits for Australia's research and higher education.'
Adelaide University, set to open in 2026, is an amalgamation of the University of South Australia and The University of Adelaide.
Globally, MIT, Imperial College London, Stanford University, Oxford and Harvard make the top five in that order.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
AU Financial Review
an hour ago
- AU Financial Review
Trump's ‘revenge tax' on super funds, companies may be delayed
Sydney/Washington | Australian companies and superannuation funds in the United States have secured a 12-month reprieve from punitive new taxes that would dramatically increase their costs after Republicans watered down core parts of Donald Trump's so-called 'big beautiful bill'. The Senate Finance Committee and its chairman, Idaho senator Mike Crapo, have moderately eased the potential burden on overseas entities operating or investing in the US, even though lobbyists and tax experts still believe the section 899 law at the centre of their fears is still overwhelmingly negative.
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
Banks bounce on rate cut hopes but investors still wary
Australian shares have continued to trade within a tight range as uncertainty hangs over the Israel-Iran conflict, but interest rate-sensitive stocks have improved on the back of a cooling labour market. The S&P/ASX200 edged down 0.1 point, or zero per cent, to 8,530.9, on Thursday as the broader All Ordinaries lost 9.8 points, or 0.11 per cent, to 8,748.1. Seven of 11 local sectors finished lower, but a surprise drop in employment in May left the door open to a Reserve Bank interest rate cut in July, helping rate-sensitive sectors such as financials, real estate and consumer facing-stocks push higher. The materials sector continued to weigh on the bourse, down 1.7 per cent as lumbering iron ore prices dragged on large cap miners and gold fell to a seven-day low. The Australian dollar is slightly lower against the greenback, buying 64.66 US cents, down from 65.07 US cents on Wednesday at 5pm. Australian shares have continued to trade within a tight range as uncertainty hangs over the Israel-Iran conflict, but interest rate-sensitive stocks have improved on the back of a cooling labour market. The S&P/ASX200 edged down 0.1 point, or zero per cent, to 8,530.9, on Thursday as the broader All Ordinaries lost 9.8 points, or 0.11 per cent, to 8,748.1. Seven of 11 local sectors finished lower, but a surprise drop in employment in May left the door open to a Reserve Bank interest rate cut in July, helping rate-sensitive sectors such as financials, real estate and consumer facing-stocks push higher. The materials sector continued to weigh on the bourse, down 1.7 per cent as lumbering iron ore prices dragged on large cap miners and gold fell to a seven-day low. The Australian dollar is slightly lower against the greenback, buying 64.66 US cents, down from 65.07 US cents on Wednesday at 5pm. Australian shares have continued to trade within a tight range as uncertainty hangs over the Israel-Iran conflict, but interest rate-sensitive stocks have improved on the back of a cooling labour market. The S&P/ASX200 edged down 0.1 point, or zero per cent, to 8,530.9, on Thursday as the broader All Ordinaries lost 9.8 points, or 0.11 per cent, to 8,748.1. Seven of 11 local sectors finished lower, but a surprise drop in employment in May left the door open to a Reserve Bank interest rate cut in July, helping rate-sensitive sectors such as financials, real estate and consumer facing-stocks push higher. The materials sector continued to weigh on the bourse, down 1.7 per cent as lumbering iron ore prices dragged on large cap miners and gold fell to a seven-day low. The Australian dollar is slightly lower against the greenback, buying 64.66 US cents, down from 65.07 US cents on Wednesday at 5pm. Australian shares have continued to trade within a tight range as uncertainty hangs over the Israel-Iran conflict, but interest rate-sensitive stocks have improved on the back of a cooling labour market. The S&P/ASX200 edged down 0.1 point, or zero per cent, to 8,530.9, on Thursday as the broader All Ordinaries lost 9.8 points, or 0.11 per cent, to 8,748.1. Seven of 11 local sectors finished lower, but a surprise drop in employment in May left the door open to a Reserve Bank interest rate cut in July, helping rate-sensitive sectors such as financials, real estate and consumer facing-stocks push higher. The materials sector continued to weigh on the bourse, down 1.7 per cent as lumbering iron ore prices dragged on large cap miners and gold fell to a seven-day low. The Australian dollar is slightly lower against the greenback, buying 64.66 US cents, down from 65.07 US cents on Wednesday at 5pm.
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
Too much huffing from the AUKUS caucus
There is a lot of hyperventilating at present over the Prime Minister's "failure" to score a face-to-face sit-down with Donald Trump. Much of it turns on a surprisingly credulous absorption of official talking points about the supposed necessity of the colossally expensive multi-decade AUKUS nuclear submarine pact. Trump's late cancellation of a scheduled bilateral meeting, then, is depicted as a blow to the $368 billion AUKUS deal and, axiomatically, therefore, to Australia. But is it? Words like "snub" and "debacle" have flown about on Sky After Dark and in pro-Coalition newspapers. Docile commentators seemed convinced that Anthony Albanese has been humiliated and claim he should have pushed harder and earlier for a Trump meeting. This naively overstates Australia's powers of persuasion in the current unique circumstances, understates Trump's singular attachment to an "America first" mindset, and underplays the gravitational pull of global events to which a mercurial America, sadly, is unnervingly central. If the previously unthinkable happens in coming days and Trump directly intervenes in Iran militarily, all the bleating over a cancelled bilateral in Canada will look even sillier than it does now. A common refrain, too, is that the Australian PM should have been prepared to fly to Washington, DC months ago for an Oval Office assignation (to which he was not invited?) rather than rely on talks on the sidelines of an international summit. The trouble with this is, well, everything. First, there's the epic US lid-doffing coursing under such arguments. Like the teenage pop fan who spends the entire concert filming their idol because without "likes" on social media you weren't really there, these gushing American supplicants betray a flimsy sense of Australia - one that requires validation through repeated external (read: American) recognition. Their reasoning goes like this: No meeting, no respect, we must not deserve respect. The more obvious explanation - that of a flawed, ego-maniacal president ignorant of history, dismissive of alliances and being skilfully played by Bibi Netanyahu - scores only the vaguest of references in some of these accounts. This toadying informs a second flawed assumption. That the AUKUS deal secretly hatched by the instinctively secretive Morrison government and too hastily embraced by a quaking Labor in opposition, is, ipso facto, vital to Australia's national interest. This, despite serious criticism from credible defence and security experts, and senior political figures on both sides of politics. That many journalists either explicitly or implicitly infer only benefits from AUKUS without acknowledging these substantive criticisms is convenient for the government and generally for its pro-America defence champions. Mature, objective journalism, however, it is not. MORE FROM KENNY: Those who say Albo should have been prepared to risk becoming a punching bag for Trump in the bear pit of the Oval Office seem to ignore the reality that such an outcome would be at least as bad for Australia as for the PM personally. A collapse in bilateral civility before the world's media could end up affecting trade, the ANZUS alliance, and Australian access to top-shelf education, medical science and digital technologies, let alone access to lucrative US markets. Besides, the idea of Albanese being personally intimidated is so much conservative wishful thinking. Through three decades in Parliament, and time before that as the sole left-aligned party organiser in the ruthless right-controlled NSW branch of the ALP, the one thing you can be certain of is that Albanese can assuage difficult people and can handle himself in an argument, should it come to that. There is a lot of hyperventilating at present over the Prime Minister's "failure" to score a face-to-face sit-down with Donald Trump. Much of it turns on a surprisingly credulous absorption of official talking points about the supposed necessity of the colossally expensive multi-decade AUKUS nuclear submarine pact. Trump's late cancellation of a scheduled bilateral meeting, then, is depicted as a blow to the $368 billion AUKUS deal and, axiomatically, therefore, to Australia. But is it? Words like "snub" and "debacle" have flown about on Sky After Dark and in pro-Coalition newspapers. Docile commentators seemed convinced that Anthony Albanese has been humiliated and claim he should have pushed harder and earlier for a Trump meeting. This naively overstates Australia's powers of persuasion in the current unique circumstances, understates Trump's singular attachment to an "America first" mindset, and underplays the gravitational pull of global events to which a mercurial America, sadly, is unnervingly central. If the previously unthinkable happens in coming days and Trump directly intervenes in Iran militarily, all the bleating over a cancelled bilateral in Canada will look even sillier than it does now. A common refrain, too, is that the Australian PM should have been prepared to fly to Washington, DC months ago for an Oval Office assignation (to which he was not invited?) rather than rely on talks on the sidelines of an international summit. The trouble with this is, well, everything. First, there's the epic US lid-doffing coursing under such arguments. Like the teenage pop fan who spends the entire concert filming their idol because without "likes" on social media you weren't really there, these gushing American supplicants betray a flimsy sense of Australia - one that requires validation through repeated external (read: American) recognition. Their reasoning goes like this: No meeting, no respect, we must not deserve respect. The more obvious explanation - that of a flawed, ego-maniacal president ignorant of history, dismissive of alliances and being skilfully played by Bibi Netanyahu - scores only the vaguest of references in some of these accounts. This toadying informs a second flawed assumption. That the AUKUS deal secretly hatched by the instinctively secretive Morrison government and too hastily embraced by a quaking Labor in opposition, is, ipso facto, vital to Australia's national interest. This, despite serious criticism from credible defence and security experts, and senior political figures on both sides of politics. That many journalists either explicitly or implicitly infer only benefits from AUKUS without acknowledging these substantive criticisms is convenient for the government and generally for its pro-America defence champions. Mature, objective journalism, however, it is not. MORE FROM KENNY: Those who say Albo should have been prepared to risk becoming a punching bag for Trump in the bear pit of the Oval Office seem to ignore the reality that such an outcome would be at least as bad for Australia as for the PM personally. A collapse in bilateral civility before the world's media could end up affecting trade, the ANZUS alliance, and Australian access to top-shelf education, medical science and digital technologies, let alone access to lucrative US markets. Besides, the idea of Albanese being personally intimidated is so much conservative wishful thinking. Through three decades in Parliament, and time before that as the sole left-aligned party organiser in the ruthless right-controlled NSW branch of the ALP, the one thing you can be certain of is that Albanese can assuage difficult people and can handle himself in an argument, should it come to that. There is a lot of hyperventilating at present over the Prime Minister's "failure" to score a face-to-face sit-down with Donald Trump. Much of it turns on a surprisingly credulous absorption of official talking points about the supposed necessity of the colossally expensive multi-decade AUKUS nuclear submarine pact. Trump's late cancellation of a scheduled bilateral meeting, then, is depicted as a blow to the $368 billion AUKUS deal and, axiomatically, therefore, to Australia. But is it? Words like "snub" and "debacle" have flown about on Sky After Dark and in pro-Coalition newspapers. Docile commentators seemed convinced that Anthony Albanese has been humiliated and claim he should have pushed harder and earlier for a Trump meeting. This naively overstates Australia's powers of persuasion in the current unique circumstances, understates Trump's singular attachment to an "America first" mindset, and underplays the gravitational pull of global events to which a mercurial America, sadly, is unnervingly central. If the previously unthinkable happens in coming days and Trump directly intervenes in Iran militarily, all the bleating over a cancelled bilateral in Canada will look even sillier than it does now. A common refrain, too, is that the Australian PM should have been prepared to fly to Washington, DC months ago for an Oval Office assignation (to which he was not invited?) rather than rely on talks on the sidelines of an international summit. The trouble with this is, well, everything. First, there's the epic US lid-doffing coursing under such arguments. Like the teenage pop fan who spends the entire concert filming their idol because without "likes" on social media you weren't really there, these gushing American supplicants betray a flimsy sense of Australia - one that requires validation through repeated external (read: American) recognition. Their reasoning goes like this: No meeting, no respect, we must not deserve respect. The more obvious explanation - that of a flawed, ego-maniacal president ignorant of history, dismissive of alliances and being skilfully played by Bibi Netanyahu - scores only the vaguest of references in some of these accounts. This toadying informs a second flawed assumption. That the AUKUS deal secretly hatched by the instinctively secretive Morrison government and too hastily embraced by a quaking Labor in opposition, is, ipso facto, vital to Australia's national interest. This, despite serious criticism from credible defence and security experts, and senior political figures on both sides of politics. That many journalists either explicitly or implicitly infer only benefits from AUKUS without acknowledging these substantive criticisms is convenient for the government and generally for its pro-America defence champions. Mature, objective journalism, however, it is not. MORE FROM KENNY: Those who say Albo should have been prepared to risk becoming a punching bag for Trump in the bear pit of the Oval Office seem to ignore the reality that such an outcome would be at least as bad for Australia as for the PM personally. A collapse in bilateral civility before the world's media could end up affecting trade, the ANZUS alliance, and Australian access to top-shelf education, medical science and digital technologies, let alone access to lucrative US markets. Besides, the idea of Albanese being personally intimidated is so much conservative wishful thinking. Through three decades in Parliament, and time before that as the sole left-aligned party organiser in the ruthless right-controlled NSW branch of the ALP, the one thing you can be certain of is that Albanese can assuage difficult people and can handle himself in an argument, should it come to that. There is a lot of hyperventilating at present over the Prime Minister's "failure" to score a face-to-face sit-down with Donald Trump. Much of it turns on a surprisingly credulous absorption of official talking points about the supposed necessity of the colossally expensive multi-decade AUKUS nuclear submarine pact. Trump's late cancellation of a scheduled bilateral meeting, then, is depicted as a blow to the $368 billion AUKUS deal and, axiomatically, therefore, to Australia. But is it? Words like "snub" and "debacle" have flown about on Sky After Dark and in pro-Coalition newspapers. Docile commentators seemed convinced that Anthony Albanese has been humiliated and claim he should have pushed harder and earlier for a Trump meeting. This naively overstates Australia's powers of persuasion in the current unique circumstances, understates Trump's singular attachment to an "America first" mindset, and underplays the gravitational pull of global events to which a mercurial America, sadly, is unnervingly central. If the previously unthinkable happens in coming days and Trump directly intervenes in Iran militarily, all the bleating over a cancelled bilateral in Canada will look even sillier than it does now. A common refrain, too, is that the Australian PM should have been prepared to fly to Washington, DC months ago for an Oval Office assignation (to which he was not invited?) rather than rely on talks on the sidelines of an international summit. The trouble with this is, well, everything. First, there's the epic US lid-doffing coursing under such arguments. Like the teenage pop fan who spends the entire concert filming their idol because without "likes" on social media you weren't really there, these gushing American supplicants betray a flimsy sense of Australia - one that requires validation through repeated external (read: American) recognition. Their reasoning goes like this: No meeting, no respect, we must not deserve respect. The more obvious explanation - that of a flawed, ego-maniacal president ignorant of history, dismissive of alliances and being skilfully played by Bibi Netanyahu - scores only the vaguest of references in some of these accounts. This toadying informs a second flawed assumption. That the AUKUS deal secretly hatched by the instinctively secretive Morrison government and too hastily embraced by a quaking Labor in opposition, is, ipso facto, vital to Australia's national interest. This, despite serious criticism from credible defence and security experts, and senior political figures on both sides of politics. That many journalists either explicitly or implicitly infer only benefits from AUKUS without acknowledging these substantive criticisms is convenient for the government and generally for its pro-America defence champions. Mature, objective journalism, however, it is not. MORE FROM KENNY: Those who say Albo should have been prepared to risk becoming a punching bag for Trump in the bear pit of the Oval Office seem to ignore the reality that such an outcome would be at least as bad for Australia as for the PM personally. A collapse in bilateral civility before the world's media could end up affecting trade, the ANZUS alliance, and Australian access to top-shelf education, medical science and digital technologies, let alone access to lucrative US markets. Besides, the idea of Albanese being personally intimidated is so much conservative wishful thinking. Through three decades in Parliament, and time before that as the sole left-aligned party organiser in the ruthless right-controlled NSW branch of the ALP, the one thing you can be certain of is that Albanese can assuage difficult people and can handle himself in an argument, should it come to that.
