Uhhhhh, huh?!?! Just looking at the USA and some European school's that I recognize, this has to be the most ludicrous rankings I've ever seen.   I may not wholly agree with the DI rankings (as most, I have personal preferences) but at least they're approximately what I would rank the schools.  

SpatialSojourner, I agree...this is rather inaccurate. Not just because MIT is #1, but moreso because Princeton is #38 and Michigan is #49. A bunch of left-brained econometricists applying statistical analysis to an artistic venture. Thank you "higher education data specialists"!

This is an important Archinect post because many students ask about international universities choices and quit frankly with the US tuition, you would be nuts to stay in the US - many great world schools most have half or less the tuition load - some $0 tuition. Your choice - debt or delight. 

While I know most yanks only think made in the USA is worthy of anything, nor do Americans generally read basis of survey.  Princeton is a hell of a better school than Michigan -

MIT is about relevance of what they are teaching to the society as a whole - verses fanciful nothingness of some of the other privileged ivy graduate schools of design.

this is research-based.   I know you don't know what that means.  Probably don't believe in climate change either as that is all about statistics.

How is the data collected?

The subject rankings are based on research citations from Scopus data – this includes analysis from 17.3 million research papers and over 100 million citations – alongside reputational surveys of over 126,000 academics and graduate employers worldwide.

This year, QS introduced six new subjects to the rankings: business and management, architecture, art & design, dentistry, development studies and veterinary science.

lol , what a joke, Stanford doesnt even have an architecture school. And if Yale and Princeton are near the bottom then these rankings are terrible indicators to any audience, more so for the people in the academic field.  

Oh, dear.  Stanford does have architecture.  Perhaps not to NCARB - but who needs that

http://cee.stanford.edu/programs/architectural-design -

http://cee.stanford.edu/news-events/news/john-barton-discusses-future-stanford-graduate-architectural-design-program

d-school 

Princeton is 11th in US - Yale show poor research citation number so in lower 50 world wide.

So let's see. Should I be in Boston spending $50-60/ year on an Ivy or perhaps in silicon valley collaborating with other thinkers on ideas......hmm. I am very impressed with Stanford - as a University think it by far the best in the US. I hope the go for arch school and change the world.

TED, sorry, but you're wrong and everybody knows it.

and I'm prepared to pick apart all of your refutable logic, so don't tempt me.

I am never wrong :-) right?

Remember, this is a discussion board and as I said many out ther are looking for University alternates to ....lets say the Ivies, all which are great universities.

... I have history here[ archinet], have taught at 5 schools in the 100 and gone to 4 schools in the top 50.....and your credentials?  And have had a few projects of note-worth-ness about.

Don't you realise ...There isn't every a single right or wrong - that's why some say climate change 'is' or just a passing bump - climate is scenarios looking at patterns.

In the end [am certain you will agree] the 'best' in choice of schools is about what you value at a point in your life.  But as a researcher, you can rate universities on a comparative basis.  On writing of staff, citations or how much others reference the work, if it led to inventions....

Some of the international universities on this list are brilliant and to most americans, unknown- so if anything, offering a list of other choices that archinect'rs can add to there review.  A 'public service announcement'

If I was interested in digital, I would go to Stanford, hands down.  In some ways like the AA, individual programs may be hit or miss, but the place has so much going on, who cares, I will find my way. Creativity is about collaboration - the best students don't give a shit about NCARB or RIBA.

"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."

Albert Einstein

@ Ted , you obviously haven't read my comment clearly but I said that Stanford does not have an architecture school. They have an architecture major that is offered within the engineering school. 

nevertheless, the rankings are still bogus man. 

@Ted

This ranking is anything but BS ...
Monash (AUS) , ... in which the Architecture school has only been around for less than 10 years (41st on the list)

YALE ! .... 51-100
 

@ROB4 Sorry, you are right, no architecture school, however 'Architecture' subject includes 'Architecture/Built Environment' so while most on Archinect probably see 'architect' as a single profession towards licensure with MArch 1, 2, 3, most innovation and creativity takes place outside the courses under the prescription regime of a regulatory body because it limits the ability of the right questions to be asked.

For example, the Bartlett is No. 2 in the world on this list.  Absolutely agree with that ranking, but not because of its Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3 RIBA programmes, be it they are good but are not the only reason they are high on the list [Sorry Bob Sheil :-)]

Alan Penn who is now dean and led CASA is brilliant and is responsible for much of the shifts at UCL in the last 3 year. Urban Buzz was a £2mil funded research project that worked with practices to make visible their research, community groups etc, developing a range of scales of projects. CASA itself http://www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/casa has a rich history of relevant research including Space Syntex.  Revamp of 1 yr professional masters at Bartlett now brought MArch [G]Ad and B-Pro Programmes.  

It is this underlying structure of research/courses that inform the Part 1, 2 and 3 courses. Ultimately, it does come into the professional-prescriptive programmes.

So look deeper at data - 

"MIT is about relevance..(blah, blah, blah) other privileged Ivy schools of design." MIT is not Ivy League. If you can't even get that right....

Sorry, you mis-quoted me:

'some of the other privileged ivy graduate schools of design' ...was not including MIT.

MIT is not a design school nor would I go there if I was interested in improving my design.The institution is pushing the boundaries in many areas [Neri Oxman, Skylar Tibbits for example]. If you are a great student with eyes wide open, you want to engage and build upon this innovation and be part of it, go to MIT.  But don't choose a Uni working on the past.

Look. Every member of Archinect has different take what is a good design school - it is a personal choice in the end. The list is only there to open up more options for students.

Peace.

Like the proverbial question of Archinect: Should I get a Mac or PC?

There is no right answer, mate.