Uncertainty over research funding and immigration rules blamed for decline, as Cambridge slips out of top three for first time

British universities have taken a tumble in the latest international rankings, as concern persists about the potential impact of Brexit on the country’s higher education sector.

The UK’s top-ranked university, Cambridge, has fallen out of the top three for the first time since the QS World University Rankings began 12 years ago, and the vast majority of the country’s other leading institutions similarly drop down the table.

While the performance of many western European institutions – in France, Portugal, Germany and Italy – has declined, the most significant falls have been in the UK where universities have seen a real-terms cut to government funding for research.

The surveys that informed the rankings were carried out before the UK voted in June to leave the EU. QS, a higher education thinktank, said the referendum had added to the uncertainty undermining the UK sector but did not fully explain the downward trend.

Of the 48 UK institutions in the top 400, 38 have dropped down the rankings this year. Cambridge slips to fourth place, and Imperial College London drops from eighth to ninth. King’s College London (KCL) falls from 19 to 21, the London School of Economics (LSE) from 35 to 37, the University of Bristol from 37 to 41 and Warwick from 48 to 51.

Four UK universities remain in the top 10 in the world: Cambridge, Oxford (unchanged at 6), University College London (still at 7) and Imperial. On the up are the University of Edinburgh, climbing from 21 to 19, and Manchester University, now ranked in the top 30.

Top 200 universities in the world 2016 - the table Read more

QS said storm clouds were gathering over UK higher education. “Uncertainty over research funding, immigration rules, and the ability to hire and retain the top young talent from around the world seems to be damaging the reputation of the UK’s higher education sector,” said Ben Sowter, head of research at QS.

The government’s promise to guarantee EU funding levels for research projects signed before this year’s autumn statement had helped address some of the uncertainty, but QS said more support was needed if the UK higher education sector was to retain its reputation for excellence.

Leading US universities which benefit from substantial private funding continue to dominate the rankings, with Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in top spot followed by Stanford University, California, in second and Harvard third.

Asian universities continue to make strong progress. Of the 74 Asian universities in the top 400, 68% have risen in the latest rankings.



Almost three-quarters of British universities in the top 400 have seen a drop in both academic reputation and employer reputation this year, and 58% have seen a fall in the number of foreign academics.

Nick Hillman, director of the Higher Education Policy Institute, said the drop in the rankings was worrying for British universities. Echoing QS, he blamed funding and the perception that the UK was a little less open to the rest of the world than it had been in the past.

“We don’t know where Brexit is going to take us. We do know we have got a prime minister who for all her strengths looks like she is going to continue to have no particular soft spot for universities,” he said.

London continues to fare well, however, with more top 40 institutions than any other city in the world. London’s mayor, Sadiq Khan, said: “Boasting more of the globe’s top universities and welcoming the most international students, London is the higher education capital of the world and I want to make sure it stays that way.”

The QS World University Rankings are based on four categories: research, teaching, employability and internationalisation. The methodology consists of six indicators: academic reputation (40%), employer reputation (10%), faculty student ratio (20%), citations per faculty (20%), international students (5%), and international faculty (5%).



In a separate report, the Office for Fair Access (OFFA), the university admissions watchdog, has announced that universities will spend £833.5m in 2017-18 on schemes to improve access to higher education for under-represented groups.

The figure represents a 10% increase on last year, funded by increased tuition fees. Just under half (£408.7m) will pay for financial support including bursaries, fee waivers and accommodation discounts. The rest pays for outreach work in communities, homework clubs, summer schools, as well as pastoral support and study skills training.

James Westhead, executive director of Teach First, which aims to address educational disadvantage, said: “While it is welcome that universities will increase spending on widening access to higher education this year, too much of this money is spent on ineffective schemes, or as recruitment incentives for those who have already decided to apply.

“Still only a quarter of access money is spent on activities to raise attainment and aspirations in younger children, including primary age, and unless this is significantly increased we will continue to see poorer pupils struggle to reach university.”

Research from the Social Market Foundation (SMF) has found that retention rates in higher education in England have barely shifted since 2009/10 and that rates for students from the most disadvantaged backgrounds remain lower than for others.

The SMF report, Staying the Course, says just over 8% of students from low-participation areas dropped out of higher education in 2014/15, compared with just over 6% of students from other areas.

The report identifies a group of 20 institutions where around one in 10 students are not continuing in higher education after a year, and highlights the University of Bolton, where more than one in five students from the most disadvantaged backgrounds drop out.

Emran Mian, the report’s author, said: “Every student who does not continue in higher education means a loss of potential, a bad experience for that student and poor value for the taxpayer, as the investment in tuition costs is likely to have a low return.

“This research suggests a link between an institution’s students’ satisfaction and its drop-out rates. Institutions which prioritise student success are likely to see lower rates of non-continuation.”