In most global rankings – such as the QS and ARWU (Shanghai Ranking) – IITs and the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) are the best India has to offer to the world. But the latest Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings 2026 throw up a strange picture – the best is the IISc (201-250 rank band), but it’s followed by lesser-known institutes such as Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences (351-400), Jamia Millia Islamia (401-500), Shoolini University of Biotechnology and Management (401-500), and Banaras Hindu University (501-600).
But a startling trend that has raised eyebrows amongst academics is that these novice institutes posted ‘Research Quality’ scores that rival the likes of Oxford, Cambridge, and Yale, and far surpass IISc and IITs.
For instance, ‘Research Quality’ of Saveetha Institute of Medical & Technical Sciences (93.4) and Graphic Era University (92) is in the same range as Oxford (97.7), Cambridge (97.1), and Yale (97.2), and far higher than IISc (51.2), IIT Patna (70.4), and IIT Indore (63.9).
A 75-point anomaly
The most glaring evidence lies in the decoupling of ‘Research Quality’ from ‘Research Environment’. In top institutes, these two move in tandem – for example, Oxford has ‘Research Environment’ of 100, and ‘Research Quality’ of 97.7, and IISc scores are 56.9 and 51.2, respectively – because you cannot have world-leading research impact without the infrastructure, funding, and reputation to support it.
But Saveetha Institute has ‘Research Environment’ of just 18.4, and yet ‘Research Quality’ of 93.4 – a 75-point anomaly. Similarly, in the case of Graphic Era, it’s a 69.8-point anomaly; in the case of Chitkara University, it’s a 76.3-point anomaly; and Lovely Professional University has a 70-point anomaly.
“This divergence is a red flag for data integrity,” a former IIT professor told FE. “Although my institute stopped taking part in the THE Rankings 2020 onwards, when a university’s citation impact soars while its research infrastructure remains in the basement, it suggests the institution is optimising for an algorithm rather than building a culture of research.”
In 2020, seven of the older IITs – Bombay, Delhi, Guwahati, Kanpur, Kharagpur, Madras, and Roorkee – stopped taking part in the THE Rankings, citing its unclear ranking methodology.
The citation paradox
The lack of transparency in how these scores are calculated has led to significant pushback from veteran academic leaders. Speaking to the Indian Express last year, Prof V Ramgopal Rao – IIT Delhi director from 2016-21, and now group vice-chancellor of BITS Pilani – highlighted the flaws that allow these anomalies. “The challenges with the rankings are of reputation and perception scores. Those are black boxes.
What is the geographical distribution of those who are providing perception scores? Another concern is institutional self-citations. What is happening in some universities is that one faculty member writes a paper, and they ask all other faculty members to cite the paper. At the institutional level, they’re increasing their own citation count. For rankings, papers with over 200 authors are also considered, and paper retractions are not accounted for properly,” he said.
Artificial citation impact
Academicians told FE that faculty members within an institution – or a network of affiliated colleges – cite each other’s work extensively to artificially inflate impact. “Some institutes have adopted an undergraduate publication model, requiring students to publish in Scopus-indexed journals to graduate,” the above-quoted IIT professor said. “There have been cases of students citing their own professors’ previous works just to clear the graduation hurdle.”
Questions you must ask
Inflated ‘Research Quality’ improves the overall ranking of an institution – that’s why an LPU is higher than an IIT in the THE Rankings – but before choosing an institution for higher studies, students must ask themselves if they’re taking the right path?