Harvard, Stanford and Oxford among the top 10 of 2025-2026 Best Global Universities rankings by US News & World Report: Check the complete list here
The US News & World Report has released its 2025-2026 Best Global Universities rankings, assessing over 2,250 institutions across more than 100 countries. This comprehensive evaluation is based on academic research output, global and regional reputation, and subject-specific performance metrics sourced from Clarivate's Web of Science Core Collection and InCites Benchmarking & Analytics.
According to the rankings, China leads the list with 397 universities, followed by the United States with 280, India with 118, Japan with 104, and the United Kingdom with 93 institutions. These rankings offer students, educators, and policymakers a global perspective on higher education institutions with strong academic and research influence.
The rankings span 51 academic subjects, with eight fields seeing an expanded list of institutions this year, including artificial intelligence, engineering, and gastroenterology.
Each subject ranking is uniquely weighted based on research performance within that field.
Below are the ten highest-ranked universities in the overall global standings and their top-performing disciplines:
Rank
University Name
Country
1
Harvard University
United States
2
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
United States
3
Stanford University
United States
4
University of Oxford
United Kingdom
5
University of Cambridge
United Kingdom
6
University of California, Berkeley
United States
7
University College London (UCL)
United Kingdom
8
University of Washington, Seattle
United States
9
Yale University
United States
10
Columbia University
United States
Harvard University
Global Score: 100
Global Research Reputation: 1
Harvard continues to dominate globally, securing the top rank across multiple disciplines. It holds first place in fields such as immunology, microbiology, oncology, neuroscience, psychiatry/psychology, molecular biology and genetics, and economics and business.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
2025: Steel Suppliers From Mexico At Lowest Prices (Take A Look)
Steel Suppliers | search ads
Search Now
Undo
Harvard's research leadership spans health sciences, biological research, and social sciences, showcasing the breadth of its academic impact.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Global Score: 97.2
Global Research Reputation: 2
MIT ranks second overall and holds the top global position in physics. It is also a strong performer across biological and technological domains, including cell biology, biotechnology, microbiology, immunology, and economics.
Its consistent excellence in science and innovation cements its place as a global research powerhouse.
Stanford University
Global Score: 94.5
Global Research Reputation: 3
Stanford takes the top spot in mathematics and maintains strong positions in optics and radiology. With robust contributions across technology and health-related disciplines, the university sustains its elite status in both academic reputation and research influence.
University of Oxford
Global Score: 88.3
Global Research Reputation: 5
Oxford emerges as a global leader in infectious diseases and the arts and humanities. Its long-standing tradition of academic excellence and strong international research collaborations contribute significantly to its top-five global standing.
University of Cambridge
Global Score: 86.8
Global Research Reputation: 4
Cambridge ranks third globally in the arts and humanities and continues to be recognized for excellence across multiple research fields, maintaining its position as one of Europe's foremost academic institutions.
University of California, Berkeley
Global Score: 86.4
Global Research Reputation: 6
Berkeley's strengths lie in space science and other scientific disciplines. Its robust research ecosystem supports continued global influence and academic leadership in the sciences.
University College London
Global Score: 86.2
Global Research Reputation: 25
UCL is particularly prominent in pharmacology, toxicology, and the arts and humanities. Despite a relatively modest global reputation rank, it remains a consistent top-tier performer across several subject areas.
Yale University
Global Score: 86
Global Research Reputation: 9
Yale maintains its reputation as a leader in research, with a solid performance across a variety of disciplines. It continues to be recognized for its contributions to health sciences, the humanities, and social research.
Columbia University
Global Score: 85.8
Global Research Reputation: 13
Columbia secures the top rank in meteorology and atmospheric sciences and performs strongly in economics and business. Its interdisciplinary approach and urban research environment contribute to its international prominence.
Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
6 hours ago
- Economic Times
'Humans were never built to run': Harvard professor says walking beats workouts for a longer, healthier life
In an old podcast interview and his book Exercised, Professor Daniel Lieberman debunks the myth of constant intense exercise. He explains that evolutionary biology favors walking and rest over running and heavy workouts. While moderate activity is vital, Lieberman emphasizes that humans are biologically wired for energy conservation, not for high-performance athleticism. Harvard evolutionary biologist Daniel E. Lieberman argues in his book Exercised that humans weren't built to run marathons or engage in extreme fitness routines. Instead, we evolved for moderate movement like walking. (Representational image: iStock) Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Evolution Didn't Design Athletes — It Designed Survivors Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads A Culture of Overexertion Walk Before You Run — Literally Renowned evolutionary biologist Daniel E. Lieberman , a professor at Harvard University , is turning heads — and slowing down treadmills — with his thought-provoking book Exercised. The core message? Contrary to popular belief, humans didn't evolve to run marathons or grind through intense workouts. Instead, our ancestors spent far more time sitting, walking, and conserving energy than sprinting or strength on the High Performance podcast, Lieberman debunks the modern fitness myth : 'We have to do this weird thing called exercise, which is voluntary physical activity for the sake of health and fitness — something nobody did until very recently.'Lieberman explains that while physical activity is crucial, the kind we idolize today is historically unnatural. Our ancient relatives only moved as much as survival demanded — usually through moderate walking, hunting, gathering, or building shelter.'Humans are unusually fat creatures,' Lieberman says with a smile, adding that biologically, our bodies are wired to store energy, not burn it off unnecessarily. From an evolutionary perspective, excessive exercise could even be seen as studies challenge the modern 'no pain, no gain' philosophy. While 150 minutes of activity a week — roughly 21 minutes a day — can reduce mortality by 30%, pushing beyond that can sometimes invite injury or burnout. 'It's not about running marathons. Just walking a bit more each day can do wonders,' Lieberman warns against the growing culture of overtraining and pushing limits, especially among younger generations influenced by performance-driven social media. While elite athleticism is impressive, he emphasizes that the average human body simply wasn't built to endure constant strain.'The obsession with optimum performance is overrated,' he said during the podcast. 'High performance is just achieving your goals and staying active — it doesn't need to mean winning medals.'At the heart of Lieberman's philosophy is the humble act of walking. More than a biological necessity, he presents it as a sustainable, natural form of exercise that aligns with how our bodies evolved. Ancient humans walked the equivalent of Los Angeles to New York every year — not because they wanted to, but because they had modern times, incorporating simple changes like walking an extra metro stop or opting for stairs over elevators is more aligned with our evolutionary design than lifting weights for hours or pushing through rigorous cardio you've ever felt guilty for not signing up for that spin class or skipping leg day, Lieberman's research is a breath of fresh, science-backed air. His message is clear: being active is important — but balance is before you lace up for your next run, consider his advice. Maybe it's time we all gave our legs — and guilt — a little rest. After all, evolution might just be on your side.
Time of India
6 hours ago
- Time of India
'Humans were never built to run': Harvard professor says walking beats workouts for a longer, healthier life
Renowned evolutionary biologist Daniel E. Lieberman , a professor at Harvard University , is turning heads — and slowing down treadmills — with his thought-provoking book Exercised . The core message? Contrary to popular belief, humans didn't evolve to run marathons or grind through intense workouts. Instead, our ancestors spent far more time sitting, walking, and conserving energy than sprinting or strength training. Speaking on the High Performance podcast, Lieberman debunks the modern fitness myth : 'We have to do this weird thing called exercise, which is voluntary physical activity for the sake of health and fitness — something nobody did until very recently.' — SandeepMall (@SandeepMall) Evolution Didn't Design Athletes — It Designed Survivors Lieberman explains that while physical activity is crucial, the kind we idolize today is historically unnatural. Our ancient relatives only moved as much as survival demanded — usually through moderate walking, hunting, gathering, or building shelter. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Semua yang Perlu Anda Ketahui Tentang Limfoma Limfoma Pelajari Undo 'Humans are unusually fat creatures,' Lieberman says with a smile, adding that biologically, our bodies are wired to store energy, not burn it off unnecessarily. From an evolutionary perspective, excessive exercise could even be seen as counterintuitive. His studies challenge the modern 'no pain, no gain' philosophy. While 150 minutes of activity a week — roughly 21 minutes a day — can reduce mortality by 30%, pushing beyond that can sometimes invite injury or burnout. 'It's not about running marathons. Just walking a bit more each day can do wonders,' Lieberman suggests. You Might Also Like: Harvard doctor's simple tip can boost your happiness in one minute. A startup CEO is already practicing it A Culture of Overexertion Lieberman warns against the growing culture of overtraining and pushing limits, especially among younger generations influenced by performance-driven social media. While elite athleticism is impressive, he emphasizes that the average human body simply wasn't built to endure constant strain. 'The obsession with optimum performance is overrated,' he said during the podcast. 'High performance is just achieving your goals and staying active — it doesn't need to mean winning medals.' Walk Before You Run — Literally At the heart of Lieberman's philosophy is the humble act of walking. More than a biological necessity, he presents it as a sustainable, natural form of exercise that aligns with how our bodies evolved. Ancient humans walked the equivalent of Los Angeles to New York every year — not because they wanted to, but because they had to. In modern times, incorporating simple changes like walking an extra metro stop or opting for stairs over elevators is more aligned with our evolutionary design than lifting weights for hours or pushing through rigorous cardio regimens. You Might Also Like: What's the best time for breakfast? Harvard doctor shares three rules If you've ever felt guilty for not signing up for that spin class or skipping leg day, Lieberman's research is a breath of fresh, science-backed air. His message is clear: being active is important — but balance is essential. So before you lace up for your next run, consider his advice. Maybe it's time we all gave our legs — and guilt — a little rest. After all, evolution might just be on your side.
Hans India
a day ago
- Hans India
MIT study warns how ChatGPT weakens critical thinking
A new study from MIT's Media Lab is raising red flags about the impact of generative AI tools like ChatGPT on human cognition—particularly among students. The study suggests that using ChatGPT for academic work may reduce brain activity, diminish creativity, and impair memory formation. The experiment involved 54 participants aged 18 to 39, who were divided into three groups: one using ChatGPT, another using Google Search, and a control group using neither. Each group was asked to write multiple SAT-style essays while wearing EEG devices to measure brain activity across 32 regions. Results showed ChatGPT users exhibited the lowest neural engagement, underperforming across behavioral, linguistic, and cognitive measures. Their essays were also deemed formulaic and lacking originality by English teachers. Alarmingly, as the study progressed over several months, many in the ChatGPT group abandoned active writing altogether, opting instead to copy-paste AI-generated responses with minimal editing. Lead author Nataliya Kosmyna explained her urgency to publish the findings ahead of peer review, saying, 'I'm afraid in 6-8 months some policymaker will propose 'GPT for kindergarten.' That would be absolutely detrimental to developing brains.' In contrast, the group that relied solely on their own brainpower showed stronger neural connectivity in alpha, theta, and delta bands—regions linked with creativity, memory, and semantic processing. These participants felt more ownership over their work and reported higher satisfaction. The Google Search group also demonstrated high engagement and satisfaction, suggesting traditional web research supports more active learning than LLM use. In a follow-up test, participants had to rewrite a previous essay—this time without their original tool. ChatGPT users struggled, barely recalling their previous responses, and showed weaker brain wave activity. In contrast, the brain-only group, now using ChatGPT for the first time, exhibited increased cognitive activity, suggesting that AI can support learning—but only when foundational thinking is already in place. Kosmyna warns that heavy AI use during critical learning phases could impair long-term brain development, particularly in children. Psychiatrist Dr. Zishan Khan echoed this concern: 'Overreliance on LLMs may erode essential neural pathways related to memory, resilience, and deep thinking.' Ironically, the paper itself became a case study in AI misuse. Some users summarized it using ChatGPT, prompting hallucinated facts—like falsely stating the version of ChatGPT used was GPT-4o. Kosmyna had anticipated this and included 'AI traps' in the document to test such behavior. MIT researchers are now expanding their work into programming and software engineering, and early results are even more troubling—suggesting broader implications for industries seeking to automate entry-level tasks. While previous studies have highlighted AI's potential to boost productivity, this research underscores the urgent need for responsible AI use in education, backed by policies that balance efficiency with brain development. OpenAI did not respond to a request for comment. Meanwhile, the debate on the role of AI in learning continues—with growing calls for regulation, transparency, and digital literacy.
