The National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) recently released its fifth edition of rankings for institutions across various disciplines. This year, over 3,800 institutions participated—a marked increase of 20% from last year. Under this framework, BITS Pilani (all three Indian campuses considered) placed 15th in the University rankings—an eight-rank jump from 2019. In the Engineering category, BITS Pilani ranked 30th—a five-rank drop from last year. 

A sixteen-member committee was entrusted with the job of creating a National Ranking Framework in 2015. This core committee, chaired by the Secretary (Higher Education) MHRD, included, most notably, Directors of IIT Kharagpur, IIT Madras, IIM Ahmedabad, and IIM Bangalore and the Vice-Chancellor of Delhi University. To avoid ambiguity in interpretation and inconsistency in the data collected, easily measurable, reportable, and verifiable parameters were required. However, while multiple objective factors figured in the final framework, whether they indicate quality has been a matter of debate.   

The data used for the rankings has been collected from the concerned institutions and third-party sources. The preamble of the framework mentions that an institution is only eligible if all relevant and updated data about the faculty is available on a publicly visible website. The ranking agency verifies the data provided by the institutions on a random sample basis.

An attempt at a comprehensive comparison between BITS Pilani, IIT Madras, IIT Bombay and VIT has been made in this piece. IIT Madras has consistently been the top-ranking institution in the Engineering category for the last couple of years and serves as the best-case scenario in each of the subheads discussed. Selecting VIT, the top-ranking private institution in the Engineering category and a private deemed university like BITS, allows one to compare both universities on a like-for-like basis. 

Disclaimer: The NIRF’s ‘Methodology for Ranking of Academic Institutions in India’ document does not explain or justify the rationale behind the design of some of the parameters. The formulae for some of the parameters can be found in this document. We reached out to the BITS Pilani administration hoping to better understand BITS’s strategic aims and institutional profile vis-à-vis other leading private and public engineering institutions to ultimately contribute to a more informed debate amongst students but received no response. Needless to say, all insights in this piece that are not backed by numbers should be taken with a grain of salt. 

Key Takeaways

• BITS ranked 30^th in the Engineering category this year.
• Marks in the ‘Combined metric for Placements and Higher Studies’ and ‘Median Salary’ subheads were either better or comparable to the IITs’ tallies.
• ‘Teaching, Learning & Resources’ score was comparable to VIT’s and significantly lower than the top 6 IITs’ totals.
• In the metrics related to research, publications, and patents, BITS’s performance was subpar compared to VIT and the IITs.
• Over the years, the ‘Perception’ score has declined.

The Breakdown

All performance metrics are organised under the following five headings:

 (1) Teaching, Learning & Resources (30%)

 (2) Research and Professional Practice (30%)

 (3) Graduation Outcome (20%)

 (4) Outreach and Inclusivity (10%)

 (5) Perception (10%)

Teaching, Learning & Resources (TLR)

This category is further divided into four subheads with the maximum overall TLR score of 100:

1. Student Strength including Doctoral Students (20 Marks)

15 marks are a function of the sanctioned approved intake and the total number of students enrolled in all undergraduate (UG) and postgraduate (PG) programmes offered by the institution. 5 marks depend on the total number of students enrolled in the doctoral programme until the previous academic year. 

BITS Pilani’s score has improved by 2.5 marks over the last couple of years. The approved PG intake in 2020 was over twice that of 2015. However, BITS has scored 0.6 marks less than IIT Madras and IIT Bombay. 

The score depends on the ratio of admitted students to approved intake. So, a larger number of students enrolled does not automatically translate to higher scores. VIT has just under 30,000 students enrolled in their UG and PG programmes; almost thrice as many as BITS Pilani. VIT has 2,515 doctoral students, compared to 415 in BITS. However, its score is 0.4 less than that of BITS Pilani.

2. Faculty-Student Ratio with Emphasis on Permanent Faculty (30 Marks)

Full-time faculty members with PhDs and ME/MTech degrees are considered here. The ‘expected’ ratio of 1:15 is awarded full marks, and a ratio of less than 1:50 sets the ‘Faculty-Student Ratio with emphasis on permanent faculty’ (FSR) score to zero. 

While IIT Madras and IIT Bombay received a perfect score, VIT and BITS Pilani have a similar FSR score. BITS Pilani’s score has dropped by 3 points since 2018, which can be attributed to the disproportionate increase in student and faculty intake over the last couple of years. 

3. Combined Metric for Faculty with PhD (or Equivalent) and Experience (20 Marks)

This metric factors in the percentage of faculty members with a PhD or equivalent qualification (10 marks) and their experience (10 marks). There are three bands—less than eight years of experience, between eight and fifteen years of experience, and over fifteen years of experience. If the ratio across the three bands is 1:1:1, full marks are given in this category. BITS Pilani has a score of 11.89. The distribution of faculty members across the three bands in BITS Pilani, IIT Madras, and IIT Bombay is as follows:

4. Financial Resources and their Utilisation (30 Marks)

7.5 marks are awarded for average annual capital expenditure per student for the previous three years and 22.5 marks depend on the yearly operational spending. These exclude the expenditure on the construction of new buildings and maintenance of hostels. 

BITS Pilani spent around ₹59 crores on the libraries and for new equipment for workshops and laboratories in the academic year 2018–19. The operational expenditure for that year was just under ₹255 crores. Over the years, BITS Pilani’s score has decreased by 5 marks which could be attributed to an uneven increase in student intake and the annual expenditure.

Research and Professional Practice (RP)

1. Combined Metric for Publications (35 Marks)

The publications indexed in Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Indian Citation Index are considered for assessment. This metric is a function of the weighted number of publications (P), divided by the maximum of the nominal number of faculty members as calculated on the basis of the required FSR of 1:15 or the available faculty in the institution (F_RQ).

To illustrate using an example, if an institute has 1500 students and 90 professors, that is, ten less than the required FSR of 1:15, F_RQ  = max(100, 90) = 100.

This means, even if an institute’s FSR is worse than 1:15, the same number of publications are expected. 

BITS Pilani scores 10 marks less than VIT in this category, although the two institutions have the same FSR of about 1:20.

2. Combined Metric for Quality of Publications (40 Marks)

20 marks are a function of the total citation count divided by F_RQ, and the other 20 marks depend on the number of publications in the top 25 percentile out of the total number of publications averaged over three years. BITS Pilani is behind VIT by over 15 points. IIT Madras and IIT Bombay score 36 marks. Over the last couple of years, BITS Pilani’s score has decreased by 3 marks.

 3. IPR and Patents: Patents Published and Granted (15 Marks)

10 marks are a function of the patents granted, and 5 marks are a function of the patents published over the previous three years. BITS Pilani fares poorly compared to other colleges in the category with just  1 mark. VIT scored 5 marks, and IIT Bombay and IIT Madras have perfect scores. BITS Pilani’s score has been lacking in this category for the past couple of years. 

 4. Footprint of Projects and Professional Practice (10 Marks)

7.5 marks depend on the annual research funding per faculty member and 2.5 marks depend on annual consultancy amount per faculty member. BITS Pilani scored a mere 0.4 marks. IIT Madras received a perfect score and IIT Bombay scored 9 marks.

Graduation Outcome (GO)

1. Combined Metric for Placements and Higher Studies (40 Marks)

This metric is entirely dependent on the percentage of graduating students placed and the percentage of graduating students that have been selected for higher studies in the previous three years. If all graduates are either placed or selected for higher studies, a perfect score is given to the university. BITS Pilani does significantly better than IIT Madras, IIT Bombay, and VIT. Over the course of 3 years, BITS Pilani’s score has improved by 5 marks. 

2. Metric for University Examinations (15 Marks)

The function used to calculate this metric is defined as follows: 

F_UE = 15 × min(N_g / 80, 1)

N_g is defined as the percentage of the number of students passing the respective university examinations in stipulated time for the programme they are enrolled in as a fraction of the approved intake averaged over three years. 

For instance, let us assume that the approved intake of a university is 1000 students and the number of students enrolled is 900. Of these 900 students, 850 pass the university examinations in the time specified by their programme.  N_g, in this case, would be (850 / 1000) × 100 = 85%.

Subsequently, F_UE is calculated as follows— 

• F_UE = 15 × min(85 / 80, 1)
• F_UE = 15 × min(1.0625, 1)
• F_UE = 15

To get a perfect score, more than 80% of the approved intake have to pass the respective university examination in the time specified by the programme. BITS Pilani has consistently received a perfect score for the past three years.

3. Median Salary (25 Marks)

This metric depends on the median salary of graduates averaged over the last three years. The median salary of BITS Pilani graduates has increased from ₹9 lakhs per annum in 2017 to ₹12.5 lakhs per annum in 2020.

4. Metric for Number of PhD Students Graduated (30 Marks)

This metric depends on the average number of PhD students that have graduated over the previous three years. BITS Pilani has a poor enrollment in its doctorate program and hence fares poorly in this category in comparison to IIT Madras, IIT Bombay and VIT.

Outreach and Inclusivity (OI)

1. Region Diversity (30 Marks)

25 marks depend on the fraction of students from other states and 5 marks depend on the fraction of students from other countries. In order to get a perfect score in this sub-category, all enrolled students must be from states other than the state in which the university is situated, which is odd considering college proximity is often an important deciding factor for the socioeconomically disadvantaged. BITS Pilani scored better than IIT Madras, IIT Bombay, and VIT and its score has not changed much over the last couple of years. 

2. Women Diversity (30 Marks)

15 marks depend on the percentage of female students and 15 marks depend on the percentage of female faculty. A perfect score is awarded if half of the student body is female and 20% of the faculty is female. BITS Pilani, IITM, and IITB all fare similarly with approximately 14, 14, and 13 marks respectively. 

3. Economically and Socially Challenged Students (20 Marks)

This metric depends entirely on the percentage of undergraduates receiving a full tuition fee reimbursement by the institution to pursue their degree programmes. BITS Pilani fares poorly in this category with the average score over the past three years being about 0.6 marks. 

4. Facilities for Physically Challenged Students (20 Marks)

Institutions are required to have lifts, ramps, specially designed toilets, and transportation from one building to another for handicapped students in the form of walking aids and wheelchairs. BITS Pilani has consistently received a perfect score for the past three years.

Perception (PR)

Peer Perceptions: Employers and Academic Peers (100 Marks)

According to NIRF, this metric depends entirely on a series of surveys conducted ‘over a large category of employers, professionals from reputed organisations and academics to ascertain their preference for graduates of different institutions’. BITS Pilani’s score in this category has dropped from 50.32 in 2017 to 42.47 in 2020. As the exact methodology of this metric is not very clear, it is difficult to comment on the performance in this score.

Concluding Remarks

The ‘Research and Professional Practice’ (RP) category is where BITS Pilani’s score is significantly lower than VIT’s and the IITs’ scores. BITS Pilani’s rank in this category has dropped from 20^th in 2017 to 36^th in 2020. 

The difference in marks with VIT is because of lower scores in the subheads related to publications and their quality. These subheads contribute 75 points out of 100 to the RP category and 22.5 points to the total tally (30% of 75).

VIT has improved its RP score by 10 points in the last three years, taking the difference between BITS Pilani’s and VIT’s score in this category to approximately 30 points. This leads to a difference of approximately 9 points in the overall score (30% of 30). If BITS Pilani were to score the same as VIT in this category (keeping the score in other categories the same), its overall rank would be 10. This would be a huge jump from its current rank.

The RP score can affect the ‘Perception’ (PR) score as the PR score is calculated after conducting surveys from academia and industry. Academics would naturally prefer graduates from institutions with high research output. Since BITS Pilani’s placement statistics, according to the NIRF data, are at par with the top-ranked IITs, it can be speculated that the industry’s perception of BITS is good. The drop in the perception (PR) rank could then be attributed to low research output. 

BITS Pilani’s poor score in terms of research output can be mitigated by a change in the campus climate more conducive towards scholarship. Investment in research and funding for the same is a time-proven strategy to improve this ethos and, concurrently, academic reputation in general.