New metrics reshuffle top 30 university rankings, expose globalization gaps
A view of Yeungnam University’s campus in Gyeongsan, North Gyeongsang Province / Courtesy of Yeungnam University
Yeungnam, Kookmin break into top 30 as student retention, international faculty emerge as key differentiators
The top 30 of The Korea Times University Rankings 2027 remained largely stable — 28 of last year's 30 universities held their places — but beneath that continuity, a revised methodology reshaped individual positions and exposed widening gaps in the quality and depth of internationalization at Korean universities.
Seoul-based private universities dominated the top 30, though seven universities outside the capital region also made the cut. They included regional flagship national universities — Pusan, Kyungpook, Jeonbuk and Chungnam — as well as private institutions known for their internationalization efforts, such as Woosong, Handong Global and Yeungnam universities.
Yeungnam University and Kookmin University were the only newcomers, climbing three and four spots from 32nd and 34th last year to 29th and 30th, respectively.
Graphic by Bae So-young
Yeungnam's rise was driven largely by its strong performance in international research. The private university in Gyeongsan, North Gyeongsang Province, ranked ninth among the 60 institutions in the research category with 30.95 points, placing first in the share of internationally collaborative research papers and third in field-weighted citation impact.
Kookmin's rise was driven largely by gains in international student retention, where its score increased by 2.55 points from the previous year — the biggest contributor to its climb. A higher score for the share of papers published in the top 10 percent of academic journals also helped propel the university into the top 30.
The biggest gains within the top 30 came from Sejong University and Woosong University, which both climbed six places to seventh and 20th, respectively. Handong Global University followed with a five-place rise to 23rd, while Incheon National University and Kookmin University each moved up four spots.
On the other end, Konkuk University and Soongsil University recorded the steepest declines, both falling five places to 17th and 26th, respectively. University of Seoul and Kyungpook National University dropped four spots, while Seoul National University of Science and Technology and Jeonbuk National University each slipped three places.
Domestic and international students pose during Kookmin University's cultural and exchange event. Courtesy of Kookmin University
Retention indicator proves decisive
Behind those movements was a revised methodology that shifted emphasis to education-related indicators.
The change to the student retention indicator proved particularly consequential. Among the 54 universities assessed in both years, it was the largest positive factor for 13 universities and the largest negative factor for 25 — more than any other indicator in both directions. Universities that previously had high dropout rates among non-degree students tended to benefit from the revised calculation, while those with relatively high attrition among degree-seeking international students were more likely to lose ground.
Another key factor was the newly introduced indicator measuring the proportion of international full-time faculty, which showed the widest gap among universities across all 19 indicators.
The divide was particularly pronounced between public and private universities. The 14 public universities averaged just 0.95 points out of 10, compared with 4.05 points for the 46 private institutions — suggesting that private universities have moved more quickly to build a more international faculty.
The rankings were more spread out at the top but became increasingly tight toward the 30th-place cutoff. From 24th to 30th, several universities were separated by only fractions of a point, meaning even small changes in a single indicator could significantly shift their positions.
The results suggest that basic standards for managing international students have become widely established across the 60 universities assessed. Greater weaknesses emerged, however, in indicators reflecting the broader impact of internationalization, including the social impact of graduates and research funding from overseas sources.
Even among the top 30, strengths varied sharply by category. Handong Global University ranked second in student support but 44th in research, while Hankuk University of Foreign Studies placed 12th in education but 58th in student support.
This shows that a high overall ranking does not necessarily translate into strength across all four areas — and that universities are pursuing different paths to internationalization. For prospective international students, the results suggest that looking beyond the overall ranking to the areas that matter most to their studies and campus experience may prove more useful.