The research team spent considerable amount of time accurately analyzing the filled in data for each institute. For each institute, a score was arrived at for each parameter. For a particular parameter, the score was a composition of each of the sub-parameters.
Faculty score of an institute would be composed of faculty per student, qualification of faculty members, research articles published, contribution of the faculty to national and international journals, patents filed and granted.
Infrastructure score would be similarly composed of capital expenditure on lab equipment and consumables, expenditure on books and journals, and availability of dedicated and shared PCs per student. Similar scores were arrived at for industry interaction and placement using sub-parameters.
Appropriate and largely consistent weights were used for sub-parameters wherever necessary. Sub-parameter scores were indexed with hundred points being granted to the institute with highest score for a particular sub-parameter. Indexed scores were then added up for each institute to arrive at the total score for a particular parameter. Scores were than averaged on hundred.
Each of the parameters (faculty, infrastructure, industry interaction, and placements) was further weighed as per weights provided by experts to arrive at the total score of an institute. The institutes were then ranked as per this score on an overall basis. The ranking was done separately for the public and private institutes.
Ranking parameters
Faculty: Faculty per student; faculty qualification; faculty experience; publications by the faculty in national and international journals at different points of time; and patents filed/granted both national and international at different points of time.
Infrastructure: Expenditure on library; expenditure on lab equipment and consumables at different points of time; and labs per student.
Industry interaction: Products developed by the institute in production; projects sponsored to an institute from industry and government sources; and royalty inflow at different times.
Placements: Visits of companies for campus recruitment; job offers during campus placement; number of students placed against needed; number of job offers against needed; and salary offered during the campus placement.
Weights: Infrastructure-28; Faculty-30; Industry interaction-32; and Placement-10