7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
1/61
1
Summer Internship Project ReportSubmitted for the partial fulfillment of PGDM (2010-12)
CONDUCTED ATPharma Publication, New Delhi
Ranking of Pharmacy colleges in India
FORE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT, New Delhi
Submitted By:
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
2/61
2
Acknowledgement .........................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 4
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 6
Way Ahead.................................................................................................................................. 7
Objective ......................................................................................................................................... 8
Literature Review............................................................................................................................ 9
Methodology of Study .................................................................................................................. 14
Problem Discovery................................................................................................................ 15
Exploratory Research ............................................................................................................ 15
Problem Definition................................................................................................................ 15
Literature Review.................................................................................................................. 15
Basic research ....................................................................................................................... 15
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
3/61
3
Questionnaire Construction .................................................................................................. 16
Target Population .................................................................................................................. 16
Analysis................................................................................................................................. 16
Data Collection ............................................................................................................................. 17
Questionnaire Designing ........................................................................................................... 17
Sampling ....................................................................................................................................... 17
Data Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 19
Spearman's Correlations ........................................................................................................... 20
Regression ................................................................................................................................. 44
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 49
Findings......................................................................................................................................... 50
Limitations .................................................................................................................................... 51
Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 52Bibliography / References............................................................................................................. 53
Appendix ....................................................................................................................................... 55
Company Profile ....................................................................................................................... 55
Questionnaire 1 ......................................................................................................................... 57
Questionnaire 2 ......................................................................................................................... 59
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
4/61
4
Executive Summary
Indias Pharmaceutical sector is growing at a rate of 14 % per year. There is huge demand for
competent manpower in this industry. Yearly about 60000 students graduate in pharmaceutical
courses in India and approximately 50% give GPAT which is competitive examination for
masters course in pharmacy. Despite this huge number of students appearing for competitive
examination it hasnt enjoyed such attention from the coaching institutes and publications
houses. Last year the course for competition is changed but most of the leading publishers are
following old syllabus.
Pharma Publications basically provides the preparatory books for the competitive examinations
for post graduation in the field of pharmaceuticals with the name of GPAT success series and
NIPER success series. It also provides distance learning education for the same courses. It is now
planning to launch a national level pharma magazine with the name of Pharma Post. Pharma Post
first issue will include a national level survey on ranking of Pharmacy colleges.
This survey is done by designing two questionnaire, one for students and alumni & other for
faculty and staff members of AICTE & PCI approved Pharmacy colleges. A sample size of 488respondents was taken from web based , door to door and mail survey
For analysis median of collected sample for each variable was taken. This was done to have
linear association with each variable depended on over all rank of the institute. Then on all the
dependent variable regression was applied to form a regression model with which score for each
college is calculated to predict the rank of the college.
Spearman Rank Correlation was used on collected data which was ordinal and it is non
parametric test which could be applied on non probability sampling. At the same time it is also
used as sample size is also less than 30 for normal distribution curve.
After calculating the correlation between the overall institute and other variables, regression
model was used to calculate relation between overall institute and other parameters related. This
test is used because it can be done on non probability sampling, then it can be done on ordinal
data and it can take care of 16 independent variables at the same time.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
5/61
5
Concluding with the results from the analysis of the questionnaire is that Ranking of Pharmacy
colleges depends on student-faculty ratio , quality perceived by student of faculty members,
relevant material taught apart from books, demographics, placement ratio, procedure of
admission , library , teaching technology , interaction with alumni and laboratories.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
6/61
6
Introduction
India's US$ 11.9 billion pharmaceutical industry is growing at the rate of 14 percent per year. It
is one of the largest and most advanced among the developing countries. According to one
report, in 2010 there are 1087 pharmacy colleges and schools in India producing over 60000
pharmacy graduates yearly.
Growth Drivers for Pharmaceutical Industry
The growing population of over of a billion
Increasing income
Demand for quality healthcare service
Changing lifestyle has led to change in disease patterns, and increased demand for new
medicines to combat lifestyle related diseases
Foreign Direct Investment up to 100 per cent is permitted through the automatic route
and Automatic approval for Foreign Technology Agreements also is available in the case
of all bulk drugs cleared by Drug Controller General (India), all their intermediates and
formulations, except those restricted by the Government of India
As Indian Pharmaceutical sector is expected to grow at this rapid rate there is a hugerequirement of competent workforce to work in this industry. Yearly about 60000
students graduate in pharmaceutical courses in India and approximately 50% give GPAT
which is competitive examination for masters course in pharmacy. Despite this huge
number of students appearing for competitive examination it hasnt enjoyed such
attention from the coaching institutes, publications. Last year the course for competition
is changed but most of the leading publishers are following old syllabus.
Seeing this void in the industry , a young entrepreneur from a leading MBA college has come up
with a business plan to startup a Publication house Pharma Publications. Pharma Publications is
a proprietorship firm owned by Ms. Jyotika Kapoor. The firm started its operation in 2010 and is
at present in the business of education. The firm basically provides the preparatory books for the
competitive examinations for post graduation in the field of pharmaceuticals which are basically
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
7/61
7
GPAT and NIPER with the name GPAT success series and NIPER success series. It also
provides distance learning education for the same courses. It is also pioneer in launch of all-India
mock online test series for GPAT and NIPER exams with the name of iGPAT and iNIPER. It is
only player in the market which provides solution detailed analysis of the mock examination,
which help students to improve their grip on the subject. It is also pioneer in launching books
with complete changed syllabus for the exam.
In such a short span of time it has moved forward at rapid pace and has made relations with few
coaching institutes and colleges, which would recommend its books. Apart from this these
relations also help in providing students for all India test series. The list of these clients includes
but not limited to
VNS Institute of Pharmacy, Bhopal
IIMT College of Pharmacy, Greater Noida
Pharmula Academy, Hyderabad
Essence Academy, Hyderabad
Way Ahead
In the coming year Pharma Publications intent to grow many times. It plans to enter different
fields related to pharma. In the coming few months its going to launch a national level pharma
magazine on the name of Pharma Post. It is planning to start MBA in pharma at the start of next
year for which it is in constant talk with one of the pharmacy college in NCR and deal for the
same is at infant stage and expected to mature in coming few months. Afterwards in the coming
few years it has also planned to open virtual class rooms for competitive examinations.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
8/61
8
Objective
Pharma Publication which is a budding Publication house for aspiring pharmacy students. Its
going to launch a national level pharma magazine with the name of Pharma Post. As of now
there is not much information available about top colleges in pharmacy. For this Pharma
Publications is doing a national level survey from the existing students, alumni, faculty and staff
members of pharmacy colleges approved AICTE and PCI (Pharma Council of India) and come
up with a ranking of these colleges in its first issue.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
9/61
9
Literature Review
1 Martin Schatz (1), Ranking of business schools has been a controversial subject for a
number of years. There are two problems associated with the popular rankings of
MBA programs. The first problem is that people foolishly tend to believe that there is
significance to the order in which the schools appear. The second problem is that the
rankings have a tendency to become self-fulfilling prophecies.
Its further explained with example of two rankings :Business Weekand U.S. News &
World Report.Business Weekreportedly bases its rankings on two factors; a survey of
recent graduates from the schools being evaluated, and a survey of corporate
executives. First flaw in their report was that of some 700 colleges and universities inthis country that offer the MBA degree, Business Weekpre-selected forty-four
schools to be included. But how did they determine which forty-four schools to
include in their survey? Anything that they did with the data after that first decision is
irrelevant if there is not a valid way of selecting the initial set of schools. Another
flaw in its methodology rests on the premise that business executives know anything
at all about the quality of business schools. As a matter of fact, the executives do
know is from reading earlier issues ofBusiness Week. It is also likely that at best, the
executives evaluate the education received by the graduates of these schools on the
basis of one or two individual graduates whom they happen to know, rather than on
any extensive research. Then third flaw in methodology was that judging the quality
of a school on the apparent popularity of the graduates. Its likely that a very large
school that is not particularly distinguished will turn out more successful graduates
who are visible than a very small school that has higher standards and expectations
for its students, but nevertheless has far fewer graduates.
In U.S. News & World Reportsurvey methodology of ranking the schools by the
people who should know -- the deans of the 270 MBA programs accredited by the
American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business. The problem with this logic
was that these people don't know any more about each other's school. First, based on
the very high turnover rate of business school deans, a good many deans are new to
the job (approximately ten percent each year) and don't even know very much about
their own school. Second, except for a few visits that a given dean may take to other
schools for the purpose of evaluating them for continued accreditation, even long-
standing deans don't really know much about more than a handful of schools. And
finally, there are no criteria.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
10/61
10
2 Morse, Robert J (2) These rankings are based on data from the Times Higher Education-QS World University Rankings, which were produced in association with QSQuacquarelli Symonds. These ranking are different from other rankings in two ways.
First, none of the data from the America's Best Colleges and America's Best GraduateSchools lists is used in the World's Best Colleges and Universities rankings. QSQuacquarelli Symonds does all the data collection and calculations for the World'sBest Colleges rankings.
Second, the methodology used to compute the World's Best Colleges is different inmany key areas. The World's Best Colleges rankings use six criteria: academic peerreview, employer review, student/faculty ratio, citations per faculty member, theproportion of international faculty, and the proportion of international students.
3 Cosh Colby (3) The article is based on Macleans magazine survey of Canadian
Universities. It point out the flaws in the methodology used by magazine in the
survey. The methodology gives high percentage of 11% in overall scores to the
students admitted in the university. It is done by seeing the marks in the high school
of the students taking admission in the university. Now point to consider in the article
is that every high school doesnt have same marking criteria and it is well explained
in the article with the example of Alberta high school and with Ontario high school.
In the first marks are highly weighted towards performance in province wide
departmental exams whereas in later this aspect is missing. So students of Ontario can
score 80% or more in exams more easily then students in Alberta. Thus college
admitting student from Ontario will get benefit in ranking.
4 Staff, (4) The article is based on community college ranking. The ranking states that
ranking could be done by seeing the size of college. In the ranking methodology 200
community colleges were divided into 3 groups based on the number of students
inside the college. It was small colleges with fewer than 3000 students, mid-size
college with 3000-7000 students and large size colleges with more than 7000
students. And then article states survey was formed separately and questionnairecontained mostly closed ended questions.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
11/61
11
5 Editor (5) , The article provides information about the full rankings for national
universities and liberal arts colleges. They have also provided a top fifty ranking for
three other categories of schools: master's universities, baccalaureate colleges, and
community colleges. And in light of surging student demand for service
opportunities, they have enhanced our service measures for 2010. In addition to rating
colleges on criteria such as the number of students participating in ROTC and the
Peace Corps, they factored five new measures, including how many students engage
in community service and whether a college provides matching dollars for service-
oriented scholarships like AmeriCorps. An introduction to a series of articles on the
best U.S. universities and colleges based on how they are meeting their public
obligations in the areas of research, service, and social mobility. They include the
University of California-San Diego, Stanford University in California, University of
Texas in Austin, Syracuse University in New York, Harvard University in
Massachusetts, Morehouse College in Georgia, Bryn Mawr College in Pennsylvania,
Berea College in Kentucky, Amherst College in Massachusetts, and Bowdoin Collegein Maine.
6 Baumann, Robert W, Chu, David K. W. & Anderton, Charles (6), In the article a study is
shown of various colleges and it is compared from the data it contained earlier since
the debut of the U.S. News & World Report College Guide in 1983, the U.S. News &
World Report College Guide has become the premier 'consumer report' of higher
education. It was found that peer assessment, which has been the largest component
of the U.S. News & World Report ranking function, contained a penalty forreligiously affiliated schools that were independent of the other U.S. News & World
Report variables and several proxies for quality. Possible explanations of the religious
penalty included taste-based discrimination, perceived differences in the quality of
the curriculum, and strategic voting by college administrators.
7 Poyer, David (7), This paper assesses the Black Enterprise Magazine (BE) ranking of the
top 50 colleges for African Americans, which it publishes biennially. Its principal
objective is to evaluate the statistical consistency in the ranking over the distribution
of institutions that compose it. The paper attempts to address two-related questions.
Does the BE report provide an unbiased and consistent assessment of the educational
value associated with the institutions included in their listing? Is the ranking method
internally consistent? Two experiments were used to evaluate the consistency of the
BE ranking.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
12/61
12
First, structural difference in the model used to rank the institutions in the upper and
lower half of the distribution is tested.
Second, structural difference in the model used to rank HBCU and non-HBCU
institutions included in the BE listed ranking is tested. In both cases the null
hypothesis of the same structure is rejected.
8 Jones, D. Yvonne (8), This paper assesses about the recent ACRL guidelines and
standards urge academic librarians to compare selected input and output measures
with peer institutions for assessment. This paper provides an example of such a
comparison, using a freely available statistical tool from the National Center for
Education Statistics (NCES). Applying the NCES data tool to liberal arts colleges
chosen by U.S. News and World Report (USN&WR) as the Best Liberal Arts
Colleges provides one strategy for choosing financial benchmarks to target, as wellas staffing and output measures for comparison. Using liberal arts colleges ranked in
the top third by USN&WR, about $2,000/FTE would be the 2004 reported amount
that the best colleges spent on library resources.
9 Credle, Sid Howard, Maheshwari, Sharad & Davenport, Janelle Pridgen (9) , This paper
is written for an African-American, choosing the best college or university is
important since the choice of college includes the complex decision of whether to
attend one of the nation's 89, 4-year Historically Black Colleges or Universities(HBCU) or a Traditionally White Institution (TWI). Numerous periodicals publish
annual rankings of the nation's "best colleges. " Black Enterprise magazine (BE)
focuses on the best colleges for African-Americans. Recently, BE's rankings were
criticized by the editors of the Journal of Blacks in Higher Education (JBHE 2005)for
"stacking the deck" in favor of HBCUs by applying a low weight to important factors
such as retention and graduation rates.
This study uses a variation of the College-Football Success Model (Walker, Keogh, &
Civils, 2006), to determine the rankings of the best universities for African
Americans. With this model we also answer the question; what type of institution, theHBCU or the TWI, is the "best" college choice for African-Americans? The results
collected on 411 of the most influential African-Americans in the country, indicate
that HBCUs with approximately 32 percent of undergraduate degrees conferred
nationally produced 156 of the 411 (or 38%) most influential African-Americans in
2005. It was also found that although HBCUs represent only 4 percent of the nation's
approximately 1,800 four year colleges, 52 (or 26%) of the 202 undergraduate
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
13/61
13
schools attended by these individuals were HBCUs. The study also indicates that
there is no difference between HBCUs and TWIs in the movement of graduates into
"top-quality" graduate schools.
10 Hartley, James E. & Robinson, Michael D (10),The economic research done at national
liberal arts colleges, although valuable in and of itself, would be more valuable if, asMcCaughey argues, it was connected to the teaching effectiveness of the college.
Measures of teaching effectiveness are notoriously hard to compute. One readily
available measure of teaching quality is the number of students from a liberal arts
college who go on to graduate work.
With generated measure of research aptitude, the number of scholarly publications, it
is straightforward to examine the relationship of faculty research to student
achievements. Data were collected on the number of Ph.D.'s in economics granted
between 1989 and 1994 to the graduates of the liberal arts colleges in our sample.(n7)
We estimated a linear regression of the number of Ph.D.'s received by the graduates
of a liberal arts college on the total number of publications of the faculty of that
college. We controlled department size (assuming bigger departments with more
mayors should send a larger number of students to graduate school) and the quality of
the institution as measured by the 1995 U.S. News & World Report ranking
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
14/61
14
Methodology of Study
The project was desired to follow the below process
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
15/61
15
Problem Discovery: When I joined Pharma Publications it has already planned to launch a
magazine named Pharma Post but it was unable to do so because it promised its subscribers that
it will be doing first pharma college ranking. But it was unable to do research project as a result
the launch of magazine was delayed because it wanted to launch with ranking. So project for me
was decided to be all India ranking of Pharma Publications.
Exploratory Research: Pilot study of the project was carried out and in it two things were
done and time period for this was scheduled to be 0.5 week (3-4 days).
Expert Interview: Experts from pharma education sector (Mr. Varindra Kumar, Mr.
Divanshu Kapoor, Ms Jotika Kapoor) and research (Mohit Rawal) were contacted. Mr.
Varindra Kumar & Mr. Divanshu Kapoor told about the important parts of a to know
about feasibility of the research project and also know all the parameters which are
important in a pharma college. At the same time Mr Mohit Rawal was contacted to know
deadlines more accurately and know the various sampling techniques which could be
applied to collect data. At the same time he made point that sampling for All-India level
would take much more time and project could not be completed in 6 weeks. So he
advised to conduct the survey for colleges in Delhi/NCR region only.
FGD: Focus group discussion was carried out between Varindra Kumar, Sunil Kumar,
Divanshu Kapoor, Mohit Rawal, Ms. Jotika Kapoor and Ashok Kumar. During the
discussion points came in forward were factors on which ranking would depend and it
was also suggested that ranking should be done only for colleges in Delhi-NCR region.
In both it was also decided two separate questionnaire would be constructed. One for faculty and
other staff members and other for the students and alumni of the college.
Problem Definition: In the exploratory research it was confirmed that ranking could be done
for only colleges in Delhi-NCR region and the problem was defined to be calculate ranking for
PHARMA colleges in the region which are approved by AICTE and PCI.
Literature Review: Since problem was finalized, now literature review was done on college
ranking formats and also it was done to know parameters which should be considered andparameters which should not be considered. And flaws in ranking by other magazines were also
studied, so that research could be error less. Time period for the same was decided to be 1 week.
Basic research: It was decided that research could be done by primary research in which
questionnaire would be filled and secondary research was done on ranking done by other firms
on the colleges.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
16/61
16
Primary research was done by data collection in the form of survey with the help of
questionnaires. Questionnaires were chosen with close end questions, so that analysis could be
done on the them.
The secondary research was important because we could know regression was to be applied and
we require assigning certain weights to components and taking weighted average whilecalculating the rank.
Questionnaire Construction: Scale used in the questionnaires was nominal, ordinal and
interval scale. And in the grid likert scale was used and it used a series of statements with which
respondents indicated their agreement or disagreement about a particular topic. While calculating
mean was taken from interval data and percentage and median was used from ordinal data.
Then index measurement was done to measure the rank depending upon different composite
measures like faculty student ratio, average faculty experience, their mode qualification and
others parameters collected in survey
Target Population: the target population for the survey is all the students, alumni and the staff
members of institutes under study.
Sample Frame: the sample frame can be drawn from
Students of colleges joined groups on social websites
Students who attended seminars from Pharma Publication in past
Students who enquired about the Pharma Publications
Faculty members who were present on social websites Directors or principal of the institutes
Analysis: on the collected data spearman correlation test is done to find the correlation between
dependent and independent variables and then regression is done on all the variables which are
correlated
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
17/61
17
Data Collection
Questionnaire Designing:
The questionnaires were designed in a such a way that it contained mostly fixed alternative
questions. This was done because it requires lesser time to analyze the responses then it would berequired to analyze open ended questions. At the same time all the potential options were
examined and chosen in the exploratory research stage in personal interview. So it was beneficial
to choose close end questions.
At the same time while framing questions it was taken care that all the questions asked have
certain relevancy with the topic. To make sure this questionnaire was cross checked by
supervisor in the industry as well as faculty member(Ms. Sumeet Kaur) also rechecked the
questionnaire to make sure all are relevant questions and questionnaire is free from errors like
double barreled questions or it doesnt have any assumptions made or tested the memory of the
respondents. It was also taken care that questionnaire is not having any leading or loadingquestions. And it used simple language and it doesnt made assumptions.
To make sure of accuracy few pitfall questions were also kept and few questions were repeated
in grid in different form. So if the respondent was trying to give invalid answer would fall in one
of this and all those questionnaire could be rejected as it would not give true picture of the
respondents.
Sampling: As colleges which were to be ranked were in entire NCR, so various sampling
techniques were decided which could be used to collect the data. The techniques used for
sampling were:
Convenience Sampling
o Mail Sampling
o Internet Sampling
o Personal Interview
Convenience sampling techniques were chosen for personal interviews in the few colleges which
decided to participate in survey in Delhi/ NCR region. So with sampling questionnaires were
filled by students by personally interacting with them and explaining them meaning of each and
every question.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
18/61
18
In internet sampling technique mails were floated to all the data base present with the pharma
publications and apart from this all college groups on social networking sites like face book,
orkut were also targeted and links for the surveyed were mailed in the groups also.
In mail sampling principals and directors of all the colleges were send postal mails for the
surveys and they were requested to submit it back by post or address of links were also given inletters if they wanted to submit it online.
Door to door sampling technique was used for colleges for which database was not sufficient or
respondents didnt filled the survey. In this way we were able to collect at least 20 entries per
college to conduct surveys.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
19/61
19
Data Analysis
In total 488 respondents filled the survey forms and so sample size was of 488. Out of whichtotal replies from the students were 448 and only 40 replies were collected from the faculty andother staff members of the institute. Out of the above collected samples 62 samples of students
were rejected as it contained errors while filling the survey. And on the rest statistics testing wasdone.
For further analysis median of collected sample for each variable was taken. This was done tohave linear association with each variable depended on over all rank of the institute. Then on allthe dependent variable regression was applied to form a regression model with which score foreach college could be calculated to predict the rank of the college.
Spearman Rank Correlation was used collected data was ordinal and it is non parametric testwhich could be applied on non probability sampling. At the same time it is also used as samplesize is also less than 30 for normal distribution curve.
After calculating the correlation between the overall institute and other variables regressionmodel was used to calculate relation between overall institute and other parameters related. Thistest is used because it can be done non probability sampling, then it can be done on ordinal dataand it can take care of 16 independent variables at the same time.
In significant rank correlation following formulas are used
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
20/61
20
Spearman's Correlations
Test 1
To test correlation between overall institute and student faculty ratio
H0: there is no correlation between both
H1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
student faculty
ratio
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 -.939**
Sig. (2-tailed) . .000
N 22 22
student faculty ratio Correlation
Coefficient
-.939** 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .
N 22 22**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon student faculty ratio
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
21/61
21
Test 2
To test correlation between overall institute and number of relevant material
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
Number of
relevantmaterial apart
from books
taught in the
class rooms
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .602**
Sig. (2-tailed) . .003
N 22 22
Number of relevantmaterial apart from
books taught in the class
rooms
CorrelationCoefficient
.602**
1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .003 .
N 22 22
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon number of relevant material
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
22/61
22
Test 3
To test correlation between overall institute and number of times teachers are late in the calss
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
Number of
times teachers
are late in
class
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .086
Sig. (2-tailed) . .702
N 22 22
Number of times
teachers are late in class
Correlation
Coefficient
.086 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .702 .
N 22 22
NONPAR CORR /VARIABLES=UntitledQuestionOverallinstitute
We fail to reject null hypothesis of correlation, so we cannot be sure about any relationship
between overall institute and number of times teacher is late in the class. So we will not take it in
regression testing
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
23/61
23
Test 4
To test correlation between overall institute and demographics of the batch
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
Demographics
of batch
mainly
consists of
students from
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .891**
Sig. (2-tailed) . .000
N 22 22
Demographics of batch
mainly consists of
students from
Correlation
Coefficient
.891** 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .
N 22 22
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon demographics of the batch
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
24/61
24
Test 5
To test correlation between overall institute and placement ratio
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
What is the
placement
ratio of the
instituteSpearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .831**
Sig. (2-tailed) . .000
N 22 22
What is the placement
ratio of the institute
Correlation
Coefficient
.831** 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .
N 22 22
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon placement ratio
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
25/61
25
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
26/61
26
Test 6
To test correlation between overall institute and how many clubs or committees are there ininstitute for extra/co-curricular activities
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
How many
clubs or
committees
are there ininstitute for
extra /co-
curricular
activities
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .381
Sig. (2-tailed) . .081
N 22 22
How many clubs orcommittees are there in
institute for extra /co-
curricular activities
CorrelationCoefficient
.381 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .081 .
N 22 22
NONPAR CORR /VARIABLES=UntitledQuestionOverallinstitute
We fail to reject null hypothesis of correlation, so we cannot be sure about any relationship
between overall institute and number of committees/clubs in the institute. So we will not take it
in regression testing
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
27/61
27
Test 7
To test correlation between overall institute and number of seminars conducted in the institute
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overallinstitute]
Number of
seminars
conducted in
the premisesof the institute
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .778**
Sig. (2-tailed) . .000
N 22 22
Number of seminars
conducted in the
premises of the institute
Correlation
Coefficient
.778** 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .
N 22 22**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon number of seminars conducted in the institute
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
28/61
28
Test 8
To test correlation between overall institute and procedure of admission of the students in theinstitute
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
UntitledQuestion
[Overall
institute]
What is
procedure ofadmission of
students in
college
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .777**
Sig. (2-tailed) . .000
N 22 22
What is procedure of
admission of students incollege
Correlation
Coefficient
.777**
1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .
N 22 22
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon admission procedure in the institute
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
29/61
29
Test 9
To test correlation between overall institute and quality of faculty
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
Untitled
Question
[quality of
faculty
teaching the
program]
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .585**
Sig. (2-tailed) . .004
N 22 22
Untitled Question
[quality of faculty
teaching the program]
Correlation
Coefficient
.585** 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .004 .
N 22 22
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the bothvariables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon quality of faculty teaching
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
30/61
30
Test 10
To test correlation between overall institute and curriculum followed by the instituteH0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
Untitled
Question
[curriculum
followed by
the
institute/unive
rsity]
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .549**
Sig. (2-tailed) . .008
N 22 22
Untitled Question
[curriculum followed by
the institute/university]
Correlation
Coefficient
.549** 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .008 .
N 22 22
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the bothvariables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon curriculum followed by the institute
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
31/61
31
Test 11
To test correlation between overall institute and firmness in time table
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
Untitled
Question
[firmness in
timetable
followed by
the institute ]
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .378
Sig. (2-tailed) . .082
N 22 22
Untitled Question
[firmness in timetable
followed by the institute
]
Correlation
Coefficient
.378 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .082 .
N 22 22
NONPAR CORR /VARIABLES=UntitledQuestionOverallinstitute
We fail to reject null hypothesis of correlation, so we cannot be sure about any relationship
between overall institute and firmness in time table followed by institute. So we will not take it
in regression testing
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
32/61
32
Test 12
To test correlation between overall institute and sternness about attendance
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
Untitled
Question
[institutes
sternness
about
attendance]
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 -.246
Sig. (2-tailed) . .270
N 22 22
Untitled Question
[institutes sternness
about attendance]
Correlation
Coefficient
-.246 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .270 .
N 22 22
NONPAR CORR /VARIABLES=UntitledQuestionOverallinstitute
We fail to reject null hypothesis of correlation, so we cannot be sure about any relationship
between overall institute and institutes sternness about attendance. So we will not take it in
regression testing
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
33/61
33
Test 13
To test correlation between overall institute and institutes existing infrastructure
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
UntitledQuestion
[institutes
existing
infrastructure]
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .457*
Sig. (2-tailed) . .032
N 22 22
Untitled Question[institutes existing
infrastructure]
CorrelationCoefficient
.457* 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .032 .
N 22 22
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon institutes infrastructure
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
34/61
34
Test 14
To test correlation between overall institute and library of the institutes
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overallinstitute]
Untitled
Question
[library of theinstitute]
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .883**
Sig. (2-tailed) . .000
N 22 22
Untitled Question
[library of the institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
.883**
1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .
N 22 22
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon library of the institute
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
35/61
35
Test 15
To test correlation between overall institute and advancement in teaching technology
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
Untitled
Question[institutes
advancement
in teaching
technology
that is use of
multimedia in
classrooms]
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .434*
Sig. (2-tailed) . .049
N 22 21
Untitled Question
[institutes advancement
in teaching technology
that is use of multimedia
in classrooms]
Correlation
Coefficient
.434*
1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .049 .
N 21 21
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon advancement in teaching technology
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
36/61
36
Test 16
To test correlation between overall institute and placement ratio as compare to other institutes
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
UntitledQuestion
[final
placement of
the institute as
compare to
other pharma
colleges]
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .617**
Sig. (2-tailed) . .002
N 22 22
Untitled Question [final
placement of the
institute as compare to
other pharma colleges]
Correlation
Coefficient
.617** 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .002 .
N 22 22
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon final placement of the institute as compare to others
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
37/61
37
Test 17
To test correlation between overall institute and interaction with alumini
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
Untitled
Question
[Interaction
with Alumini ]
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .536*
Sig. (2-tailed) . .010
N 22 22
Untitled Question
[Interaction with
Alumini ]
Correlation
Coefficient
.536* 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .010 .
N 22 22
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon interaction with alumni
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
38/61
38
Test 18
To test correlation between overall institute and institutes laboratories
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overallinstitute]
Untitled
Question
[instituteslaboratories]
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .846**
Sig. (2-tailed) . .000
N 22 22
Untitled Question
[institutes laboratories]
Correlation
Coefficient
.846** 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .
N 22 22**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon institute laboratories
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
39/61
39
Test 19
To test correlation between overall institute and opportunities provided in extra-curricularactivities
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
Untitled
Question[opportunities
provided in
extra-
curricular
activities]
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .459*
Sig. (2-tailed) . .031
N 22 22Untitled Question
[opportunities provided
in extra-curricular
activities]
Correlation
Coefficient
.459*
1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .031 .
N 22 22
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon opportunities provided in extra-curricular activities
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
40/61
40
Test 20
To test correlation between overall institute and opportunities provided in co-curricular activities.
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
UntitledQuestion
[Overall
institute]
Untitled
Question
[opportunitiesprovided in
co-curricular
activities]
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .533*
Sig. (2-tailed) . .011
N 22 22
Untitled Question
[opportunities providedin co-curricular
activities]
Correlation
Coefficient
.533* 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .011 .
N 22 22
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon opportunities provided in co-curricular activities
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
41/61
41
Test 21
To test correlation between overall institute and computer labs in the latest software
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
UntitledQuestion
[Overall
institute]
Untitled
Question
[ComputerLab in terms
of latest
software]
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 -.213
Sig. (2-tailed) . .342
N 22 22
Untitled Question
[Computer Lab in termsof latest softwares]
Correlation
Coefficient
-.213 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .342 .
N 22 22
We fail to reject null hypothesis of correlation, so we cannot be sure about any relationship
between overall institute and latest software used in the computer lab. So we will not take it in
regression testing
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
42/61
42
Test 22
To test correlation between overall institute and average experience of faculty
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overallinstitute]
average
experience offaulty member
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .821**
Sig. (2-tailed) . .000
N 22 22
average experience of
faulty member
Correlation
Coefficient
.821** 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .
N 22 22
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon average experience of faculty member
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
43/61
43
Test 23
To test correlation between overall institute and Average qualification of faculty members
H0: there is no correlation between bothH1: there is significant correlation between the both
Correlations
Untitled
Question
[Overall
institute]
Average
qualification
of faculty
members
Spearman's rho Untitled Question
[Overall institute]
Correlation
Coefficient
1.000 .881**
Sig. (2-tailed) . .000
N 22 22
Average qualification of
faculty members
Correlation
Coefficient
.881** 1.000
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .
N 22 22
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Just from spearman correlation test we can see there is significant correlation between the both
variables and thus we reject null hypothesis and we can say that their overall institute is
dependent upon average qualification of faculty members
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
44/61
44
Regression
Variables Entered/Removed
Model Variables Entered
Variables
Removed Method
1 average experience of faulty member, Untitled Question [opportunities
provided in extra-curricular activities], Untitled Question [institutes
advancement in teaching technology that is use of multimedia in
classrooms], Untitled Question [institutes existing infrastructure], Untitled
Question [curriculum followed by the institute/university], Untitled Question
[opportunities provided in co-curricular activities], Untitled Question
[Interaction with Alumini ], Untitled Question [quality of faculty teaching the
program], Untitled Question [library of the institute], student faculty ratio,
What is the placement ratio of the institute, Number of relevant material
apart from books taught in the class rooms, What is procedure of admission
of students in college, Untitled Question [institutes laboratories],
Demographics of batch mainly consists of students from, Average
qualification of faculty membersa
. Enter
a. All requested variables entered.
Model Summary
Model R R Square
Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .927a
.859 .819 .3787
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
45/61
45
Model Summary
Model R R Square
Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .927a
.859 .819 .3787
a. Predictors: (Constant), average experience of faulty member,
Untitled Question [opportunities provided in extra-curricular activities],
Untitled Question [institutes advancement in teaching technology that is
use of multimedia in classrooms], Untitled Question [institutes existing
infrastructure], Untitled Question [curriculum followed by the
institute/university], Untitled Question [opportunities provided in co-
curricular activities], Untitled Question [Interaction with Alumini ],
Untitled Question [quality of faculty teaching the program], Untitled
Question [library of the institute], student faculty ratio, What is the
placement ratio of the institute, Number of relevant material apart from
books taught in the class rooms, What is procedure of admission of
students in college, Untitled Question [institutes laboratories],
Demographics of batch mainly consists of students from, Average
qualification of faculty members
ANOVAb
Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 21.458 16 1.341 25.647 .003a
Residual .209 4 .052
Total 21.667 20
a. Predictors: (Constant), average experience of faulty member, Untitled Question [opportunities
provided in extra-curricular activities], Untitled Question [institutes advancement in teaching
technology that is use of multimedia in classrooms], Untitled Question [institutes existing
infrastructure], Untitled Question [curriculum followed by the institute/university], Untitled Question
[opportunities provided in co-curricular activities], Untitled Question [Interaction with Alumini ],
Untitled Question [quality of faculty teaching the program], Untitled Question [library of the
institute], student faculty ratio, What is the placement ratio of the institute, Number of relevant
material apart from books taught in the class rooms, What is procedure of admission of students in
college, Untitled Question [institutes laboratories], Demographics of batch mainly consists of
students from, Average qualification of faculty members
b. Dependent Variable: Untitled Question [Overall institute]
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
46/61
46
Coefficientsa
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) 4.816 1.498 3.215 .032
student faculty ratio -.347 .115 -.597 -3.010 .040
Average qualification of faculty
members
-.314 .268 .342 -1.169 .307
Number of relevant material
apart from books taught in the
class rooms
.898 .289 .467 3.109 .036
Demographics of batch mainly
consists of students from
.095 .245 .188 .390 .717
What is the placement ratio of
the institute
.656 .206 .556 3.188 .033
What is procedure of admission
of students in college
-.017 .138 .020 -.123 .908
Untitled Question [quality of
faculty teaching the program]
.099 .148 .089 .673 .538
Untitled Question [curriculum
followed by the
institute/university]
-.396 .182 .392 -2.179 .095
Untitled Question [institutes
existing infrastructure]
.302 .179 .169 1.686 .167
Untitled Question [library of the
institute]
.282 .146 .339 1.938 .125
Untitled Question [institutes
advancement in teaching
technology that is use of
multimedia in classrooms]
.443 .157 .257 2.813 .048
Untitled Question [Interaction
with Alumini ]
-.308 .154 -.287 -1.996 .117
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
47/61
47
Untitled Question [institutes
laboratories]
.130 .166 .133 .783 .477
Untitled Question [opportunities
provided in extra-curricular
activities]
-.630 .188 -.429 -3.359 .028
Untitled Question [opportunities
provided in co-curricular
activities]
-.226 .129 -.166 -1.747 .155
average experience of faulty
member
-.066 .187 -.078 -.352 .743
a. Dependent Variable: Untitled Question [Overall institute]
So the regression equation will be
Overall institute = -.597 X student faculty ratio + 0.342 X Average qualification of faculty +
0.467 X No. of relevant material + .188 X Demographics + .556 X Placement ratio + .02 X
procedure of admission - .392 X curriclum followed - .169 X infrastructure + .339 X library +
.257 X advancement in teaching + .287 X alumini + .133 laboratorie - .429 X extracurricular -
.166 X co curricular - .078 X exp of faculty + 4.816
On applying the above formula anks were calculated for the institutes
I am calculating regression based on 16 variables and if we give equal weight age to each
parameter than each parameter would get approximately 6% weightage in the ranking equation.
However while doing literature review, I noticed that ranking is more dependent on few of the
parameters. E.g. Faculty plays a major role in the ranking of the college. Hence low student-
faculty ratio is considered good for ranking. As there are three questions pertaining to faculty
hence the overall weightage taken for faculty is high. Demographics also takes high weightage as
a good college must have students from different part of country. Placements also impacts the
ranking though its weighted contribution should be ideally lower than demographics and faculty
ratio. Similarly based on these factors weights are given to different parameters and rank iscalculated.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
48/61
48
Rank Name of college Score
1 Shri Vishnu College of Pharmacy Vishnupur, Andhra
Pradesh ,Andhra Pradesh University3.36
2 Sri Venkateswara College of Pharmacy ,Andhra
Pradesh , Osmania University3.34
3 jamia hamdard, hamdard university 3.13
4 A R College & G H Patel Institute of Pharmacy ,
Gujarat , Sardar Patel University2.74
5 Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences Guru
Jambheswar University, Haryana2.61
6 Al-Ameen College of Pharmacy, Bangalore, Rajiv
Gandhi University2.45
7 mgm institue of health sciences 2.208 Acharya Institutes ,Bangalore, Bangalore University 2.19
9 Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University 2.05
10 ROLAND INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES 2.01
11Guru Nanak Institute Of Pharmaceutical Science &
Technology1.98
12 IIMT college of pharmacy 1.92
13 St. Mary's college of Pharmacy 1.84
14 Innovative College of Pharmacy 1.73
15Shree Ganpati Institute of Technology College of
Pharmacy,1.64
16Ram-Eesh Institute of Vocational & Technical
Education1.53
17 Gangami College of Pharmacy 1.49
18 School of Pharmacy Chouksey Engineering College 1.39
19 Kiet School of Pharmacy 1.37
20 Dehat Vikas College Of Pharmacy 0.91
21 himalayan Pharmacy institute 0.72
22 B.S. Anangpuria Institute Of Pharmacy 0.32
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
49/61
49
Conclusion
On the basis of regression analysis we could see that Shri Vishnu College of PharmacyVishnupur topped the ranking from the colleges which participated in the survey as it had low
student faculty ratio and scored high on all other parameters. And colleges like himalayan
Pharmacy institute, Dehat Vikas College Of Pharmacy and B.S. Anangpuria Institute Of
Pharmacy scored high on the variables which were having inverse relation as a result their rank
came out to be lowest and their overall score is too low.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
50/61
50
Findings
Some of the interesting findings which came in front of the regression test were
Curriculum followed by institute/university had negative relation, this meant that students
and faculty members of institutes which were having lower rank felt that their syllabus is
better than other peer institutes.
Infrastructure of the institutes has negative relation with rank.
Extra-curricular activities also had negative relation with rank.
Co-curricular activities also had negative relation with rank.
Strangely quality of faculty had a positive relation with rank but experience of faculty
had negative relation with rank. And when test with each other I found there is no
correlation between experience and quality of faculty
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
51/61
51
Limitations
1. There were three methods followed to conduct the survey i.e. self-administered survey ,web based survey and mail based survey. So, there is a chance of respondent error in theother two methods followed.
2. There were lesser response from respondents from far of colleges like college from Souththan colleges from NCR region.
3. Responses from faculty was lesser than expected.
4. As convenience sampling is used hence there is sampling bias and that the sample is not
representative of the entire population.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
52/61
52
Recommendations
Advertisingfocus more on online advertising , social advertising by creating profile ofPharma Publication and joining all the groups of target colleges (Graduate pharmacy
colleges).
Students database should be enhanced by conducting regular surveys and seminars with
students
Partnership with Pharma colleges so as to publish articles about their college in Pharma
Post or publishing interviews of chairman or director of the colleges.
Sales promotions should be done in colleges by tying up with the graduate pharmacy
college authorities for example by putting up canopies in front of these colleges and also
by placing cloth banner in front of them.
Work Force : Full time experienced and competent marketing employee should be hired.
Distribution : Proper distribution network should be built to increase its penetration with
target students.
Increase the product portfolio : By introducing books for graduate and post graduatePharma courses.
Tie-ups: Company should make some tie up with the colleges and coaching institutes in
the region. These places are frequently visited by the target consumer base.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
53/61
53
Bibliography / References
1. Martin Schatz, Ph.D. (1993). What's Wrong With MBA Ranking Surveys, Management
Research News 16(7), 15-18
2. Morse, Robert J.(2008). Our First Rankings of the World's Best Colleges. U.S. News &
World Report; 12/1/2008, Vol. 145 Issue 12, p73-73
3. Cosh Colby, (2003). Why college ranking fails, The reporter January 6, 2003, 40-41
4. Staff, (2007). TC3 ties for first in digital community college ranking, The Central New
York Business Journal April 13, 2007, 20
5. Editor, (2010). INTRODUCTION: A DIFFERENT KIND OF COLLEGE RANKING,
Washington Monthly; Sep/Oct2010, Vol. 42 Issue 9/10, p15-18
6. Baumann, Robert W, Chu, David K. W. & Anderton, Charles (2009). Religious penaltyin the U.S. News & World Report college rankings. Education Economics; Dec2009,
Vol. 17 Issue 4, p491-504
7. Poyer, David(2008). The Black Enterprise Magazine Ranking of Colleges for African
Americans: A Structural Analysis. Review of Black Political Economy; Spring2008, Vol.
35 Issue 1, p19-29
8. Jones, D. Yvonne(2007). How Much Do the "Best" Colleges Spend on Libraries? Using
College Rankings to Provide Library Financial Benchmarks. College & Research
Libraries; Jul2007, Vol. 68 Issue 4, p343-351
9. Credle, Sid Howard, Maheshwari, Sharad & Davenport, Janelle Pridgen(2008). AN
ALTERNATIVE RANKING METHODOLOGY OF THE BEST COLLEGES ANDUNIVERSITIES FOR AFRICAN-AMERICANS. Global Journal of Business Research
(GJBR); 2008, Vol. 2 Issue 2, p49-66
10.Hartley, James E. & Robinson, Michael D (1997). Economic Research at National
Liberal Arts Colleges: School Rankings. Journal of Economic Education; Fall97, Vol. 28
Issue 4, p337-349
11.College and University Ranking
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_and_university_rankings)
12.Ranking Methodology (http://www.arwu.org/ARWUMethodology2009.jsp)
13.College Ranking Reformed
(http://www.educationsector.org/sites/default/files/publications/CollegeRankingsReforme
d.pdf)
14.Statistics for Business and Economics by Anderson , Sweeney and Williams.
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
54/61
54
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
55/61
55
Appendix
Company Profile
Pharma Publications is a proprietorship firm owned by Ms. Jyotika Kapoor. The firm started its
operation in 2010 and is at present in the business of education. The firm basically provides the
preparatory books for the competitive examinations for post graduation in the field of
pharmaceuticals which are basically GPAT and NIPER with the name GPAT success series and
NIPER success series. It also provides distance learning education for the same courses. It is also
pioneer in launch of all-India mock online test series for GPAT and NIPER exams with the nameof iGPAT and iNIPER. It is only player in the market which provides solution detailed analysis
of the mock examination, which help students to improve their grip on the subject. It is also
pioneer in launching books with complete changed syllabus for the exam.
In such a short span of time it has moved forward at rapid pace and has made relations with few
coaching institutes and colleges, which would recommend its books. Apart from this these
relations also help in providing students for all India test series. The list of these clients includes
but not limited to
VNS Institute of Pharmacy, Bhopal
IIMT College of Pharmacy, Greater Noida
Pharmula Academy, Hyderabad
Essence Academy, Hyderabad
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
56/61
56
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
57/61
57
Questionnaire 1
For Faculty/ Staff members
Name _______________________ Contact No _____________________Name of college_________________ email id ________________________Location ______________________
Q1 No of students in a batch __________ Q2 No of full time faculty members ____________
Q3 Mode qualification of faculty membersA) Graduate or equivalent
B) Post Graduate or equivalent
C) PHD or equivalent
Q4 Average experience of faculty membersA) Nil
B) Having some experience but less than 2 years
C) Greater or equal to 2 but less than 5 years
D) 5 years to 8 years
E) Greater than 8 years
Q5 Average number of papers published by each faculty member in a yearA) Nil
B) 1-2C) Greater than 2
Q6) Demographics of batch mainly consists of students fromA) Region in which institute is located
B) Students in the zone take admission
C) Students from 2 zones take admission
D) Students from all the Zones take admission
E) International students also take places
Q7) What is procedure of admission of students in collegeA) Direct admission on first cum first serve bases
B) Based on 10+2 percentage
C) State Level entrance test conducted by institute or university
D) National level entrance test conducted by institute or university
E) Combined national entrance test (like AIEEE, IIT JEE etc.)
Q8) Number of national level seminars conducted in the premises of the institute
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
58/61
58
A) Never
B) Once a year
C) More than once a year
Q9) Number of international level seminars conducted in the premises of the institute
A) NeverB) Once a year
C) More than once a year
Q10) What is the placement ratio of the institute(total number of students placed / total number of students passing out in the batch)
A) 0-30%
B) 30-70%
C) 70-90%
D) 90-100%
E) 100%
Q11) What is your perception about?1 being the worse and 5 being the best
scenario
quality of students admitted in the program 1 2 3 4 5
curriculum followed by the institute/university as per requirement of the
corporate world1 2 3 4 5
firmness in timetable followed by the institute that is classes held as on
scheduled time1 2 3 4 5
institutes sternness about attendance 1 2 3 4 5
institutes existing infrastructure 1 2 3 4 5
average annual expenditure on library of the institute 1 2 3 4 5
institutes advancement in teaching technology that is use of multimedia in
classrooms1 2 3 4 5
final placement of the institute as compare to other pharma colleges 1 2 3 4 5
Alumini network of the institute 1 2 3 4 5
about positions held by the alumnus of the institute 1 2 3 4 5
institutes laboratories 1 2 3 4 5
opportunities provided to students in extra-curricular activities 1 2 3 4 5
opportunities provided to students in co-curricular activities 1 2 3 4 5
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
59/61
59
Questionnaire 2
For Students
Name:_______________________ Contact No _____________________Name of college_________________ email id ________________________Location ______________________
Q1 No of students in a batch ______________Q2 Mode qualification of faculty members
D) Graduate or equivalent
E) Post Graduate or equivalent
F) PHD or equivalent
Q3 Number of relevant material apart from books distributed in the class roomsA) None
B) One or two in entire year
C) Few more but only in one subject
D) One or two in entire year in each subject
E) Many in each subject
Q4 No of times teachers are not in time in classroomsA) Never
B) Once in a fourth night
C) One teacher is mostly lateD) Few teachers are mostly late
E) Rarely teachers are on time in class
Q5) Demographics of batch mainly consists of students fromF) Region in which institute is located
G) Students in the zone take admission
H) Students from 2 zones take admission
I) Students from all the Zones take admission
J) International students also take places
Q6) Process of admission of students in collegeF) Direct admission on first cum first serve bases
G) Based on 10+2 percentage
H) State Level entrance test conducted by institute or university
I) National level entrance test conducted by institute or university
J) Combined national entrance test (like AIEEE, IIT JEE etc.)
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
60/61
60
Q7) Placement ratio of the institute(total number of students placed / total number of students passing out in the batch)F) 0-30%
G) 30-70%
H) 70-90%
I) 90-100%
J) 100%
Q8) Number of committees are there in instituteA) 0-2
B) 3-5
C) 6 or above
Q9) Number of seminars/workshops conducted in the premises of the instituteA) Never
B) Once or twice a year
C) More than two in a year
Indicate your perception about the following:
7/31/2019 Final Report Ranking
61/61
1 being the worse and 5 being the best
scenario
Overall institute 1 2 3 4 5
quality of faculty teaching the program 1 2 3 4 5
curriculum followed by the institute/university 1 2 3 4 5
firmness in timetable followed by the institute 1 2 3 4 5
institutes sternness about attendance 1 2 3 4 5
institutes existing infrastructure 1 2 3 4 5
library of the institute 1 2 3 4 5
institutes advancement in teaching technology that is
use of multimedia in classrooms1 2 3 4 5
final placement of the institute as compare to other
pharma colleges1 2 3 4 5
Interaction with Alumini 1 2 3 4 5
institutes laboratories 1 2 3 4 5
opportunities provided in extra-curricular activities 1 2 3 4 5
opportunities provided in co-curricular activities 1 2 3 4 5
Computer Lab in terms of latest softwares 1 2 3 4 5
Top Related