Skip to main content
AcademicWingsSTEM discovery
Institution profile

RMIT University

AustraliaOceania

#125

QS World University Rankings 2026

65.3

QS 2026 overall score

QS World University Rankings data

Ranking data

QS World University Rankings source

#125

QS World University Rankings 2026

#123

QS World University Rankings 2025

65.3

QS 2026 overall score

QS 2026 indicators

Indicator-level data

Each card keeps the QS 2026 score and rank separate. A missing value is not estimated.

Academic reputation

QS 2026 score
55.1
QS 2026 rank
#202

Employer reputation

QS 2026 score
60.3
QS 2026 rank
#191

Faculty-student ratio

QS 2026 score
7.2
QS 2026 rank
#801

Citations per faculty

QS 2026 score
91.3
QS 2026 rank
#96

International faculty ratio

QS 2026 score
100
QS 2026 rank
#45

International student ratio

QS 2026 score
95.2
QS 2026 rank
#125

International student diversity

QS 2026 score
95.5
QS 2026 rank
#106

International research network

QS 2026 score
83.1
QS 2026 rank
#292

Employment outcomes

QS 2026 score
49.9
QS 2026 rank
#345

Sustainability

QS 2026 score
87.9
QS 2026 rank
#80
University profile

About RMIT University

RMIT University shows research through problems, settings, and practical connections

RMIT University's research pages present a broad set of routes into research, including research degrees, partnerships, facilities, centres and collaborations, researcher information, ethics and integrity, and research-support services. The arrangement usefully distinguishes the research problem from the conditions around it. A centre can show a recurring area of work, a facility can indicate technical capacity, an ethics page can describe shared responsibilities, and a researcher page can make a particular expertise visible. None of these pages alone proves that a team is working on a specific question. A careful reading combines them only when a local source creates a direct link.

The public material also makes visible a mix of technical, social, legal, design, and health-related subjects. Examples include water-industry biosolids, structural optimisation, digital literacy, image-based abuse, humanitarian architecture, and nanomaterials. The point of these examples is not to define the whole university through a few stories. It is to show how different research objects demand different evidence. A materials problem can require physical characterisation; a design problem may depend on built environments and users; a legal question can turn on social practices and policy. The more specific the object, the more meaningful the comparison becomes.

Centres, facilities, integrity, and collaboration should be read as distinct layers

RMIT University's public research navigation allows a reader to distinguish a research home from the services and relationships around it. A research centre or collaboration may identify a community of inquiry. A facility may show equipment, testing space, or specialised support. Research integrity and ethics pages can explain responsibilities that shape work with data, people, materials, or communities. Partnerships can indicate an external relationship. These layers may be important to a research question, but they do not carry the same meaning. The profile is strongest when it states which layer provides the direct academic connection and which layer only provides context.

This distinction is useful for applied questions. A project concerned with a waste stream, a structural system, a digital harm, or an urban environment may involve an external organisation or a practical setting. That does not automatically make every partnership route relevant. Look for the public description that names the actual issue, method, or research team. If it is not visible, record the missing piece rather than inferring it from the existence of a centre or service. RMIT's research pages offer enough structure to build a careful map, but the map should remain close to the research object.

Create an RMIT University record with a clear research object and evidence type

For RMIT University, write the question in a way that identifies its evidence type before searching by topic. A technical question might need a material, device, model, or experiment. A social or legal question might need a community, policy setting, digital practice, or qualitative account. A design question might involve a place, prototype, service, or user experience. Then locate the centre, researcher, facility, or project that visibly addresses that type of evidence. This method avoids a generic statement that a broad theme is relevant and instead shows how a real research setting relates to the work.

Finish with a question for the next check. A story may show that an issue has appeared in RMIT research but not show a continuing line of work. A facility may be relevant to a method while its use by a named team remains unknown. A collaboration page may establish a relationship without explaining the research role. These limits make the profile easier to trust and update. RMIT University provides public routes through research problems, facilities, centres, integrity information, and collaborations. The most useful route is the one that explains a defined object, method, and setting with the least amount of assumption.

Institution record

Country
Australia
Region
Oceania
Status
Public
QS size code
XL
Profile record updated
July 24, 2026

This date shows when this profile was refreshed. It is not a source-verification date from QS or the university.

Search opportunities

Opportunity records may use a different form of the institution's name. Confirm every listing with its original source.