world rankings of universities Watch

This discussion is closed.
mahvish
Badges:
#21
Report 15 years ago
#21
Hello I'm new here - studied a BA in Denmark and doing an internships at ADB (Pakistan) right now. Trying to decide what and where to do my Masters.

Anyway - about the rankings. They are totally screwed up. Using Harvard as a benchmark is stupid. The whole nobel prize thing is stupid as well.

And what the hell is up with LSE being so low??? I mean - seriously! and IIT in India is one of the best in the world - so is the Danish Technical Univeristy (DTU). This is a biased ranking made by unprofessional educationists who rank universities on a hunch instead of actual unbiased and informative information and judgement.
J.S.
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#22
Report 15 years ago
#22
(Original post by foolfarian)
Just lookat how ludicrous a sugestion it is. Its irrelevant where they rank Oxbridge. OR the fact that Harvard is set as a bench mark. (which is silly, because at Harvard they have academia and sports existing seperately, whereas UK unis they exist together), OR even the basis of nobel prizes (irony being that so many nobel prize winners are poached by american unis offering big money. If you based it on where they were originally educated then there would be less nucleation of nobel winners)
Fact is this table says that of the top 18 universities, 15 are american and 3 are british. This say nothing of the rest of the world (namely Japan, Europe, Australia...).
Then theres the fact Caltech and MIT are rated so highly. MIT is bogshite apparently. They offer a sandwich year there for cam students, and all my supervisors advised against because
a) its lame
b) It adds nothing to your CV. Its like going from Newcastle to Lincoln
J

I don't know the sciences too well, I know Economics well enough. To dismiss MIT as 'dogshite' based on the views of a few of your tutors is incredible. For Econ (and I suspect many of its other faculties) it's easily amongst in the upper cohort. Particularly it's graduate school and it's Econ. doctorate which happens to be one of the most sought after qualifications of its kind in the world, if not THE most sought after. For research, prestige and 'value' in the area's that I know well, it's top 3, in the world, alongside Stanford and Harvard.
0
Jamie
Badges: 18
#23
Report 15 years ago
#23
(Original post by J.S.)
I don't know the sciences too well, I know Economics well enough. To dismiss MIT as 'dogshite' based on the views of a few of your tutors is incredible. For Econ (and I suspect many of its other faculties) it's easily amongst in the upper cohort. Particularly it's graduate school and it's Econ. doctorate which happens to be one of the most sought after qualifications of its kind in the world, if not THE most sought after. For research, prestige and 'value' in the area's that I know well, it's top 3, in the world, alongside Stanford and Harvard.
Hey, what I know is what I've been told by some quite powerful men and women. In the world arena of biological sciences, going to MIT from Cambridge is a big step down.
J
Lurker
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#24
Report 15 years ago
#24
I think the reason the LSE is so low is because it really only teaches the social sciences, but if you look at the ranking methodology on this page, 20% is for 'Nobel laureates in physics, chemistry, medicine and economics'. Obviously they're good at economics, but they probably don't have many nobel laureates in physics, chemistry or medicine. Another 20% is for 'Articles published in Nature and Science' which again probably isn't that relevant to the LSE.
Not very good league tables really.
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#25
Report 15 years ago
#25
(Original post by wizard)
You re kidding right?
i hope he is.
0
Helenia
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#26
Report 15 years ago
#26
And what's Edinburgh doing that high up anyway? It doesn't come anywhere near that high in UK tables alone - there ought to be loads higher up than it like Nottingham and Warwick etc. OK, so I didn't look too closely at the criteria, but it all seems a bit crap to me.
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#27
Report 15 years ago
#27
i would say the top 10 were pretty much accurate.
0
J.S.
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#28
Report 15 years ago
#28
(Original post by vienna95)
i would say the top 10 were pretty much accurate.

Hmm...sooo difficult to compare, although it's near enough what I'd go along with. Also, there's so much departmental variation too, for instance UPenn has one of the most distinguished business schools, Univ. of Chicago's Econ dept. and etc. There's a difference between under/grad schools too, different emphasis, different systems altogether. As for the league table itself, it's not a serious attempt, it's just a bit of a joke really. It's amusing how people take anything that's quantified so seriously.

Having said that, I think as far as the research facitilities, prestige, respect in academic circles and the like are concerned it's hard for any university to come between Harvard, Stanford and MIT. The grad schools at those respective universities seem to be the most selective. If you're an aspiring academic, a doctorate from either of those institutions is the closest you can come to a 'golden passport' into pretty much any academic institution.
0
kebab22
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#29
Report 15 years ago
#29
(Original post by foolfarian)
Hey, what I know is what I've been told by some quite powerful men and women. In the world arena of biological sciences, going to MIT from Cambridge is a big step down.
J
sorry mate, but why on every post i go into are you defending cambridge with such acrimony and passion. i mean its only your university, it isn't always the best, and why do you care that much what other people think if you clearly like it so much?
0
kebab22
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#30
Report 15 years ago
#30
(Original post by vienna95)
i would say the top 10 were pretty much accurate.
where did you study viena?
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#31
Report 15 years ago
#31
(Original post by kebab22)
sorry mate, but why on every post i go into are you defending cambridge with such acrimony and passion. i mean its only your university, it isn't always the best, and why do you care that much what other people think if you clearly like it so much?
he clearly is referring to 'another' MIT, because as much as Cambridge is respected, this is b*llshit.
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#32
Report 15 years ago
#32
(Original post by kebab22)
where did you study viena?
paris
0
curryADD
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#33
Report 15 years ago
#33
(Original post by Bhaal85)
Obviously its biased, where is Thames Valley university? And the prestigous Bangor Univsersity?
does it have harvard princeton and yale and is that why yall are complaining?

oh yes and bhaal i dont see my name on ur sig......*feels hurt*
0
gemma1811
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#34
Report 15 years ago
#34
MAN! Who did these rankings?!?!?!? They are rather percular! LSE and Exeter should no way be is low as that!!! I think that the people that compiled this 'ranking' were prob American, n don't particulary like some of the uni's over here!

xxxx
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#35
Report 15 years ago
#35
(Original post by gemma1811)
MAN! Who did these rankings?!?!?!? They are rather percular! LSE and Exeter should no way be is low as that!!! I think that the people that compiled this 'ranking' were prob American, n don't particulary like some of the uni's over here!

xxxx

if you look at the ranking criteria, its not that perculiar.
0
jammyd
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#36
Report 15 years ago
#36
i must say, there are quite a few arrogant people around here, and quite narrow minded too.

Seeing someone write 'What LSE above Keele?!?!' thanks, but i am finding keele, for my subjects to be excellent, and you should perhaps grow up. If you look at how they rate them, its prob because of LSE's lack of sciences. many universities are obsessed with reputation, and some of the ppl who apply for them appear to be going that way too

The table does seem to be biased towards american universities, but look at the bizarre criteria that the researchers have used. Everybody knows that British universities are the best in the world, but people on this site seem to be stuck in little fantasies about oxbridge, and universites classed as 'oxbridge rejects', like bristol, nottingham etc etc.

These american universities have vast resources, and for someone to label MIT bogshite is ridiculously absurd and laughable.
0
Tek
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#37
Report 15 years ago
#37
Am I the only one for whom the page does not work??
0
HammaL
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#38
Report 15 years ago
#38
http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/ranking.htm <-- this might give u a better idea of why these unis are ranked like this.
I don't think they r biased...they r just stupid.

Here they explain why they did this rankings and based on what they r ranked.
http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/methodology.htm

The reason for U.S universities performing much better is that they spend much money on research therefore they win more Nobel Prizes and etc...and idiots like "Shanghai Jiao Tong University" (who did this rankings) think that they r much better than other universities in the world...
0
meepmeep
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#39
Report 15 years ago
#39
To put it into context, they use the website http://www.isihighlycited.com/ to compile the list of "highly cited" academics. There are 2782 such people on the list for the USA, and 6 for the UK. France has 95. So the UK has only 6 "highly cited researchers"?
0
tortise123
Badges: 0
#40
Report 15 years ago
#40
hmm .. they are in favour of american universities .. we have one of the oldest universities in the world
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Did you get less than your required grades and still get into university?

Yes (3)
42.86%
No - I got the required grades (3)
42.86%
No - I missed the required grades and didn't get in (1)
14.29%

Watched Threads

View All