World universities ranking, UT 24th, UW 202-300

[ryan123]

http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2005/ARWU2005TOP500list.htm

[emptypocket]

Canadian Universities in the top 100:

24. U of T
37. UBC
67. McGill
90. McMaster

[bananaman]

What is the basis for these rankings? Reputation?

[emptypocket]

1. Ranking Criteria and Weights

We rank universities by several indicators of academic or research performance, including alumni and staff winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals, highly cited researchers, articles published in Nature and Science, articles indexed in major citation indices, and the per capita academic performance of an institution.

http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2005/ARWU2005Methodology.htm

[cuiyinghost]

we chinese really like to do a lot of Rankings. But who doesnt?

[Ley]

man.. Harvard is so rigged :P even if they only let you attend unless you adv 100 on everything, not everyone can recieve 100% adv's anyways... UBC OWNSS haha

[Tharyn]

1. Ranking Criteria and Weights

We rank universities by several indicators of academic or research performance, including alumni and staff winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals, highly cited researchers, articles published in Nature and Science, articles indexed in major citation indices, and the per capita academic performance of an institution.

http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2005/ARWU2005Methodology.htm

Only a few, but really don't think that either of those reflect the quality of the university, but eh, that's just me. The only thing I put any faith in is MacLean's ranking, I'd take this with a grain of salt.

In my opinion it should be looking at things such as funding into various programs and fields, the contributions to the field, and not just papers published by the staff, while that may have a small affect on the quality of the school, but in my opinion there's lots of other factors that actually matter to students.

--Mark

[CSR]

Quite an impressive list there...

UofT does well; top 25 in the world!

[yell0w_c0w]

This indicator only shows how much there is "research output" with respect to "incoming students". So, based on statistics, you're guarenteed to be Nobel Prize winner if you go to Harvard! :\ Which does not make sense either... Lots of smart kids everywhere on the planet, not just in America.

I find Chinese and Indian people are generally better in engineering related fields than other ppl ... I dunno maybe it's just me... McGill's full of them and I'm part of the Viet minority in engineering.

[hugh_da_man]

I find Chinese and Indian people are generally better in engineering related fields than other ppl ... I dunno maybe it's just me... McGill's full of them and I'm part of the Viet minority in engineering.

I don't think it has anything to do with a certain race being better at engineering than others. I think the people in your class depends on the region that you live in. There were mostly caucasian and asian people in my engineering classes.

[JimG]

Wow, YorkU just made the list at #500.

Edit: My mistake, York is somewhere between 401-500.

Jim

[swiftfox]

There's no way Waterloo is worse than McMaster
This is clearly bogus

[cuiyinghost]

There's no way Waterloo is worse than McMaster
This is clearly bogus

no, waterloo maybe just a college in the States. At least McMaster have all the elements that a real university should have.

[friend_4ever]

Only a few, but really don't think that either of those reflect the quality of the university, but eh, that's just me. The only thing I put any faith in is MacLean's ranking, I'd take this with a grain of salt.

In my opinion it should be looking at things such as funding into various programs and fields, the contributions to the field, and not just papers published by the staff, while that may have a small affect on the quality of the school, but in my opinion there's lots of other factors that actually matter to students.

--Mark

hehe, thats just what some sore-loser-parents always tell their kids that everyone is a winner and there is no loser in the game, hehehe





just kidding

[emptypocket]

There's no way Waterloo is worse than McMaster
This is clearly bogus

Given the criteria used in order to determine the rankings I think this is perfectly reasonable. McMaster is one of the most research intensive universities in the country. Waterloo focuses more on the development of its undergraduate programs. There's no better or "worse" when it comes to rankings. It's all about the methodology.

no, waterloo maybe just a college in the States. At least McMaster have all the elements that a real university should have.

Waterloo is maybe not that well known to the general public in the US but definitely highly regarded among employers (especially in the engineering and science fields).