What's new

Greater China Education, School & University: News & Discussions

Hi Andrew, calm down, calm down. There is no need to do an unnecessary quarrel.
I just don't get it....

U r from Shanghai, Shanghai's Tongji University is responsible for nearly all crazy civil projects in China and many abroad, but it is nowhere to be seen. It has many top research labs and institutes, doing a hell lot of frontier researches.

But some crappy universities in Australia's regional townships can be among top by making money from worst students from Asia and teaching them accounting and commerce.

I don't get it. It's beyond reasoning.

屏幕快照 2016-09-24 18.34.13.png

屏幕快照 2016-09-24 18.34.51.png
屏幕快照 2016-09-24 18.35.06.png


屏幕快照 2016-09-24 18.35.14.png
 
.
I just don't get it....

U r from Shanghai, Shanghai's Tongji University is responsible for nearly all crazy civil projects in China and many abroad, but it is nowhere to be seen. It has many top research labs and institutes, doing a hell lot of frontier researches.

But some crappy universities in Australia's regional townships can be among top by making money from worst students from Asia and teaching them accounting and commerce.

I don't get it. It's beyond reasoning.

View attachment 337460
View attachment 337459 View attachment 337462

View attachment 337461

I agree.

Western universities (especially Anglo universities) get high ranking because of who they are.

Most of these lists are created by Western institutions with their own criteria for what makes a good university which leads to bias and favour their universities.

Chinese and other non-Western universities are probably just as advanced or even more advanced with higher teaching quality and difficulty of content but they don't meet the Western criteria to be high on those lists.

Even lists made by China have been influenced to include Western criteria which puts a ridiculous amount of Western universities at the top.

There is absolutely nothing Western universities teach that Chinese universities don't. It's just that Western universities have the brand name being high on these lists which attracts students from around the world as they are seen as 'prestigious'.

In terms of teaching quality, research, etc, there is very little difference between Chinese and Western universities.
 
. .
I just don't get it....

U r from Shanghai, Shanghai's Tongji University is responsible for nearly all crazy civil projects in China and many abroad, but it is nowhere to be seen. It has many top research labs and institutes, doing a hell lot of frontier researches.

But some crappy universities in Australia's regional townships can be among top by making money from worst students from Asia and teaching them accounting and commerce.

I don't get it. It's beyond reasoning.

View attachment 337460
View attachment 337459 View attachment 337462

View attachment 337461



There is no proof for your rambling.

In selected subjects that your Tongji univ is supposed to do well, here are the results

QsLzIKN.png


You can calculate the non-self citations per paper too.

For Univ Melbourne, here are the results in the same disciplines during the same period
8TIa4wg.png


I agree.

Western universities (especially Anglo universities) get high ranking because of who they are.

Most of these lists are created by Western institutions with their own criteria for what makes a good university which leads to bias and favour their universities.

Chinese and other non-Western universities are probably just as advanced or even more advanced with higher teaching quality and difficulty of content but they don't meet the Western criteria to be high on those lists.

Even lists made by China have been influenced to include Western criteria which puts a ridiculous amount of Western universities at the top.

There is absolutely nothing Western universities teach that Chinese universities don't. It's just that Western universities have the brand name being high on these lists which attracts students from around the world as they are seen as 'prestigious'.

In terms of teaching quality, research, etc, there is very little difference between Chinese and Western universities.


Correct.

Anglo Saxons overrate themselves but China is infatuated with them. Same for other Orientals who love them adore them marry them and get laid by them in their own home towns for gaining face and prestige.

This is why you see China and all of the Orient trying hardest to imitate every step of American or Anglo Saxon culture. The Chinese think the two are the same very often.

Example - Anglo saxons invoke a criterion called percentage of faculty that is PhD or equivalent.

Why stopping at PhD? Why not Habilitation which is a higher doctorate than a PhD or lower doctorate?

As you may know, most European countries like France, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Luxembourg or even Russia offer this degree, but Anglo Saxons do not. Can we count a criterion called "Percentage of faculty that gained Habilitation or equivalent to higher doctorate?" Most Anglo Saxon countries will score zero or close to zero in this criterion then, and we can devise many such criterion to fail them further.

For example, French Ecole Polytechnique X or ENS entrance exams in Mathematique, Physics, Information Sciences and others are some of the hardest in the world if not the hardest. I have not seen anything remotely close in difficulty anywhere in the world, can we create criteria like difficulty, depth, breadth and thoroughness of course contents so that Anglo Saxons will score very low and European countries score very high?

Another factor: Anglo Saxons rely too much on citations. Obsessed with it. And result is that they create the most fake citations, or self citations. They cite their own papers most frequently, and China has caught that bug too. You copy the Anglo Saxons too much.

Check Scimagojr.com, for citations and self citations column. Percentage of self citations highest in China, USA and similar countries.
 
. .
There is no proof for your rambling.

In selected subjects that your Tongji univ is supposed to do well, here are the results

QsLzIKN.png


You can calculate the non-self citations per paper too.

For Univ Melbourne, here are the results in the same disciplines during the same period
8TIa4wg.png





Correct.

Anglo Saxons overrate themselves but China is infatuated with them. Same for other Orientals who love them adore them marry them and get laid by them in their own home towns for gaining face and prestige.

This is why you see China and all of the Orient trying hardest to imitate every step of American or Anglo Saxon culture. The Chinese think the two are the same very often.

Example - Anglo saxons invoke a criterion called percentage of faculty that is PhD or equivalent.

Why stopping at PhD? Why not Habilitation which is a higher doctorate than a PhD or lower doctorate?

As you may know, most European countries like France, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Luxembourg or even Russia offer this degree, but Anglo Saxons do not. Can we count a criterion called "Percentage of faculty that gained Habilitation or equivalent to higher doctorate?" Most Anglo Saxon countries will score zero or close to zero in this criterion then, and we can devise many such criterion to fail them further.

For example, French Ecole Polytechnique X or ENS entrance exams in Mathematique, Physics, Information Sciences and others are some of the hardest in the world if not the hardest. I have not seen anything remotely close in difficulty anywhere in the world, can we create criteria like difficulty, depth, breadth and thoroughness of course contents so that Anglo Saxons will score very low and European countries score very high?

Another factor: Anglo Saxons rely too much on citations. Obsessed with it. And result is that they create the most fake citations, or self citations. They cite their own papers most frequently, and China has caught that bug too. You copy the Anglo Saxons too much.

Check Scimagojr.com, for citations and self citations column. Percentage of self citations highest in China, USA and similar countries.
i agree with u. those univ rankings mostly come from uk, they tend to overate british or english speaking univ. a lot, while severely underestimate instituitions from non-english speaking countries, not just china, but other western countries as well. like Netherland's TU Delft, nowhere in the ranking, but a highly academicly prestigious research univ. not just teaching you accounting finance. those british rankings do the same thing in asian senario, singapore or hongkong's universities are overated, while japan's universities are underated. it is ridiculous to rank univ of tokyo under any univ from sg and hk.
 
.
Australian universities are overrated.
Look at their citation of top journals, what a joke....
Merely making money from international students (that will make the scores higher such as "reputation" and "international students") is short-sighted....There are no industries and innovation to back up the education sector.....

Some Australian unis' commerces, designing may be not bad, but their science, engineering and physic can just match some 20-30 rankings Chinese unis in my opinion. I know a girl whose college entrance score can't meet any A unis in China went to Queensland University of Technology. I am surprised of this Times ranking AU has 6 unis in top 100.
 
.
i agree with u. those univ rankings mostly come from uk, they tend to overate british or english speaking univ. a lot, while severely underestimate instituitions from non-english speaking countries, not just china, but other western countries as well. like Netherland's TU Delft, nowhere in the ranking, but a highly academicly prestigious research univ. not just teaching you accounting finance. those british rankings do the same thing in asian senario, singapore or hongkong's universities are overated, while japan's universities are underated. it is ridiculous to rank univ of tokyo under any univ from sg and hk.


Rankings are opinion based matter.

If you choose variables A to E, you can get one ranking. If you choose variables F to J, you get a different ranking.

It is just another Anglo Saxon marketing agenda and to exaggerate their presence, to make them feel better.

Prestige? I never heard much positive of Dutch or Delft Tech Univ at all and it does not matter much either, not much high quality publications from it. Is the standard of education there considered good for China?

Why do you think U of Tokyo ranked behind SG or HK is ridiculous? Is it because Todai is better at Natural Sciences or is it because you just think so?
 
.
Rankings are opinion based matter.

If you choose variables A to E, you can get one ranking. If you choose variables F to J, you get a different ranking.

It is just another Anglo Saxon marketing agenda and to exaggerate their presence, to make them feel better.

Prestige? I never heard much positive of Dutch or Delft Tech Univ at all and it does not matter much either, not much high quality publications from it. Is the standard of education there considered good for China?

Why do you think U of Tokyo ranked behind SG or HK is ridiculous? Is it because Todai is better at Natural Sciences or is it because you just think so?

U of Tokyo is no. 1 in non-Anglo world according to Nature Index, only behind Harvard, Stanford and MIT, on the university ranking. Where do you find any position for a univ. from Sg or HK in top 30? Zero.

Capture3.JPG



From any point of view, please, please, don't fool people by placing such a univ in No. 13 in Asia.

QS ranking in Asia:


Capture4.JPG


Univ of HK, ranking No. 2 in QS, is in the position of 200 in Nature Index, lower than Florida State Univ (No.192 in Nature Index). You told me U of HK better than U of Tokyo, is more or less like to say, Florida State Univ is better than MIT...... what a joke. But yes, it is true that the discrepancy on the high quality research output between U of HK and U of Tokyo, is just comparable to that of Florida State and MIT.
 
Last edited:
. .
U of Tokyo is no. 1 in non-Anglo world according to Nature Index, only behind Harvard, Stanford and MIT, on the university ranking. Where do you find any position for a univ. from Sg or HK in top 30? Zero.

View attachment 337683


From any point of view, please, please, don't fool people by placing such a univ in No. 13 in Asia.

QS ranking in Asia:


View attachment 337682

Univ of HK, ranking No. 2 in QS, is in the position of 200 in Nature Index, lower than Florida State Univ (No.192 in Nature Index). You told me U of HK better than U of Tokyo, is more or less like to say, Florida State Univ is better than MIT...... what a joke. But yes, it is true that the discrepancy on the high quality research output between U of HK and U of Tokyo, is just comparable to that of Florida State and MIT.


This is faulty argumentation.

Your argument is that only Natural Sciences publication matter.

But does Nature Index show what is the citation count? What is the non-self citation count? And what is the non-self citation count per paper produced? And what is the non-self citation count per full time researcher for any of them?

I gave you examples before.

g1H3jzj.png


For period 2011-2016, these organizations produced highest number of highly cited papers indexed in Web of Science Core Collection for the Scitech disciplines.

As you can see, Natural Sciences, Physics, Mathematics, and Life Sciences produce different order. Basically, you can not compare different institutions with different strengths in different areas.

And do not forget, Life Sciences and affiliated disciplines always produce the highest number of publications, citations, and h-index. That is why almost everybody counts separate fields of knowledge separately. Natural Sciences separate from Life Sciences, separate from Engineering and Technology, separate from Social Sciences.

You can find a different order if you sort your nature publications by discipline. Nature Index only counts three disciplines, anyway. Not a good enough indicator, it is actually far worse than those British QS or THES rankings because of is narrow focus.

All rankings are just subjective, best you can do is compare similar disciplines and other factors.
 
.
There is no proof for your rambling.

In selected subjects that your Tongji univ is supposed to do well, here are the results

QsLzIKN.png


You can calculate the non-self citations per paper too.

For Univ Melbourne, here are the results in the same disciplines during the same period
8TIa4wg.png





Correct.

Anglo Saxons overrate themselves but China is infatuated with them. Same for other Orientals who love them adore them marry them and get laid by them in their own home towns for gaining face and prestige.

This is why you see China and all of the Orient trying hardest to imitate every step of American or Anglo Saxon culture. The Chinese think the two are the same very often.

Example - Anglo saxons invoke a criterion called percentage of faculty that is PhD or equivalent.

Why stopping at PhD? Why not Habilitation which is a higher doctorate than a PhD or lower doctorate?

As you may know, most European countries like France, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, Luxembourg or even Russia offer this degree, but Anglo Saxons do not. Can we count a criterion called "Percentage of faculty that gained Habilitation or equivalent to higher doctorate?" Most Anglo Saxon countries will score zero or close to zero in this criterion then, and we can devise many such criterion to fail them further.

For example, French Ecole Polytechnique X or ENS entrance exams in Mathematique, Physics, Information Sciences and others are some of the hardest in the world if not the hardest. I have not seen anything remotely close in difficulty anywhere in the world, can we create criteria like difficulty, depth, breadth and thoroughness of course contents so that Anglo Saxons will score very low and European countries score very high?

Another factor: Anglo Saxons rely too much on citations. Obsessed with it. And result is that they create the most fake citations, or self citations. They cite their own papers most frequently, and China has caught that bug too. You copy the Anglo Saxons too much.

Check Scimagojr.com, for citations and self citations column. Percentage of self citations highest in China, USA and similar countries.

When you use citations you're citing someone else' work and not doing the experiment on your own.
 
.
When you use citations you're citing someone else' work and not doing the experiment on your own.
I had a short-term exchange program in UWA in Perth...
I spent most of my time traveling.....on their money....for example, taking the Prospector to the Super Pit.
But I had to do something you know....
So I wrote a summary based on a bunch of papers....
I wanted them to give me a good mark of my exchange program (we usually call it tourist programs in the college)....
So I cited a lot of their papers, and I wrote one of their names as the first author.....
Anyway, a rubbish summary, but....a local journal (just 0.* point), received it.
 
.
I had a short-term exchange program in UWA in Perth...
I spent most of my time traveling.....on their money....for example, taking the Prospector to the Super Pit.
But I had to do something you know....
So I wrote a summary based on a bunch of papers....
I wanted them to give me a good mark of my exchange program (we usually call it tourist programs in the college)....
So I cited a lot of their papers, and I wrote one of their names as the first author.....
Anyway, a rubbish summary, but....a local journal (just 0.* point), received it.

That's my whole point. Since when did using so many citations mean you're a better school?
 
.
There is friendly rivalry between Sydney, NSW and Melbourne, Victoria.
Okay, not so friendly, we don't like each other, LOL.
Victorian universities are doing well but not so for NSW.
If you read through the article, you will find that "money talks, bullsh*t walks".


========
SEPTEMBER 22 2016
Times Higher Education rankings: Australia's success not guaranteed as Asia rises
Eryk Bagshaw, The Sydney Morning Herald


The University of Sydney has dropped four places in the world's most prestigious university rankings list, the latest report from Times Higher Education has revealed.

According to the report, due to be released around the world on Thursday, Australia took out 23 places in the world's top 400 universities.

The nation's oldest tertiary institution, the University of Sydney, dropped from 56 to 60 this year, tying with the University of Queensland, while its Sydney rival UNSW moved up four places to 78.

The University of Melbourne is once again the country's highest ranking institution at No. 33, while Australian National University came in second as the 47th best university in the world.

1474494011687.jpg

For the first time in the ranking's 13-year-history the University of Oxford took out top spot.

For the first time in the ranking's 13-year-history the University of Oxford took out top spot, knocking off the California Institute of Technology, which has held the crown for the past six years.

The Times ranking system relies on surveys completed by academics as well as the number of research citations per academic. It attempts to take into account teaching quality by measuring factors such as the number of doctorate students to bachelor students.

Phil Baty, the editor of the Times Higher Education World University Rankings, said Australia's ranking success cannot be guaranteed in the long-term while more of Asia's leading universities join the top of the list.

"Australia will have to watch out for Asia's continuing ascent. The higher education superpower has two new entries in the top 100 and a further four institutions joining the top 200," he said.

1474494011687 (1).jpg
University of Sydney dropped from 56 to 60, tying with the University of Queensland. Photo: Paul Jones

China now has two top 40 universities, while the National University of Singapore – at 24th – comes in nine places higher than Melbourne University.

The statistics will worry the Australian international student market, now the country's third-biggest export worth nearly $20 billion a year.


1474494011687 (2).jpg

Melbourne University is the highest-ranked university in Australia. Photo: Joe Armao

"Australia is a key research partner for many Asian universities so the nation can capitalise on the region's success, although it may find it harder to attract top Asian students and academics," Mr Baty said.

The warning was echoed by federal Education Minister Simon Birmingham.

"While these results are positive, we must continue to foster excellence and innovation in our universities to remain internationally competitive," he said.

UNSW's deputy vice-chancellor of research, Nicholas Fisk, said universities were just as likely to be competing with institutions down the road as they were with ones thousands of kilometres north.

"The competition is completely global these days. Good research is done by large interdisciplinary teams, all the centres of excellence have nodes in other universities in Australia," he said. "It is a very international outlook.

"These days there are more and more universities on the list and with the huge rise in east Asian universities, even staying still is a huge achievement."

upload_2016-9-26_11-49-49.png


The Group of Eight, which represents Australia's top eight ranked universities, said the rankings should be a reminder about the importance of research funding as the federal government stalls on university funding reform.

A $3.2 billion "zombie" university funding cut has remained in the Turnbull government's budget with little hope of passing the Senate after twice being rejected.

"If Australia's leading research-intensive universities cannot in the future maintain their excellent rankings, then Australia will take an economic and jobs hit that the nation can ill afford," Go8 CEO Vicki Thomson said.

"This is why the Go8 continues to be vocal about the need to ensure our research is sustainably funded because that is the foundation of future success," she said.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom