Talk:Times Higher Education

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A mortarboard This article is part of WikiProject Universities, an attempt to standardise coverage of universities and colleges. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
This article is part of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of education and education-related topics. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to featured and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.
Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] university list

number 10: "ecole polytechnique" is located in switerland NOT in France!!! And the official name is ETH (german: Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule; englisch: swiss federal institute of technology)

But the ecole polytechnique in Paris is rather better known.
ETH is Swiss Federal Institute of Technology and well known as ETH. "Ecole Polytechnique" is situated in Paris. For more information, you better have a look on the original ranking published by Times. Niaz bd 21:26, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] staffing level table footnote

i don't understand the footnote to this table. the table doesn't score all the faculty or all the students. just the international ones. but the student/faculty score is for internation and domestic, right? --jashar 22:29, 15 May 2006 (EDT)

[edit] list size

I think the general rank list should go up to 50.--Zereshk 23:11, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

A new list has been released, but you have to be a subscriber to access it from the official website. Is there anyone with access to it? Some updates are probably due. --Brendanfox 09:14, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Engineering / IT toplist

Can you please stop changing the Engineering/IT list? Last time I looked at the THE website (2004 version), the number one and two were the University of California, Berkeley and MIT, respectively. Editing a Wikipedia article to give incorrect information that suits your taste is nothing but childish.

[edit] Update the 2005 rankings

Could someone update the 2005 THES rankings into the chart, so its not just a list above the 2004 rankings.

University of Texas at Austin at #9 in North America? Are they kidding? Neutralitytalk 04:54, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree with the top post, although I understand that THES used a particular ranking formula, Having UT Austin ranked top ten in North America is bordering on ridiculous. With all due respect, I am sure the sensible students and faculty at UT Austin would agree that it is not in the league of the Havards and Stanfords.

The THES rankings list is seriously flawed in many aspects. Australian universities are over-rated, whereas Canadian and British institutions (aside from Oxbridge) are very under-rated. The ranking methodology is not consistent and comprehensive to rate universities worldwide. A better alternative to this set of rankings is the Shanghai JiaoTong Top 500 list. However, even that list has its limitations. 218.111.50.181 01:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I disagree. The Shanghai ranking is laughably flawed in its criteria which is heavily biased against institutions which do not cater or specialise in Science/Engineering. If i remember correctly the LSE (for one exmaple) did not even make the ranking when it first came out which is an absolute joke. I honestly find it hard to accept the accusations of bias with regard to the criteria used. siarach 10:50, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh? Really? SJTU ranking is more flawed than this one (which says Hong Kong University> Stanford)?

Why do you say that Australian universities are overrated and that Canadian and British institutions are underrated? Can I ask you what university you attend(ed) or work at? Just James 10:20, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I added universities 26-200 from the THES 2005. They gave a trial membership for 14 days, i downloaded the list ages ago. Aslate 23:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of =199, University of Georgia

Someone added the following row to the table:

199= University of Georgia, Athens USA 20.8

This doesn't appear of my list from the THES, i have removed this until there is proof it should be there. Aslate 17:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peking University

The official name of "Beijing University" is "Peking University". However rumour has it that the authority has proposed to change the offical name to "The University of Beijing" in 2006, "Peking University" is still used in its offical webpage. So, I change it to its official name accordingly. Powermac 02:08, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The ranking is generally criticized for its ranking basis that favors British universities.

I have cut this unreferenced assertion. My research doesn't show that the ranking is generally criticised. Most references simply accept it. Can anyone find any other references?--Duncan 09:36, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

The only reference which ive seen provided is a poorly written, infantile, unrepentantly POV and laughably ignorant ( it refers to the wrong bloody newspaper for goodness sake!) link to some media indian media website or other. In the 3 or so years these rankings have been going ive yet to see any genuine criticism of them - unlike the Shanghai rankings for example which were immediately heavily criticised upon their inception for their huge bias against institutions which do not specialise or favour Science/Engineering. Unless some decent references can be provided to show that there is widespread condemnation of the THES world rankings no mention of this apparent phenomenon should be made. siarach 10:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)


"I am a Wikipedia contributor training at the Tavistock Clinic, in London, mainly contributing on aspects of socialism." OK, I see that you have a good reason to defend this ranking and unmatched reputation of UK universities in the world. You can keep blind on the data which demontrate the great distance UK universities are behind of the US. You can keep calling them "poorly written, infantile, unrepentantly POV and laughably ignorant".

I don't want to waste my time to figure out all links refute your claim that "Most references simply accept it, other rankings are heavily critisized", even if I make such efforts you still dischard them simply wih youur insulting words, rather than any reasoning.

This is data provided by Wuhan University http://rccse.whu.edu.cn/SmallClass.asp?BName=大学评价&BType=0&SName=世界大学评价2007 General ranking: http://rccse.whu.edu.cn/college/sjdxkyjzl.htm Specialized ranking: http://rccse.whu.edu.cn/college/sjkyjgxkjzlphb2007/sjkyjgxkjzlphb2007.htm For social science you may be interested: http://rccse.whu.edu.cn/college/sjkyjgxkjzlphb2007/shkx.htm

Hope those data doesn't hurt you much. Anyway, you may still believe what you want to believe, and reject what you don't want to believe as crap.

~~Tocharian



Favours british universities, why are so many US ones on the list then --58.161.113.85 03:14, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Your comment is absurd. Your logic is that there're still some US universities remained, this shows not biased? If you look at any other rankings which are based on objective data, there should be 50-60% US universities in top 100, and 80-90% in top 20. If you look into the data provided by Wuhan University based on publication quality and quantity, Cambridge is only comparable to US 15-20 University, not to mention Oxford. This QS ranking shamelessly put Ox and Cam at world #2 in general ranking, and claim that they are world No 1 in Science! Isn't this called favours UK university? ~~plmunich

Did you ever consider the fact that Oxford and Cambridge are actually quite good and deserve to be in the No 2 place? No, you didn't, did you? Also, if you had bothered to read the full pamphlet, they go in some detail explaining about how BOTH US and UK universities together dominate the results and why this is. But you didn't read it, did you? --69.123.112.18 (talk) 05:12, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Penn?

Stupid brits ranked Cornell above the venerable U Penn? Have they not heard of Penn's #1 business school (Wharton) and #3&4 Law and Med schools (USNews)?

I think its undergraduate rankings, and Wharton nor UPenn Law nor UPenn medicine are undergrad. Meanwhile, Cornell is much mor e undergrad oriented.--69.123.112.18 (talk) 04:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] UCL #1??

Why is University College London in first place...

Because somebody vandalised this article. You have to clear your browser cache to see the correct list. Valentinian T / C 10:34, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Table sorting does not work

If I click on the column head to sort by, say, 2005 ranking, the results are not sorted numerically, but rather alphabetically, so "10" follows "1". This should be fixed, could anyone tell the programmer-in-charge? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.161.144.74 (talk) 00:39, 15 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Rankings are Great

They start so many unnecessary flame wars.

"OMG My School isn't #1?!"

[edit] Where to see details

There are numerous ways to access the rankings without paying. If your just interested in top 200, goto (http://www.paked.net/higher_education/rankings/times_rankings.htm) for the rankings. But if you need full info like top USA, top UK, top science, top medicine etc, goto thes.co.uk and register for a free trial. Simply copy and paste all rankings in a safe place (like Excel or Word, or save as images) since the trial expires after 15 days. If you are interested in the new rankings I recommend you do not register for the free trial just now but wait till the 2007 rankings become available (this summer). This paragraph has been contributed by Ahsan Rahim, Pakistan.

I've moved the section above from the article space. The tone is not encyclopedic enough. Valentinian T / C 20:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)