Clarification for those who are little bit slower:

Canadian Universities Forum (discussion group)


 
 
Subject: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:
"Now let us examine objectively each fantasy coming out of UofT:

1) Has the most publications after Harvard. True, but let us be realistic. Is UofT the second best university in the world? Not! Number of publications does not mean anything, UofT could be publishing in crap journals. In terms of impact factors, UofT can only provide evidence of where they exceed in certain categories. Being the best in some categories does not mandate having the highest impact factor overall.

2) Has most awards than other university in Canada. True. That is becuase UofT invests massive amounts of money recruiting top-notch researchers. The Maple Leafs also hires mostly star players. Are they good? No! If you look at these professors, you will notice that most of them have had >15 years of research experience in another university. You cannot say that these awards are based necessarily on their research carried-out at UofT. Other universities in Canada, like McGill and UBC, make top-notch researchers; UofT hires them. In fact, UofT scores lower than McGill consistently when it comes to success of alumini."

-----------------------------------------------------------

Can I ask you a question? How old are you and what school are you at or are planning on attending.

Okay,

1. Nobody alluded to UofT being the second best University in the World. Obviously the quality of an institution is not soley based on number of publications published. However, it is a ONE major indication of quality.

The source that was provided to you outlining the categories in which UofT has the highest impact is the ONLY report of its kind. Why does it only list those fields? Because it is only those fields which tend to have journal publications. The report was done by Thomson Corporation (owner is richest Canadian), so you know its accurate and well respected. This isn?t Research Infosource or whatever the name is.

As far as being the best overall, well you can draw your own conclusions. Just be sure to base your conclusions on evidence.

2. It?s obvious that you loathe UofT. Otherwise, you wouldn?t be trying so hard, and making these ridiculous and baseless accusations. The evidence is out there. UofT faculty have won 25% of national awards, yet they only make up 7% of the nations faculty. Do you understand what this means? These are awards won AT that institution. They keep track of which institutions collect the most awards. If you refuse to believe this because you aren?t man enough to face the truth, then so be it. As long as people with half a brain can comprehend what this means, thats all that matters. Whether or not an ignorant and lonely high school kid from Turkey can understand this means squat.

[20-07-2006,01:44]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:)
"Only one ranking system currently scores UofT higher than McGill. It is also a highly questionale one (Academic Ranking of World Universities; Institute of Higher Education, Shanghai Jiao Tong University) showing major inconsistencies from year-to-year. Times Higher Education supplement, which scores McGill higher, is a trusted source in the UK, used there by government officials to determine educational policy. You are an idiot"

--------------------------------------------------------------

1. More than one ranking put UofT ahead of McGill (for the 10th time!)

Macleans ranked number 1 for the last 12 years. McGill has fluctuated between 2 and 4th place.

World University Rankings lists UofT 24th in the World, UBC 36th, and McGill 67th.

THES ranks McGill 24th?, UofT 29th, and UBC ??.

2. If you want to give the argument that THES is more accurate or better respected than STJU, give evidence. Everything I have read thus far has criticised both rankings equally. STJU for concentrating too much on science-oriented Universities, and THES for adjusting their methodology so that European Universities place higher. Both rankings have been cited by respected publications equally. So, to say that one is better simply because it satisfies your preference is completely ignorant. One is not more trusted than the other. You accuse STJU of doing it for the money, but STJU is a study that was done to compare Universities in China to those around the World. Whereas THES is a publication that is sold to the public, STJU is free online. I´m not accusing THES of doing it for the money, because I´m not as simple as you, but you understand my point?

STJU has only been out for two years. You say it has been so inconsistent year-to-year which is laughable. Compare THES and STJU and you´ll find that there has been more movement in THES. Again, before you make these statements, make sure you know what you´re talking about.

[20-07-2006,01:57]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:)
"The best criteria of comparing which university is tops for potential and current students is to look at:

1. overall entering average
2. % out of province
3. % foreign students (ugrad & grad)
4. # student awards per 1000

* All of the above can be compared at the Maclean?s website.


Based on these factors, McGill is far superior to U of T in all 4 factors.

Conclusion: McGill is hardest to get in (based on all programs), but still attracts a lot higher percentage of out of province and international students than U of T.

U of T would be considered one of Ontario?s top choices, while McGill is Canada?s and the world?s first choice Canadian University."

---------------------------------------------------------

What you have provided is fine, but surely you are not saying that those four factors are the only factors that one should consider when ranking a University?

You´ve listed things that summarize an entering class body. And McGill is great, and I think it´s a great school, but if you want to argue which University is best overall, you need to consider more than just the student body, because the top Universities in Canada are extremely similar in terms of entering averages (+/-3%) and student awards (+/-3/1000?). If you´re talking just international and out-of-province students, then McGill has the upper hand. Also, don´t forget that McGill has been for a long long time concentrating on getting high numbers of international and out-of-province students, and only recently has UofT, Queen´s, UBC, etc. followed suit. So, we´ll see what things look like in a few years or so.

Bottom line, McGill is great and I´m not going to lie or be immature and make up shit just so that I can convince the 10 or so people that visit these boards that McGill is shit. I´ll only provide the facts along with sources. If you want my opinion though, I, like many others, really do believe that UofT is the best overall Canadian University, and I´ll debate this further with you if you want. 15,20 years ago it was probably McGill, but things have changed, dude.

[20-07-2006,02:11]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:)
What is so hard to understand?

1) Quantity is different from quality. Thompson Corp states the quantity of papers produced by each univsersity and as well as impact factors for different categories in science. Thompson Corp does not aim to rank nor does its information provide a means to rank.

2) Many professors change locations. It takes 5 to 10 years for research to get recognized as award worthy. If you look closesly, most UofT professors with awards did their tenure track elsewhere. This suggests an aggressive recruitment for big names by the part of UofT.

I do not loathe UofT. Rather, I am here to point-out simply that you guys are full of yourselves.

[20-07-2006,02:17]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:)
In reply to the second idiot.

Thompson Corp does not rank universities. Macleans does not rank UofT currently higher than McGill. THES is highly respected world-wide. The Academic Ranking of World Universities, the only ranking system that currently ranks UofT higher than McGill, has produced large discrepencies from year-to-year and is conducted by Shanghai Jiao Tong University, which supposedly China´s worst university.

[20-07-2006,02:26]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:)
Also in response to the second idiot. Since Maclean´s ranked universites, McGill has fluxuated between 1st and 2nd place only. McGill held the first place many times before UofT´s long run. Note that a Canada-based ranking system is not ideal for ranking Canadian universities because their is conflict of interest. In particular, when you consider that Maclean´s is based in Toronto.
[20-07-2006,02:31]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:)
Give it up UofT kids. The more you argue, the more it shows that you take personal offense. I am sorry to hurt your egos, but I am just pointing how your heads are not screwed correctly when you try to convince others (or even yourselves for that matter) that you´re the best. You´re not. McGill > UofT.
[20-07-2006,02:35]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:)
1. Thomson Corp ranks Universities in terms of publications published and IMPACT. Both are important. If you prefer, concentrate on IMPACT, and UofT is the best in 5 categories, McGill 0.

2. Yes, some UofT professors have won awards before hand, and some win awards at UofT. Like I said earlier, the statistics show that UofT professors WHILE AT UofT win 25% of the nations awards, yet they only make up 7% of the nations faculty. Please, don´t make me repeat this again. If you need time, read it slowly. You seem to be implying that UofT recruits professors that win all these great awards and then once they get to UofT they stop performing. I mean, dude. Grow up.

[20-07-2006,02:36]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:)
I´m done arguing with you "McGill" kid. You aren´t able to provide any real arguments, so I´m done. Whoever visits this site will read these posts and figure out who is making sense and who is just throwing accusations and lies out there with absolutely nothing to back it up.
[20-07-2006,02:40]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:)
Okay, whatever you say idiot.
[20-07-2006,02:41]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:)
"Many professors change locations. It takes 5 to 10 years for research to get recognized as award worthy. If you look closesly, most UofT professors with awards did their tenure track elsewhere. This suggests an aggressive recruitment for big names by the part of UofT."

Interesting speculative argument. I wonder where *you* looked "closely" to see that most UofT profs did their "tenure track elsewhere" (do you know what tenure track means? Doesn´t look like it from that statement.) It also seems that most professors apply to UofT rather than are recruited, at least from all the applications that went into my department when they were hiring last year. And since most professors do move beyond the school from which they attained their phd at (not doing so is academic incest), you can´t claim 5-10 yrs of research elsewhere means shit.

And honestly pal, you´re really reaching. Look at your arguments.

By the way... some stats were posted here a few weeks ago showing the low percentage of PQ students going to post-secondary, and the anglo populace base vs spaces in anglo universities. It should not surprise anyone that McGill is full of out of province students.

"I do not loathe UofT. Rather, I am here to point-out simply that you guys are full of yourselves."

If you say so. Me, I think you got issues dude.

[20-07-2006,02:42]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:)
"McGill has fluxuated between 1st and 2nd place only"

Same thing, but if you´d take the time to check, you´re wrong like every other statement you´ve made. It´s pointless arguing with someone who ignores facts, evidence, etc. It´s a lost cause.

This isn´t about me feeling better about myself or about UofT, it´s about having a real debate about an interesting topic, but you aren´t in my league, so I´m backing out. Maybe when you graduate high school or mature a little bit, we can talk.

[20-07-2006,02:43]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:)
*Small
[20-07-2006,02:45]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:)
1) You clearly do not understand the concept that being the best in some subjects does not mandate necessarily being the best overall. I am sorry if you do not understand this basic concept.

2) Wrong. The awards are not derived necessarily from their work at UofT since most of these professors spent most of their research careers in tenure-track elsewhere. Again, I am sorry if you do not understand this basic concept either.

[20-07-2006,02:48]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Clarification for those who are little bit slower:)
^ Dude, you´re hopeless. The facts WITH sources have been provided to you. Read them and ask some for help if you need help understanding them, but stop repeating the same BS.

Sorry, one more thing. I couldn´t resist.

"Canada-based ranking system is not ideal for ranking Canadian universities"

Do you even think about what you´re posting? What kind of stupid statement is this? You kinda like Bush, eh.

Toronto-based, so that automatically means that UofT has to win? Please. Why not York or Ryerson? You can´t expect people to take what you seriously if you make these serious accusations but provide no evidence except for your own suspicion.

[20-07-2006,02:53]
Anonymous



Canadian Universities Forum at Canada City Web Site | Start Home Based Business in Canada | Canadian and International FLP Business