The quality of debate has been raised here

Canadian Universities Forum (discussion group)


 
 
Subject: The quality of debate has been raised here
I guess there are some Americans post on this board too.
[20-07-2006,05:19]
Anonymous
(in reply to: The quality of debate has been raised here)
that uoft fanboy kill the mcgill guy
[20-07-2006,05:23]
Anonymous
(in reply to: The quality of debate has been raised here)
*killed
[20-07-2006,05:23]
Anonymous
(in reply to: The quality of debate has been raised here)
^only a uoft fanboy would say that
[20-07-2006,05:50]
Anonymous
(in reply to: The quality of debate has been raised here)
Yeah okay buddy, do you work for Shanghai Jiao Tong University?
[20-07-2006,12:01]
Anonymous
(in reply to: The quality of debate has been raised here)
I think McGill kid raises many good points:

1) McGill is more prestigious,
2) McGill is harder to get in,
3) Shanghai Jiao Tong University that ranks of UofT is highly questionable,
4) Thompson Corp is not a ranking system,
5) UofT kid has not demonstrated (althought s/he claims so) that the quality of research is higher,
6) it is impossible to establish whether life-time research awards given to professors at UofT are based on their work at UofT when they did their tenure-track elsewhere. Therefore these awards do not reflect necessarily UofT accomplishments.

[20-07-2006,12:15]
Anonymous
(in reply to: The quality of debate has been raised here)
McGill´s quality of research is higher than UofT if you consider that the average amount of funding per faculty is higher at McGill (Research Infosource). This means McGill faculty are better on average getting funding compared with UofT. And yes, McGill kid is right that having the highest impact factor in a few subjects does not mean being best overall, it is simple question of mathematices (i.e. 1 1 1 3 5 6, average = 2.8 versus 2 2 2 2 2 2, average 2.0).

1. McGill is ranked number one in the medical doctoral category of Maclean´s 2005 Canadian university rankings, sharing the top spot with the University of Toronto. Outstanding students and a reputation for the highest quality are among the primary strengths. Toronto is not ranked higher.

2. McGill is ranked the top Canadian school in the Times Higher Education Supplement ranking of the world´s best universities in 2005 and the only Canadian university in the top 25 in the world. McGill is ranked higher. Note that this publication is specialized in assessing higher education whereas Maclean is Canada´s Vanity Fair.

3. McGill is Research University of the Year 2005 in the medical doctoral category, named by Research InfoSource, Canada´s leading research and development consulting firm. McGill earned 97.3 points out of a possible 100 in its ranking system, the highest score in the country.

[20-07-2006,12:46]
Anonymous
(in reply to: The quality of debate has been raised here)
And what can UofT claim?

Best Canadian University according to Shanghai Jiao Tong University.

[20-07-2006,13:01]
Anonymous
(in reply to: The quality of debate has been raised here)
Shanghai Jiao Tong University ranking project is not reproducible:
http://www.ad-astra.ro/journal/8/florian_shanghai_irreproducibility.pdf

Sorry UofT!

[20-07-2006,14:48]
Anonymous
(in reply to: The quality of debate has been raised here)
Shanghai Jiao Tong University ranking project is not reproducible:
http://www.ad-astra.ro/journal/8/florian_shanghai_irreproducibility.pdf

Sorry UofT!

[20-07-2006,17:30]
Anonymous
(in reply to: The quality of debate has been raised here)
^ read the response from SJTU at the end. just because it?s published doesn?t mean it?s right, bud. but, in any case, i?m glad you are at least learning how to give actual evidence (whether right or wrong) for your arguments.

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

"I think McGill kid raises many good points:

1) McGill is more prestigious,
2) McGill is harder to get in,
3) Shanghai Jiao Tong University that ranks of UofT is highly questionable,
4) Thompson Corp is not a ranking system,
5) UofT has not demonstrated (althought s/he claims so) that the quality of research is higher,
6) it is impossible to establish whether life-time research awards given to professors at UofT are based on their work solely at UofT when they did their tenure-track elsewhere. Therefore these awards do not reflect necessarily UofT accomplishments."

----------

lol. You mean YOU think YOU raise some good points :)

1. Maybe?

2. For certain programs, and if you?re a Canadian and not an Internation student, yes (which is BS). But, either way, they are so similar in admission standards that this isn?t even an issue worth discussing. In the recent past McGill had a noticibly lower entering average than UofT, but that doesn?t mean McGill was an inferior school.

3. Ok? So is every University ranking ever published. One of the things you can do is look for trends between the rankings (e.g., Harvard is always number one, ergo there is a very good chance Harvard is actually number one).

4. No, it?s not a formal ranking. But, it does "rank" Universities in the amount of articles published and IMPACT for many fields (science and non-science), but there is no FINAL ranking. You can draw your own conclusions from the statistics.

5. Listen, I think McGill is a great school and does really important research, but UofT is too big and too much of a research powerhouse to compete with. What McGill does, UofT does on a much larger scale. You were the one who originally accused UofT of being unproductive and failing to perform given it?s resources, which everyone knows is completely untrue.

6. How come you still don?t understand this? Now you?re talking about life-time awards which account for like 1% (if that) of awards given out. What about the other 99% of awards UofT faculty receive AT UofT? Once again, you are implying that UofT attracts and recruits these world-class researchers, yet once they actually get to UofT, they stop performing.

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

The post 4 posts above is so retarded that I won?t even address it. I really do think it?s a 12-year old writing this shit.

[20-07-2006,20:58]
Anonymous
(in reply to: The quality of debate has been raised here)
1. A good indicator of prestige is the quality of candidates who want to enter University. Maclean?s website demonstrates that McGill is superior to UofT in overall entering average, % out of province, and % foreign students (ugrad & grad).
This demonstrates that McGill is Canada?s and the World?s first choice Canadian University.

2. See my answer to 1. McGill is harder to get into.

3. Some more than others buddy. Shanghai Jiao Tong University?s rankings are not even reproducible see http://www.ad-astra.ro/journal/8/florian_shanghai_irreproducibility.pdf. Conclusions of reproducibility study: "The data presented here suggests that the results of the Shanghai ranking are irreproducible. At least the data concerning the SCI indicator suggests that the authors of the Shanghai ranking deviated from the official published methodology when computing the scores of the universities."

4. Yes, you are correct. UofT has highest impact in only 5 of these fields and I maintain my point that this does not reflect overall quality.

5. Retard. McGill not a research powerhouse? Go smoke some crack. According to the most recent Research Infosource figures, full-time professors at McGill lead the country with the highest average research funding, an important indicator of the University?s research quality.

6. WTF, 1% versus 99%??? You think research is like the science fair in high school where professors present their research at meetings and get awards? Most awards e.g. Nobel, Royal Society, PNAS, Killam were received after recognition of many years of experience.

[20-07-2006,21:35]
Anonymous



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