Wow, UofT hater is insane

Canadian Universities Forum (discussion group)


 
 
Subject: Wow, UofT hater is insane
Everyday it´s a whole new batch of threads bashing UofT with false claims and ridiculous accusations, all while supporting McGill. It´s clear that he feels the need to convince people that McGill is better than UofT, so rather than responding to the troll, just leave him alone. Eventually he will be forced to leave his basement and introduce himself to society.

Just to inform those of you who don´t know about how Canadian Universities place in the rankings:

According to three international rankings:

UofT: 24 + 27 + 18 / 3 = 23

UBC: 36 + 50 + 31 / 3 = 39

McGill: 62 + 21 + 42 / 3 = 42

SOURCE:

http://www.president.utoronto.ca/aboutthepresident/speeches/universityreportcards/performanceinternationalrankings.htm

---

Macleans:

UofT placed 1st in 12 of the last 13 years.

McGill placed 1st in 2 (tied UofT last year) of the last 13 years. (and believe me, they can?t stop talking about it!)

SOURCE: Macleans Magazine

----

UofT is the research University of the year according to research infosource.

SOURCE: http://www.researchinfosource.com/media/2006-top50-sup.pdf

(you can see that UofT gained 14% in funding while McGill lost 22% (the biggest loss out of any Canadian University)!. If McGill is so great, shouldn´t they be attracting all the funding?)

UofT is the leader in total citations and impact for the majority of academic fields. McGill isn´t a leader in even one field in either total citation or impact. What kind of ´top´ University isn´t the leader in even one field?

SOURCE: http://scientific.thomson.com/press/2005/8290754/

----

Conclusion: UofT is and always will be Canada?s best University. The McGill kid can post lies about how it´s so easy to get into UofT or that 50% of it´s students are chinese, but if UofT was so shitty, why does it attract such great students and faculty? One glance at our list of alumni and it´s clear where future leaders choose to study in Canada: UofT!

List of Alumni:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_University_of_Toronto_people



[23-11-2006,16:13]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Wow, UofT hater is insane)
uoft hater is a retarded high school kid who is trying his best to tell the ppl that mcgill > uoft, not going to work...those who are informed know that uoft > mcgill
[23-11-2006,17:47]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Wow, UofT hater is insane)
LOL

take it from the gold standard in this country: Maclean´s

1. McGill
2. Queen´s

nobody cares what happened the past 12 years. you like to talk a lot about your school´s past triumphs for someone who likes to name other universities "has beens". you´ve never thought that maybe it´s your school (uoft) which is the real has-been?

ppl know better to not take a shady chinese ranking seriously, nor another ranking that takes 60% of that shady chinese ranking to form their "own" ranking. take it from a reputable source like THES. McGill has beaten UofT every year and will continue to do so.

anyway, i´ve said this over and over. no matter what, your school (uoft) will remain a virtual unknown around the world while internationals line up to apply to the Harvard of Canada. these are top students, not the mediocre kind like the ones that helped uoft rank 12th in canada in average entering grades. so really, it´s fun taking down your school on the net, but let´s be honest with ourselves, uoft will never be known as canada´s top school around the world (and in it´s own home country!).

[23-11-2006,22:05]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Wow, UofT hater is insane)
^ so much ignorance. but please, don´t feed the troll.
[23-11-2006,23:17]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Wow, UofT hater is insane)
In a nutshell, here´s how the THES approached its self-imposed charge to "[apply] a single set of measures consistently across the world." Half of a ranked university´s final score was based on its reputation, calculated on the basis of "peer review" responses provided by 1,300 academics around the world, who identified themselves as able to comment on specific academic subjects and geographical areas and their top choices in each. (Berkeley surpassed Harvard in this important metric ? though marks in other areas ? most notably student/faculty ratio ? lowered our overall ranking.)

Twenty percent of the score was based on what THES editors call "a ranking of research impact," which is academese for the volume of citations per faculty member (the data coming from a single source, a database produced by U.S.-based Thomson Scientific). Another 20 percent relied on faculty-to-student ratios, with the editors acknowledging that despite the difficulty of making valid international comparisons on this basis, the indicator "is a simple and robust one that captures a university´s commitment to teaching."

The final 10 percent was accorded on the strength of two factors, each relating to an institution´s "international orientation": the percentage of overseas students enrolled and the percentage of international faculty employed.

Critics of the THES methodology (and that of other similar surveys, such as U.S. News & World Report´s) have pointed to what one of their number, Anne Machung of the Planning and Analysis Office at UC´s Office of the President, calls "the arbitrary nature of the variables used to construct the rankings, and their volatility."

The 50 percent of each ranking attributable to a university´s "peer reviewed" reputation is questionable, they say, in the absence of any insight into how the 1,300 respondents were selected, how many responded, and how valid their self-identified expertise might be considered. (The THES has so far published only a popular summary of its findings, without the raw data that would shed greater light on the underlying methodology.) The 20-percent weight accorded citations favors universities in English-speaking countries and those with strong capabilities in the natural sciences (as the THES editors acknowledge). Calculations of student/faculty ratios may or may not include the substantial proportion of instruction carried out by GSIs, adjunct faculty, and others; each university provided its own data in this area, with no attempt made by the THES and its consultant, QS Research, to take different measures into account. And the two international factors in the mix each have their critics, particularly among those familiar with the drastic impact on international-student recruitment in the U.S. stemming from various post-9/11 policy changes.

====

Reputable?

BWAHAHAHAH!!!

I love how racist this kid is too. He is against anything Chinese. Because one of the rankings, which by the way is just as respected as THES if not more, is Chinese it must be "shady".

Basically you can be sure of one thing, if something praises UofT, it´s bullshit, but if it praises McGill it is respectable. Maclean´s was always bashed in the past (even by UofT students) and now this kid thinks it deserves everyones attention.

I thought McGill students were smarter....


I guess not.

[23-11-2006,23:34]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Wow, UofT hater is insane)
^bwahahahaa look at this loser explode... i guess he didn´t like what he read.

i said shady chinese ranking to refer to sjtu ranking, which is arguably the worst ranking i´ve ever seen (30% based on dead nobel prize winners?!? the heck?!?). it wasn´t a racist remark, you´re referring to someone else. like i said in another thread, there are other "mcgill kids".

wtv i won´t go into this ´cause i have better things to do. i do know i go to the Harvard of Canada as the world sees it, so why do i care?

[23-11-2006,23:57]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Wow, UofT hater is insane)
It´s 30% weight given to alumni and faculty who have won nobel prizes or fields medals (past and present). While there are different methodologies used in ranking Universities, I´d like to think that 30% weight given to how many awards are given to alumni and faculty of an institution is much more relevant than 50% weight given to something as subjective as reputation as dictated by less than 1300 individuals who are unknown to us.
[24-11-2006,00:15]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Wow, UofT hater is insane)
I think he has a problem with McGill being ranked 62nd! Behind the University of Florida! LOL.

UBC is consistenly better in the international rankings. McGill only does well under certain conditions.

[24-11-2006,00:33]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Wow, UofT hater is insane)
it actually is ridiculous to assign 30% of a ranking´s weight on nobel prize winners. they´re basically assessing the quality of an institution based on an award that very very few people win. and not only that, the people who have won could´ve won it 50 years ago and it is apparently still valid in the ranking. i have an issue with mcgill being 62nd? same for you having issue with THES putting UofT 2nd and Maclean´s ranking it 3rd! anyway, no issues, i told you already, rankings are meaningless. i´m a student of what is known as the Harvard of Canada around the world, you´re a student of a no-name university. :)
[24-11-2006,00:41]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Wow, UofT hater is insane)
lol. you crack me up.
[24-11-2006,01:41]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Wow, UofT hater is insane)
yeah the truth hurts
[24-11-2006,03:49]
Anonymous
(in reply to: Wow, UofT hater is insane)
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/November2006/02/c7754.html

are you part of the elite in your high school/cegep?

then go to McGill and Queen´s!

[24-11-2006,03:50]
Anonymous



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