The price of being the best

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anonymous
  • Start date Start date
A

Anonymous

Guest
A while ago, the German government started a campaign that would award the best universities of the country with the status of an "elite university" (the official title is, of course, different and more elaborate, but the public discussion uses this term for simplicity). The idea was to ignite some competition between the schools, to re-establish the country's reputation of being a stronghold of science, and, basically, to improve the quality of the universities. The title is meant to improve a school's prestige, attracting more scholars, scientists and students, and of course is also combined with a money bonus.
One of the driving forces of the campaign was the shocking revelation that only three German universities got a ranking in the top 100 unis of the world. Germany wants its own Harvards, Yales and Oxfords. Fine with me.
Last week, six universities got promoted to that status (adding to three that already held it), including the one I started studying this semester, the FU Berlin. Great thing, you might say. In fact, several people congratulated me on that. Quite an impressive feat too, given that the university was only founded in 1948, while the other big Berlin university, the Humboldt Uni, which has much historical prestige, has not yet received the status.

It is a bittersweet victory, though. I study at one of the many very small institutes (for which the uni is famous), which used to teach a good number of ancient and modern languages. However, ever since Germany introduced the Bachelor system, the institute was merged with several others and subsequently had to drop most of its languages except two (both of which I have to learn) and a good part of its historical section as well. Now, that doesn't touch me, because I went there to learn the modern languages anyway, but I still think that dropping such sections is a step in the wrong direction. To my knowledge, there are now only two institutes left in the entire country that teach these languages and the other stuff that my institute had to drop. Some people may say I'm overreacting, but I think that is how knowledge is lost. The less people teach it, the less people learn it, and the less people can pass that knowledge on at later times.

Switching to the Bachelor system and the status as an "elite university" are not directly related to each other, but still, you would think that with such a prestige, the school would be interested in keeping everything together, wouldn't you? After all, Göttingen also switched, but the institute still keeps everything it had before.

But hey, I'm studying at one of the nine best universities in the country, so why should I care?
 
Perun said:
One of the driving forces of the campaign was the shocking revelation that only three German universities got a ranking in the top 100 unis of the world.

I am curious to see a list. Do you know where this can be found?

Perun said:
The less people teach it, the less people learn it,

Vice versa as well my friend: The less people learn it, the less people teach it.
 
That's one of the biggest problem in Europ, since a little while, every country wants "its" Harvard or Oxford...

Now you have a European marking system (ECTS) and this is a fucking bullshit. This has been invented to help student to migrate from a country to another one. But the main matter is that each country has its own habits in marking students. I know that for a french who goes to study in Canada, he can be taken for a hard worker although, in France, he's described like a lazy student. (I know Canada isn't in Europ but it's only an example). And, to me, this system (ECTS) is only here to bring competition between Univerities at a European scale. One other matter is that people need "objective" (unbiased would perhaps be better") criterias to choose.

Perun said:
only three German universities got a ranking in the top 100 unis of the world.

And then ? Where's the matter ? What is teached in these 100 top unis ? You just can't compare a uni spacialised in strong sciences like maths or physics with another one specialised in history or in human sciences...
And I'd like to know the criterias used to mark the unis. Cause that's only with that that you know if the classification means something or not.

Forostar said:
I am curious to see a list. Do you know where this can be found?
I'm interested in too, so I'm going to look for that !

There's an article about that in Wikipedia, but in French, here

And the full one
 
Top 500 (from 2007) -->
http://www.arwu.org/rank/2007/ARWU2007TOP500list.htm

Criteria:
http://www.arwu.org/rank/2007/ARWU2007Methodology.htm

Statistics per region & per country:
http://www.arwu.org/rank/2007/ARWU2007Statistics.htm

Top 99:

1 Harvard Univ

2 Stanford Univ

3 Univ California - Berkeley

4 Univ Cambridge

5 Massachusetts Inst Tech (MIT)

6 California Inst Tech

7 Columbia Univ

8 Princeton Univ

9 Univ Chicago

10 Univ Oxford

11 Yale Univ

12 Cornell Univ

13 Univ California - Los Angeles

14 Univ California - San Diego

15 Univ Pennsylvania

16 Univ Washington - Seattle

17 Univ Wisconsin - Madison

18 Univ California - San Francisco

19 Johns Hopkins Univ

20 Tokyo Univ

21 Univ Michigan - Ann Arbor

22 Kyoto Univ

23 Imperial Coll London

23 Univ Toronto

25 Univ Coll London

26 Univ Illinois - Urbana Champaign

27 Swiss Fed Inst Tech - Zurich

28 Washington Univ - St. Louis

29 Northwestern Univ

30 New York Univ

30 Rockefeller Univ

32 Duke Univ

33 Univ Minnesota - Twin Cities

34 Univ Colorado - Boulder

35 Univ California - Santa Barbara

36 Univ British Columbia

37 Univ Maryland - Coll Park

38 Univ Texas - Austin

39 Univ Paris 06

39 Univ Texas Southwestern Med Center

41 Vanderbilt Univ

42 Univ Utrecht

43 Pennsylvania State Univ - Univ Park

43 Univ California - Davis

45 Univ California - Irvine

46 Univ Copenhagen

47 Rutgers State Univ - New Brunswick

48 Univ Manchester

49 Univ Pittsburgh - Pittsburgh

50 Univ Southern California

51 Univ Florida

52 Univ Paris 11

53 Karolinska Inst Stockholm

53 Univ Edinburgh

53 Univ Munich

56 Tech Univ Munich

57 Australian Natl Univ

58 Univ North Carolina - Chapel Hill

58 Univ Zurich

60 Carnegie Mellon Univ

61 Ohio State Univ - Columbus

62 Univ Bristol

63 McGill Univ

64 Hebrew Univ Jerusalem

65 Univ Heidelberg

66 Uppsala Univ

67 Osaka Univ

68 Purdue Univ - West Lafayette

69 Univ Oslo

70 Brown Univ

71 Univ Leiden

72 Univ Sheffield

73 Univ Helsinki

74 Univ Arizona

75 Univ Rochester

76 Moscow State Univ

76 Tohoku Univ

78 Case Western Reserve Univ

79 Univ Melbourne

80 Michigan State Univ

81 Univ Nottingham

82 Univ Basel

83 Boston Univ

83 Ecole Normale Super Paris

83 King's Coll London

86 Stockholm Univ

87 McMaster Univ

87 Rice Univ

87 Univ Goettingen

90 Indiana Univ - Bloomington

91 Texas A&M Univ - Coll Station

92 Univ Birmingham

93 Univ Utah

94 Nagoya Univ

94 Univ Freiburg

96 Arizona State Univ - Tempe

97 Lund Univ

97 Univ Iowa

99 Tokyo Inst Tech

99 Univ Bonn

99 Univ Strasbourg 1
 
Odd. I see a lot more German unis on that list than those alleged three.
 
I see WAY too many American Universities. What are the standards to make that list? I wonder because Arizona State University has a HUGE rep for being an easy party school yet it made the list and not the University of Arizona... odd.
 
It's kinda sad that Germany feels it has to go ahead and expand its international profile like that.  Because these sorts of games are utter raw politics.  There is absolutely nothing academic about them.  Having sat on meetings for a year at my former school, I can see that the idea of getting on these lists is a structured play by the university to present its best face when the time for evaluation comes through, including going so far as to send professors who might have an extremely negative opinion of the school on rather long distance conferences.

Secondly, I am not familiar with how Perun's school worked before it switched to the Bachelor system, so if someone could inform me...
 
Onhell said:
I see WAY too many American Universities.

That's why the criterias are so important. In this study, Nobel Prices and Fields Medals are the main (the only ???) criterias. But who can assert that a Nobel priced is a good teacher ? The goal reached by those who made the study is to know the gap separating them from american universities.

LooseCannon said:
It's kinda sad that Germany feels it has to go ahead and expand its international profile like that.

It's all about money, the price isn't the same for a german student and a stranger one...
 
Onhell, the University of Arizona actually is on the list; it is at pos 74.

After skimming those criteria, I have to say they are horribly biased and unbalanced. Particularly the number of Nobel Prizes that have been awarded to people from a certain university is overrated. If somebody got a Nobel Prize in 1907, that says nothing about the university in 2007; especially in Europe. Remember, there were two world wars inbetween.
Moreover, Nobel Prizes are awarded in chemistry, biology, physics, mathematics and economics. None of those subjects are in a philosophic faculty. I.e. according to this list, a university that has its heavyweight on subjects such as politics, linguistics, history, theology, law, philosophy or sociology is worthless, because you don't get Nobel Prizes for those subjects.
Even worse, the list also rates highly the number of Fields Medals. They are awarded only in mathematics.
The Research Output is a joke. Articles published in Nature and Science, huh? What about real research? Most articles written by scientists and scholars are not published in popular scientific magazines, but subject-bound journals, and lots of them even. You can read scientific progress from articles published there. Not to mention I have heard several professors talk of Nature as a sort of "science tabloid".

No wonder you see so many Tech Univs and Med Univs, but so few that specialise in other categories. This list is bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.
 
Perun said:
Even worse, the list also rates highly the number of Fields Medals. They are awarded only in mathematics.

Of course they are !! The Fields Medal was created because there's no Nobel Prize for Mathematics. The record tells that Mr Nobel has been cuckold by a mathematician, that's why it doesn't exist...  :ok:
 
Perun said:
Onhell, the University of Arizona actually is on the list; it is at pos 74.

After skimming those criteria, I have to say they are horribly biased and unbalanced. Particularly the number of Nobel Prizes that have been awarded to people from a certain university is overrated. If somebody got a Nobel Prize in 1907, that says nothing about the university in 2007; especially in Europe. Remember, there were two world wars inbetween.
Moreover, Nobel Prizes are awarded in chemistry, biology, physics, mathematics and economics. None of those subjects are in a philosophic faculty. I.e. according to this list, a university that has its heavyweight on subjects such as politics, linguistics, history, theology, law, philosophy or sociology is worthless, because you don't get Nobel Prizes for those subjects.
Even worse, the list also rates highly the number of Fields Medals. They are awarded only in mathematics.
The Research Output is a joke. Articles published in Nature and Science, huh? What about real research? Most articles written by scientists and scholars are not published in popular scientific magazines, but subject-bound journals, and lots of them even. You can read scientific progress from articles published there. Not to mention I have heard several professors talk of Nature as a sort of "science tabloid".

No wonder you see so many Tech Univs and Med Univs, but so few that specialise in other categories. This list is bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.

Thanks, I skimmed a bit too quickly... and I agree the "criterias" are a bunch of crap. They can come up with better, fairer standards.
 
Onhell said:
Thanks, I skimmed a bit too quickly... and I agree the "criterias" are a bunch of crap. They can come up with better, fairer standards.

Fairer you said ?

Onhell said:
How about they have a race. They pick the fattest student on campus from each uni and they have them do the 100 meter dash? :p

Note : If they take the fattest, then there won't be so much crowd in the tribunes !

Other proposition : it's a competition made by teams and it consists in drinking as much beer as you can. I think there won't be any problem to find volunteers...
 
well I just found a problem with both our ideas. With mine there wouldn't a single American Uni on the list given that the fattest people live there and I'm sure some of them attend such institutions of higher learning :D And with yours, Germany and Ireland would take the top 20 :p
 
Back
Top