The Wu Shulian University Rankings have been questioned: the California Institute of Technology did not break into the top 500

recently, “China’s Higher Education Research 5 China University of Science and Technology Higher Education Research Institute,” Evaluation Research Group “academic” University ranking based on the credibility perspective “from the academic point of view for the first time on weapons The book even the group launched the “2010 China University Evaluation” index system and the algorithm has made a number of questions.

Chinese the HKUST group on a number of world-class elite “talent cultivation” score estimates, and their integration into the Chinese Institute of Management Science 2012 Chinese universities overall ranking in comparison. The results showed that, in the British Times Higher Education Supplement World University Rankings 2011 ranked first in the California Institute of Technology, the “personnel training” score actually missed the first to enter the Wu Shulian list single 500.

from the 1983 U.S. News And World Report “released since the first university rankings, university rankings more and more by the concerns of the community. Domestic university rankings, Wu Shulian Universities of China “the most influential, the most controversial.

in response to public opinion questioned Wu Shulian group had announced that the China University of evaluation index system in 2010, the calculation formula and indicators for assignment, etc., and that this index system is “open, transparent , repeatable, and testable.

some colleges and universities at home and abroad in accordance with the the Wu Shulian group index system and algorithm for complex speech, complex operator, the results of this ranking ‘number’ instead of ‘quality’ evaluation data processing, personnel training the resulting rankings, contrary to the actual situation of the university ecosystem, inconsistent with the actual knowledge of the people. “the HKUST group a person in charge said.

It is understood that the group select Shandong University, Jilin University, Zhengzhou University and Renmin University of China, China University of Science and Technology and Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications of the six university for comparison, in accordance with “Wu Shulian 2012 University of the total ranking, Shandong University, Jilin University, Zhengzhou University in the undergraduate training score is located in the first three, while perceived quality MyCOS employment and personnel training in accordance with the freshman admission standards that reflect the quality of students and representatives of social The ability to “sort, the National People’s Congress, USTC, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications in the first three.

intriguing, Shandong University, Jilin University, Zhengzhou University, each year the number of undergraduate students enrolled in more than 10,000, far higher than the other three universities, which makes the Task Force on Wu Shulian rating the index system and algorithm of the doubt, “seems to indicate that ‘undergraduate training score’ and ‘the number of students between the existence of a strong association.”

group further found, “2010 China University Evaluation “index system, the undergraduate culture score from the sum by three, which have a weight of up to 0.6, and college graduates, the number of the multiplier, which means that the” University of the number of graduates “indirect undergraduate training score high and low impact, directly led to the characterization of meaningful indicators of” quality “of the final number of” alternative.

“‘postgraduate training score’ by 5 by adding together the three ‘outstanding doctoral thesis score’, ‘Challenge graduate academic competitions Award score’, ‘Graduate Teaching Achievement Award score’ difference is minimal, colleges and universities in the same batch, the size of the remaining two by the number of ‘graduated from the Master’ and ‘the number of graduated doctoral the number of decisions. “China HKUST group a member said,” Clearly, of the number of students determined to the maximum extent of the scores of students to develop. “

On this basis, the group of internationally renowned California Institute of Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Ecole Normale and Cambridge University personnel training score deduction. “2010 China University of evaluation, including some China-specific indicators, such as undergraduate teaching evaluation Challenge Awards in foreign universities is not, therefore, these four universities in the introduction to the Wu Shulian ranking system to calculate assume that these statistics and calculated indicators not be considered or set the highest value. “

deduction results found, California Institute of Technology scored only 1.07 points in the in Wu Shulian list single even before the 500 can not get into. The same “unfortunate”, used to train 10 Nobel Prize winners and six Fields Medal winner of the international elite Ecole Normale, barely into the top 500 domestic Xianning College, Yichun College rankings is roughly the same. Massachusetts Institute of Technology had topped the world’s second-row 60, Nanchang University, Henan University rankings quite.

The University of Cambridge, a little better, personnel training about 32.66 points, to be able to enter the of Wu Shulian Chinese University in the top 20 to 30. “Group an official said, several international elite a common characteristic, are the elite universities, the number of admissions each year are limited, such as California Institute of Technology each year the number of Undergraduate Admissions at about 240 people, while the Ecole Normale not recruit high school starting point for undergraduate students only from other universities to select good quality undergraduates for the last year of training, the number of the basic maintenance of about 250 people. Culture score of

estimates based on the 2010 evaluation of world-class universities ‘talent’ obviously seriously inconsistent with the actual cognitive, indicating that the ‘number’ instead of ‘quality’ of the “2010 China University Evaluation index system and its algorithm can not be true in nature, objective and effective manner to reflect the ability and level of personnel training in university. “group A member suggested that,” Chinese University of evaluation has been available for years, has entered in today’s Higher Education in China improve the quality stage, this University ranking to a certain extent would the community, including universities, government, employers, parents and students, misleading, affect their understanding and judgment of the various colleges and universities.

In addition, the the HKUST group think, “2010 China University Evaluation, there are still the following problems, such as the calculation of” scientific research score, the only paper volume and papers cited amount to do simple added, not excluding disciplinary differences; based on the results of the 2010 evaluation estimated that even in China have not been completed world-class universities, some colleges and universities’ scientific research score “more than has been recognized world-class university. Therefore, relying on university rankings published by the “2010 China University Evaluation, not a true reflection of the university” personnel training “and” scientific research “ability, objectivity, fairness of credibility should be questioned.

the share: welcome the , comment I want to Comments the micro Bo Recommended | today’s microblogging hot (edit: SN056)