"World's Best University"?
That is a massive title.
I wonder if the instruments that will justify such a scope of ranking have been developed yet,much less applied.
This corrective by Dr Wendy Piatt, the "director general of the Russell Group of research-
intensive universities is more realistic":
" this latest league table, like all others, has its limitations and there can be no single correct way of measuring university performance or quality".
In these universities,UCL has the highest prestige, followed by SOAS,at least as far as I know. It was revealing,however,that I experienced striking disparities between all three that suggested to me that the actual picture might be more nuanced and delicate than such public perceptions would suggest.
-- I expect that all that wonderful research is really being done in these places,but are they research institutes or universities? Or research intensive universities,as it would be put in England.
A university is much more than a research institution.It is a place for nurturing people.
What is the quality of the average student experience in these places? What is the quality of guidance they get in their development to become like the intellectual luminaries whose names have made the places famous and seem to drive these high rankings? To what degree and in what range of contexts can students interact with staff?What is the quality of interpersonal relations between the members of staff?
Why was the quality of the accommodation service I enjoyed as a student at Kent and UCL far superior to that which my acquaintance studying at Cambridge enjoyed in 2009? So much so that to me the Cambridge experience looked more like a ghetto,a ghetto perhaps reserved for foreign students?
Why was the Cambridge Accommodation service in 2009 so rapacious about money and proving so vindictively petty in relation to this student,under the leadership of Nichola Blanning?
The unholy alliance between the student's department and accommodation services was like a squabble of chickens in a gossip filled market.In contrast,UCL academics at UCL and the University of Kent, existed at a dignified distance from such administrate services,as befits an academic,since such aspect of administration are a specialised activity of their own.
One wonders if there is a relationship between such rapaciousness and the story in a University of Cambridge newspaper about Cambridge female students working as prostitutes to pay their way through school.
One would have thought that the university's £30 billion endowment, reputedly equivalent to those of all other English universities combined, except Oxford,would enable a more humane student experience.
UCL and SOAS proved superior to the University of Kent in the scope of financial assistance available to students as well as in the complementary activities that enrich the student's life,UCL being far and away best in that regard.
At the same time,however,the culture I encountered at UCL and SOAS seemed more remote at the official level for a student than that of the University of Kent,which demonstrated a robust student care service, addressing both psychological and financial needs.
Someone writing about US institutions(dont remember his name now) insists that less prestigious and smaller institutions provide better educational value.Dont remember his reasons but one seemed to be better attention to students.
In my exposure in the universities I attended,I found that the relationship between members of staff in my departments seemed better at Kent than at UCL and SOAS.Not to talk of the horrid experience of the Black female law lecturer at SOAS who won a case against the university for being underpaid for years compared to her colleagues.
Also, a professor in computing came from Oxford to Kent, because,according to him,Oxford is prestigious but pays less.In corroborating this,a Kent academic stated that Oxford has more academics per student but achieves that by paying less to its staff.
It seems one needs to look very hard at these institutions.
Thanks
Toyin
On 8 September 2010 10:18, Hetty ter Haar <oldavenue@googlemail.com> wrote:
Cambridge ousts Harvard as world's best university
US college knocked off top spot for first time in seven years, while
UK institutions 'struggle to compete on funding'
- Get the full list [http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/sep/
08/worlds-top-100-universities-2010]
Jeevan Vasagar and Rachel Williams
Wednesday September 8 2010
The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/sep/08/cambridge-worlds-best-university-harvard
Both of them have earned fistfuls of Nobel prizes, have educated
enough statesmen to table a string of international summits, and
inspired eminent scientists, philosophers and poets.
But Harvard today forfeits first place to Cambridge in a league table
of the world's top universities, the first time in the list's seven
year history that the Ivy League institution has been knocked off the
number one spot.
British universities made a strong showing, with University College
London, Oxford and Imperial all appearing in the top 10, while King's
College London and Edinburgh appeared in the top 25.
American institutions dominate the list, however, taking 31 out of the
top 100 places in the QS world university rankings [http://
www.topuniversities.com/" title="QS world university rankings]. The
list also features 15 Asian universities, lead by the University of
Hong Kong at 23. The QS table is based on measures of research
quality, graduate employability, teaching and how international the
faculties and student bodies are.
Harvard, which takes its name from John Harvard, an alumnus of
Cambridge who was its first benefactor, was still most popular among
the 5,000 employers polled worldwide.
However, Cambridge was voted best for research quality in a survey of
15,000 academics. It has an outstanding pedigree: famous minds who
pushed back the frontiers of knowledge there include Newton, Darwin
and Wittgenstein. Cambridge took overall first place in the rankings,
which also use citation counts from a database of academic publishing.
Professor Steve Young, senior pro-vice-chancellor at the University of
Cambridge, said: "While university league tables tend to over-simplify
the range of achievements at institutions, it is particularly pleasing
to note that the excellence of the transformative research - research
that changes people's lives - carried out at Cambridge is so well
regarded by fellow academics worldwide."
A Harvard spokesman said: "Harvard University is always honoured to be
recognised among such high calibre institutions of higher learning.
However, we also continue to believe it is important that students
select the college or university that best suits their individual
needs."
John O'Leary, executive member of the QS academic advisory board,
blamed a hiring freeze for Harvard losing its top spot. "Cambridge has
gone top because it has improved its citations. Harvard has taken more
students and had a hiring freeze amongst its academics. That's the
reason these two have swapped around."
The impressive showing of British and US universities is because
English is the favoured language of academia, O'Leary said. "In
general terms, UK universities, like American ones, benefit from being
English-speaking. If you're publishing in a language most researchers
aren't using, you're not going to be picked up and cited ... in the
mainstream journals."
However, a report by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) released yesterday shows the UK lagging behind
competitors in public investment in higher education. The sector is
facing cuts of more than £1bn by the end of 2013. The share of public
spending in British higher education is 0.7% of GDP, below the OECD
average of 1%, and places Britain behind the US, Canada, Sweden,
Germany, Poland and Slovenia.
Announcing the OECD's results in London, Andreas Schleicher, the head
of its indicators and analysis division, said Finland, Canada and
Japan were now major players in higher education. "For many years the
UK was very much at the forefront," he said. "But now you do not see
that competitive advantage."
The vice-chancellors' body, Universities UK, questioned how long the
country's higher education system could maintain its world-class
position in the field given its comparative "under-investment".
The Times Higher Education magazine, which is publishing its own
global university rankings next week, is no longer collaborating with
QS. It is concerned that the careers advice company's rankings rely
too heavily on subjective surveys of scholars and employers, and not
enough on hard indicators of excellence. The THE's rankings are
expected to contain disappointing news for some prestigious British
institutions.
Ben Sowter, head of research at QS, said: "Unlike other rankings
systems which rely heavily on statistical indicators of university
research, QS also takes into account the most up-to-date views of
employers and academics, reflecting the broader interests of students
and parents. QS rankings reflect the highly competitive environment of
global higher education."
The QS rankings are weighted 40% to academic reputation, 10% to
employability, 20% to citations, 20% to the staff-student ratio and
give a further 10% weighting to how international the make-up of the
faculty and student body is.
Dr Wendy Piatt, the director general of the Russell Group of research-
intensive universities, which includes Oxford and Cambridge, said: "We
are pleased these latest figures show that Russell Group universities
still rank among the world's leading universities. However, two health
warnings should be heeded. First, this latest league table, like all
others, has its limitations and there can be no single correct way of
measuring university performance or quality.
"Second, our world-class status is under threat from other countries
who are ploughing billions into their top institutions in a determined
bid to overtake the UK in the rankings. Data released by the OECD only
yesterday shows once again that UK leading universities are already
under-resourced in comparison with their international competitors.
But now, while our competitors are investing in their future skills
and knowledge base, UK universities are threatened with further cuts
which will make it more difficult than ever to maintain their world-
class status.
"Not only North America but, increasingly, countries like China and
Korea are investing massively in their universities and as a result
their best institutions are rising rapidly up international rankings."
How they compare
Cambridge
Founded in 1209 when scholars taking refuge from hostile townspeople
in Oxford migrated to Cambridge. King Henry III took the scholars
under his protection in 1231. Peterhouse, the first college, was set
up by the Bishop of Ely in 1284.
Location Cambridge, England.
Famous alumni Wordsworth, Coleridge, Byron, Milton, Isaac Newton,
Charles Darwin, Charles Babbage.
In numbers 11,815 students, including 1,257 from overseas, 1,590
academic staff.
Fees This year, the tuition fees for British and EU undergraduates are
£3,290 a year on all courses.
Harvard
Founded in 1636 by a vote of the Great and General Court of the
Massachusetts Bay Colony, the local legislature. Named after first
benefactor John Harvard, a minister and Cambridge alumnus who
bequeathed his library and half his estate to Harvard.
Location Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Famous alumni TS Eliot, John Updike, Barack Obama, John F Kennedy,
Franklin Roosevelt, Alfred Kinsey, Robert Oppenheimer.
In numbers About 6,700 students at Harvard college, 2,100 faculty
members and more than 10,000 academic appointments in affiliated
teaching hospitals.
Fees For 2009-10, tuition fees were $33,696.
guardian.co.uk Copyright (c) Guardian News and Media Limited. 2010
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
For previous archives, visit http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
No comments:
Post a Comment