<p>Wow, just looked at the links american<em>in</em>canada provided and I have discovered that the school I currently attend is listed above McGill in both lists. Somehow though I still prefer McGill</p>
<p>i never seen more retarded rankings...lol</p>
<p>yale is 27????....are they stupid</p>
<p>if u want a proper ranking....look at the times world university rankings..those are the most widley accepted</p>
<p>yes... upon further review... the rankings that i posted are indeed very retarded... i'm sorry for wasting everyone's time haha... i do, however, stand by my opinion that cornell is more prestigious than mcgill... although i will probably apply to both next year...</p>
<p>The first ranking isn't based on prestige (which hard to measure), and the second is based on willingness to do web publication (or something like that). You want to do prestige ranking, you find a survey where subjects were asked to rank universities in order of prestige (if there is such a survey out there). Now, a good ranking of world universities would include such factors as the number of buildings unofficially named after William Shatner ;).</p>
<p>This list ranks NYU, Michigan State, UCSF, and Ohio State over Brown. Um....this ranking has very little credibility. :)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.webometrics.info/top100_...=usa_canada.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.webometrics.info/top100_...=usa_canada.htm</a>
has george mason above mcgill</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Noone trusts that Chinese University's rankings. They are, themselves, are a very bad uni.</p></li>
<li><p>The second ranking given above, webometrics, is solely based on the Internet existence. So, again, it doesn't tell you anything. I am sure Darthmouth is ranked very low there since they are a small school.</p></li>
<li><p>If you really want a good ranking, see:
<a href="http://www.thes.co.uk/worldrankings/%5B/url%5D">http://www.thes.co.uk/worldrankings/</a></p></li>
</ol>
<p>You can have free subscription.</p>
<p>yes those rankings are better, but still very flawed in terms of the prestige that i usually find attached to the universities ranked... for example... Berkeley over Oxford? UT Austin over Columbia? UC San Fran. over McGill?... etc....</p>
<p>forget about all these rankings...it's like rank the best country in the world....which is so complex...........</p>
<p>SJTU's rankings are more reliable than THES....</p>
<p>THES itself is bullocks.......Read up on the blunder that THES made regarding Malaysian universities........</p>
<p>html</p>
<p>No. SJTU is NOT respected at all! Believe me!!</p>
<p>THES also has its problems, but is much better than that Chinese uni.</p>
<p>But again, as someone said above, the thing is like comparing countries. So no international ranking can be good indeed.</p>
<p>"The data, recognised by academics worldwide, is dominated by US universities which get far more money in endowments than UK counterparts. Harvard is top of the list and though Cambridge pushed Stanford into third place, eight out of the top 10 places are filled by US universities."</p>
<p>Taken from the Guardian.</p>
<p>Unlike THES which heavily relied on 1300 academics in 88 countries, SJTU relied on statistics such as he number of Nobel Prizes and Field Medals of alumni (10%) and staff (20%), highly cited researchers (20%), articles published in Nature and Science (20%), other citations (20%) and relative size of the academic institution (10%).</p>
<p>It should be noted that SJTU indicated that their methodology tends to favout science based universities hence it is a way biased towards english speaking institutions as english is the international language in the academic world.</p>
<p>I would not say that THES is better than SJTU. THES may be accurate for the top 25, but beyond that, it's just too inaccurate.</p>
<p>
[quote]
and relative size of the academic institution (10%).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't understand why the hell that matters. Who cares? Bigger doesn't equal better. It's quality not quantity. :)</p>
<p>"Academic performance with respect to the size of an institution"</p>
<p>"The weighted scores of the above five indicators divided by the number of full-time equivalent academic staff."</p>
<p>Gawd.......please read the definition before sprouting anything.</p>
<p>So a small university can still top the list if that said university has superior academics with high research output besides having a high number of alumni who are nobel laureates or field medalists.</p>
<p>I wonder whether you guys do actually click on those links before commenting......................................</p>