关于file４８５的lockbox - 未名空间MITBBS历史存档

关于file４８５的lockbox# EB23 - 劳工卡

a*k2012-02-23 08:02

1 楼

http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
"the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
undergraduate or graduate programs"
按这个排名：
U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

t*n2012-02-23 08:02

2 楼

申请１４０的时候是file的dulluas，现在搬家到属于phoneix的北方，现在４８５应该
file到哪里？（网上１４０的case在TSC）
thanks

s*y2012-02-23 08:02

3 楼

这个是因为有了老李。

【在 a*****k 的大作中提到】

: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
: "the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
: academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
: undergraduate or graduate programs"
: 按这个排名：
: U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

l*r2012-02-23 08:02

4 楼

光看北大能排39就知道这个榜单不靠谱。

e*g2012-02-23 08:02

5 楼

Pitt的医学院非常好
有了老李，工学院也蒸蒸日上
这个排名还是很客观

【在 a*****k 的大作中提到】

: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
: "the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
: academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
: undergraduate or graduate programs"
: 按这个排名：
: U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

h*i2012-02-23 08:02

6 楼

全球工程排名清华第二，UC Berkeley第三，也是由于老李 :-)

【在 s******y 的大作中提到】

: 这个是因为有了老李。

G*Y2012-02-23 08:02

7 楼

kao
my school is world's top 500!
yeah!

【在 a*****k 的大作中提到】

: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
: "the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
: academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
: undergraduate or graduate programs"
: 按这个排名：
: U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

H*N2012-02-23 08:02

8 楼

same here

【在 G**Y 的大作中提到】

: kao
: my school is world's top 500!
: yeah!

H*y2012-02-23 08:02

9 楼

什么乱七八糟的？
多大在康耐尔之上，倒也罢了。我之前两个薄厚学校都在前40，布朗给挤到100多？我
目前所在学校按照R15明明算在烂校list上，也进了500？晕！

w*h2012-02-23 08:02

10 楼

北理工、人大、重大、湖大都不见了，天大的排名也相当可观。
看来排名这种事，被接受最多的，还数上海交大的那个。

【在 a*****k 的大作中提到】

: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
: "the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
: academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
: undergraduate or graduate programs"
: 按这个排名：
: U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

s*y2012-02-23 08:02

11 楼

是的，但是老李的同事们，尤其是系主任以及dean严重的拖了后腿，否则老李
的学校直接就排第一名了。

【在 h*********i 的大作中提到】

: 全球工程排名清华第二，UC Berkeley第三，也是由于老李 :-)

m*c2012-02-23 08:02

12 楼

this ranking is a joke, with THU,NUS,NTU,Zhejiang U and HK polytech
all in top 10 engineering school.

【在 a*****k 的大作中提到】

: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
: "the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
: academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
: undergraduate or graduate programs"
: 按这个排名：
: U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

N*K2012-02-23 08:02

13 楼

pku39 真是joke

【在 a*****k 的大作中提到】

: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
: "the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
: academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
: undergraduate or graduate programs"
: 按这个排名：
: U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

P*t2012-02-23 08:02

14 楼

我本科学校工程前10，MS学校工程前20，PHD学校工程前40。早知如此就不出国了。

【在 m***c 的大作中提到】

: this ranking is a joke, with THU,NUS,NTU,Zhejiang U and HK polytech
: all in top 10 engineering school.

a*e2012-02-23 08:02

15 楼

哈哈哈，８错

【在 a*****k 的大作中提到】

: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
: "the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
: academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
: undergraduate or graduate programs"
: 按这个排名：
: U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

L*s2012-02-23 08:02

16 楼

你妹...

【在 e****g 的大作中提到】

: Pitt的医学院非常好
: 有了老李，工学院也蒸蒸日上
: 这个排名还是很客观

g*62012-02-23 08:02

17 楼

比这个更离谱的是工程排名。清华大学全球第二，，浙大、哈工大杀入前十. Caltech
排名39. USNEWS这么猛舔中国大学的目的是啥？

【在 a*****k 的大作中提到】

: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
: "the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
: academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
: undergraduate or graduate programs"
: 按这个排名：
: U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

q*g2012-02-23 08:02

18 楼

谁赞助多，就修改谁的优势参数。

Caltech

【在 g******6 的大作中提到】

: 比这个更离谱的是工程排名。清华大学全球第二，，浙大、哈工大杀入前十. Caltech
: 排名39. USNEWS这么猛舔中国大学的目的是啥？

s*52012-02-23 08:02

19 楼

呵呵看看

【在 a*****k 的大作中提到】

: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
: "the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
: academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
: undergraduate or graduate programs"
: 按这个排名：
: U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

w*72012-02-23 08:02

20 楼

真没劲，又是第一名。

【在 a*****k 的大作中提到】

: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
: "the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
: academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
: undergraduate or graduate programs"
: 按这个排名：
: U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

p*12012-02-23 08:02

21 楼

正准备说这事呢。。。

G*i2012-02-23 08:02

22 楼

哈哈

M*t2012-02-23 08:02

23 楼

H-bomb
大家快躲开！

【在 w*****7 的大作中提到】

: 真没劲，又是第一名。

M*o2012-02-23 08:02

24 楼

haha

Caltech

【在 g******6 的大作中提到】

: 比这个更离谱的是工程排名。清华大学全球第二，，浙大、哈工大杀入前十. Caltech
: 排名39. USNEWS这么猛舔中国大学的目的是啥？

M*o2012-02-23 08:02

25 楼

我跳槽钱的学校40+，现在100+
悲催

【在 P*****t 的大作中提到】

: 我本科学校工程前10，MS学校工程前20，PHD学校工程前40。早知如此就不出国了。

m*r2012-02-23 08:02

26 楼

武大301
西交352
同济374
没交够钱啊

【在 a*****k 的大作中提到】

: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
: "the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
: academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
: undergraduate or graduate programs"
: 按这个排名：
: U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

R*o2012-02-23 08:02

27 楼

几个规律：
1.苦逼生物类前十名几乎都是美国学校
2。工程排名一定与规模和研究资金挂钩了，不然清华，哈工大怎么会排那么前
3. 多伦多大学各项都必杀康乃尔。。

R*o2012-02-23 08:02

28 楼

就工程而言，这个排名很扯淡。中国三所大学没一个比得上普渡。

【在 R*****o 的大作中提到】

: 几个规律：
: 1.苦逼生物类前十名几乎都是美国学校
: 2。工程排名一定与规模和研究资金挂钩了，不然清华，哈工大怎么会排那么前
: 3. 多伦多大学各项都必杀康乃尔。。

M*c2012-02-23 08:02

29 楼

为啥NUS给那么低？HKU那么高？

【在 a*****k 的大作中提到】

: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
: "the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
: academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
: undergraduate or graduate programs"
: 按这个排名：
: U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

g*a2012-02-23 08:02

30 楼

USNews终于也走上上海交大用Citation来决定一切的老路了。
这种排名方法不利于规模小的学校（例如普林斯顿）和文科比理科强的学校（例如耶鲁
）。相反的，规模大理科强的学校就很占优势。

【在 a*****k 的大作中提到】

: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
: "the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
: academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
: undergraduate or graduate programs"
: 按这个排名：
: U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

d*r2012-02-23 08:02

31 楼

问题出在排名的方法，发表文章的数量权重是12.5%，总引用占10%，每年发博士学位的
人数和每个faculty发博士学位的人数占10%。这个都是天朝大学的优势，靠人堆起来。
这三项占了1/3的权重了。可是获得的优势可不止这1/3，举个例子，天朝某个系每年发
的博士学位数量可以抵得上美国一个好大学整个学院的数量，这分数拉开的可不是一点
点。像Dartmouth这样的小学校连中山大学都不如，不是很可笑么？我也觉得目
前为止，上交大搞的那个排名最客观。

V*12012-02-23 08:02

32 楼

明显的啊。否则按照校园面积，招生人数，绝对全球领先啊。

【在 m*********r 的大作中提到】

: 武大301
: 西交352
: 同济374
: 没交够钱啊

A*a2012-02-23 08:02

33 楼

I think this ranking makes sense.
If we consider the number and quality of projects we do each year with our
peers in those top universities in China in the area of engineering, are we
doing better here in the US? I am not at a top university but not a bad one
either. Compared with my collaborators in China, the amount of funding
available, the facilities, and the number of faculties and students, I think
we can hardly compare with them at the same level.
I have visited my peers in China and I have to say that I admire the
achievements they accomplished in all these years. I think they have earned
the reputations. There are all kinds of issues in publications and where
the funding is spent but just think about it - those universities outnumber
most of the US universities 2-3 times regarding the number of undergraduate
and graduate students, as well as faculties.
Suppose that we have the same idea to be implemented, our peers in China can
have it done in a year or two. For us, we need to find money, find
students, find collaborators, etc... By the time we start to do something,
2-3 years may have passed, I guess by that time, they have already moved on
to the next target.
I don't understand why so many faculties on this board seem to dismiss the
work done by professors in Chinese universities. Face it. Sooner or later,
the only advantages we think we might have - the new ideas and the freedom
of thinking, will be diminishing as well.

【在 a*****k 的大作中提到】

: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankin
: "the Best Global Universities rankings focus specifically on schools'
: academic research and reputation overall and not their separate
: undergraduate or graduate programs"
: 按这个排名：
: U Pitt > USC > Rutgers > Purdue 所以老李不用再琢磨跳槽啦。

M*o2012-02-23 08:02

34 楼

就是世界终究是中国的

we
one
think
earned
outnumber
undergraduate
can
,
on
,

【在 A***a 的大作中提到】

: I think this ranking makes sense.
: If we consider the number and quality of projects we do each year with our
: peers in those top universities in China in the area of engineering, are we
: doing better here in the US? I am not at a top university but not a bad one
: either. Compared with my collaborators in China, the amount of funding
: available, the facilities, and the number of faculties and students, I think
: we can hardly compare with them at the same level.
: I have visited my peers in China and I have to say that I admire the
: achievements they accomplished in all these years. I think they have earned
: the reputations. There are all kinds of issues in publications and where

t*g2012-02-23 08:02

35 楼

这边的教授当然不敢正视中国大学赶上了的现实啊，要不然多么失落啊。

we
one
think
earned

【在 A***a 的大作中提到】

: I think this ranking makes sense.
: If we consider the number and quality of projects we do each year with our
: peers in those top universities in China in the area of engineering, are we
: doing better here in the US? I am not at a top university but not a bad one
: either. Compared with my collaborators in China, the amount of funding
: available, the facilities, and the number of faculties and students, I think
: we can hardly compare with them at the same level.
: I have visited my peers in China and I have to say that I admire the
: achievements they accomplished in all these years. I think they have earned
: the reputations. There are all kinds of issues in publications and where

y*o2012-02-23 08:02

36 楼

我觉得工程的不好比吧如果比参与国家的大工程这三个秒杀普度要是比文章那是另
一回事

【在 R*****o 的大作中提到】

: 就工程而言，这个排名很扯淡。中国三所大学没一个比得上普渡。

j*22012-02-23 08:02

37 楼

俺们校排名和上海交通大学列的那个排名一样，校方又放到首页晒了晒自豪感。哈哈；
只可惜本科生教育落后滕校一条街啊

n*g2012-02-23 08:02

38 楼

鳖的这些大学影响力很大，但是创新如何？如果参与大工程就说明水平高，那么大型建
筑公司水平更高。

另一回事

【在 y***o 的大作中提到】

: 我觉得工程的不好比吧如果比参与国家的大工程这三个秒杀普度要是比文章那是另
: 一回事