饶毅的个人博客分享 http://blog.sciencenet.cn/u/饶毅      

博文

外国月亮不比中国的圆 精选

已有 18314 次阅读 2010-9-19 21:03 |个人分类:文化|系统分类:观点评述| 一流大学, 大学排名

文无第一。大学也一样。
 
大学有很多方面,各个大学有特长,人类教育才能多样化,世界才五彩缤纷。
 
评价大学,正如法国学者Billaut等 所述:问哪个大学最好,是幼稚的问题。
 
但是,总有人热衷大学排名。
 
君不见,上海交大不久前发布世界一流大学排名榜,现在英国的《泰晤士报》和一个公司又推销他们的排名。
 
两个排名,无论是外国的还是中国的,都不合理,都不值得相信。
 
很多文献计量和统计的学者已经发表论文,全面分析后否定了交大世界一流中心的“上海排名”,部分见附件一和二。
 
今年Billaut等对上海排名的批评,其实同样适用于泰晤士排名:“上海排名,虽然得到媒体传播,并无资格成为讨论学术机构质量的有用和合适的工具,更不能指导学生家长和家庭,也不能促进高等教育系统的改革”。
 
《泰 晤士报》把北大排在世界第37,中国第一,领先世界多个著名大学。我们要高兴还是不高兴?如果我们没有头昏脑晕,不可能相信北大全面超过了(排名57的) 京都大学、理科超过(排名77的) 伦敦大学国王学院、文科超过(排名86的) 伦敦经济政治学院。
 
排名是商业,不是学问。是有需求,但也可以是毒药:让一些大学为了排名而努力,岂不是使大学被排名者牵着鼻子走?
 
论文的SCI,是一位科学做不好的美国人搞统计,结果现在成了中国 很多大学追求的目标,我们已经深受其害。让一个不能做卓越学术的几个人、或者商业机构,引领我们大学的追求,就可能成为另外一剂毒药。
 
我们如果不及时批判各种不可能严谨的大学排名,最后有可能堕落到追求这些商业机构排名的热潮中。
 
国外的排名机构几乎清一色是媒体,为了吸引眼球。在高等学校煞有介事成立专门机构专注排名,可能真是我国特色,也许我们是唯一在高校研究排 名的国度,在这个方面成为世界第一。
 
上海交大高等教育研究所成立“世界一流大学研究中心”,而且以每年发布其排名为其主要内容,是否会成为促进我国教育落后的一步?
 
正如法国的Billaut等所指出的(大意节译):“乐观的看法是,上海排名的 作者看过我们论文后,会停止做大学排名,给世界道歉,但是,现实世界中,这不可能。上海排名的作者以前就基本忽视其他人的批评,以后也肯 定会忽视我们的批评。只能大家自己好自为之。世界上没有最好的大学,正如没有最好的车一样。”他 们建议的另外方法“多搞排名,互相抵消。”,我不知道中国是否应该加入,还是更应该让外国人浪费时间,至少,中国的大学不投入资源做“以 毒攻毒”的事情。
 
              
 
附件一:法国学者对上海交大“世界一流大学研究中心”排名榜的评论文章
 
2010年7月, Scientometrics杂志发表法国学者Jean-Charles Billaut,Denis Bouyssou, 和比利时学者Philippe Vincke的论文,评价上海交通大学“世界一流大学研究中心”的大学排行榜。
 
论文题目是:你该信上海排名吗?
 
文章摘要主要内容:我们对上海较大高等研究所每年发表的“世界大学排名”进行了分析,我们的主要结论是, 排名所用的指标不相关,合并的方法有很多主要的问题,整个过程对于基本结构没有足够重视。因此,我们的观点是,上海排名,虽然得到媒体传播,无资格成为讨论学术机构质量的有用和合适的工具,更不能指导学生家长和家庭,也不能促进高等教育系统 的改革。
 
Billaut JC, Bouyssou D, Vincke P (2010). Should you believe in the Shanghai ranking?An MCDM view. Scientometrics 84:237-263.   
 
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-009-0115-x 
 
 
 
 
英文摘要原文:
 
This paper proposes a critical analysis of the "Academic Ranking of World Universities", published every year by the Institute of Higher Education of the Jiao Tong University in Shanghai and more commonly known as the Shanghai ranking. After having recalled how the ranking is built, we first discuss the relevance of the criteria and then analyze the proposed aggregation method. Our analysis uses tools and concepts from Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM). Our main conclusions are that the criteria that are used are not relevant, that the aggregation methodology is plagued by a number of major problems and that the whole exercise suffers from an insufficient attention paid to fundamental structuring issues. Hence, our view is that the Shanghai ranking, in spite of the media coverage it receives, does not qualify as a useful and pertinent tool to discuss the "quality" of academic institutions, let alone to guide the choice of students and family or to promote reforms of higher education systems. We outline the type of work that should be undertaken to offer sound alternatives to the Shanghai ranking.
 
 
 
附件二 学者对上海排名的分析和批评(部分)
 
A. F. J. van Raan (2005). Fatal attraction: Ranking of universities by bibliometric methods.
 
Scientometrics, 62:133-145, 2005.
 
A. F. J. van Raan (2005). Reply to the comments of Liu et al. Scientometrics, 64:111-112,
 
2005b.
 
G. Buela-Casal, O. Guti_erez-Martinez, M. P. Berm_udez-S_anchez, and O. Vadillo-Mu~noz (2007). Comparative study of internationa academic rankings of universities. Scientometrics, 71:349-365.
 
J. P. A. Ioannidis, N. A. Patsopoulos, F. K. Kavvoura, A. Tatsioni, E. Evangelou,
 
I. Kouri, D. G. (2007). Contapoulos Ioannidis, and G. Liberopoulos. International ranking
 
systems for universities and institutions: a critical appraisal. BioMed Central, 5(30).
 
 
 
附件三
 

《泰晤士报高等教育》2010年世界大学排名

排名

大学

国家或地区

1

Harvard University

United States

2

California Institute of Technology

United States

3

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

United States

4

Stanford University

United States

5

Princeton University

United States

6

University of Cambridge

United Kingdom

6

University of Oxford

United Kingdom

8

University of California Berkeley

United States

9

Imperial College London

United Kingdom

10

Yale University

United States

11

University of California Los Angeles

United States

12

University of Chicago

United States

13

Johns Hopkins University

United States

14

Cornell University

United States

15

Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich

Switzerland

15

University of Michigan

United States

17

University of Toronto

Canada

18

Columbia University

United States

19

University of Pennsylvania

United States

20

Carnegie Mellon University

United States

21

University of Hong Kong

Hong Kong

22

University College London

United Kingdom

23

University of Washington

United States

24

Duke University

United States

25

Northwestern University

United states

26

University of Tokyo

Japan

27

Georgia Institute of Technology

United States

28

Pohang University of Science and Technology

Republic of Korea

29

University of California Santa Barbara

United States

30

University of British Columbia

Canada

30

University of North Carolina

United States

32

University of California San Diego

United States

33

University of Illinois - Urbana

United States

34

National University of Singapore

Singapore

35

McGill University

Canada

36

University of Melbourne

Australia

37

Peking University

China

38

Washington University Saint Louis

United States

39

Ecole Polytechnic

France

40

University of Edinburgh

United Kingdom

41

Hong Kong University of Science and Technology

Hong Kong

42

Ecole Normale Superieure, Paris

France

43

Australian National University

Australia

43

University of Göttingen

Germany

43

Karolinska Institute

Sweden

43

University of Wisconsin

United States

47

Rice University

United States

48

École Polytechnique Federale of Lausanne

Switzerland

49

University of Science and Technology of China

China

49

University of California Irvine

United States

51

Vanderbilt University

United States

52

University of Minnesota

United States

53

Tufts University

United States

54

University of California Davis

United States

55

Brown University

United States

56

University of Massachusetts

United States

57

Kyoto University

Japan

58

Tsinghua University

China

59

Boston University

United States

60

New York University

United States

61

University of Munich

Germany

61

Emory University

United States

63

University of Notre Dame

United States

64

University of Pittsburgh

United States

65

Case Western Reserve University

United States

66

Ohio State University

United States

67

University of Colorado

United States

68

University of Bristol

United Kingdom

68

University of California Santa Cruz

United States

68

Yeshiva University

United States

71

University of Sydney

Australia

72

University of Virginia

United States

73

University of Adelaide

Australia

73

University of Southern California

United States

75

William & Mary

United States

76

Trinity College Dublin

Ireland

77

King's College London

United Kingdom

78

Stony Brook University

United States

79

Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology

Republic of Korea

79

University of Sussex

United Kingdom

81

University of Queensland Australia

Australia

81

University of York

United Kingdom

83

Ruprecht Karl University of Heidelberg

Germany

83

University of Utah

United States

85

Durham University

United Kingdom

86

London School of Economics and Political Science

United Kingdom

87

University of Manchester

United Kingdom

88

Royal Holloway, University of London

United Kingdom

89

Lund University

Sweden

90

University of Zurich

Switzerland

90

University of Southampton

United Kingdom

90

Wake Forest University

United States

93

McMaster University

Canada

94

University College Dublin

Ireland

95

University of Basel

Switzerland

95

George Washington University

United States

95

University of Arizona

United States

98

University of Maryland College Park

United States

99

Dartmouth College

United States

100

ENS De Lyon

France

 

 


一流大学之路
https://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-2237-364692.html

上一篇:有关 “世界一流大学研究中心”大学排名的讨论
下一篇:遗传学家的遗传秘密
收藏 IP: .*| 热度|

37 茹永新 张乾兵 关燕清 陈龙珠 刘红超 于锋 刘世民 杨远帆 曹聪 杨秀海 许浚远 刘立 丁甜 刘凡丰 许先进 吕喆 黄晓磊 金小伟 潘学峰 孔晓飞 翟远征 许培扬 曾庆平 唐常杰 吴锦宇 齐霁 徐耀阳 李毅伟 赵文锋 丛远新 姜洪洲 刘广明 林涛 杜新豪 三面环山 taojinwuhan nm

发表评论 评论 (24 个评论)

数据加载中...
扫一扫,分享此博文

Archiver|手机版|科学网 ( 京ICP备07017567号-12 )

GMT+8, 2024-4-23 19:36

Powered by ScienceNet.cn

Copyright © 2007- 中国科学报社

返回顶部