The University of Nottingham - Malaysia Campus v2

Lowyat.NET forums

Lowyat.NET Kopitiam Garage Sales

Lowyat.NET Rules and Regulations FAQ Help Search Members

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Lowyat.NET -> Education Essentials

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed

138 Pages « < 59 60 61 62 63 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

University The University of Nottingham - Malaysia Campus v2, [UK University of The Year]

views

entryman	Apr 19 2009, 09:45 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1201
Look at all my stars!! Senior Member 2,179 posts Joined: Sep 2008	QUOTE(thechetticompany @ Apr 19 2009, 09:32 PM) Don't joke with me with THES Rankings ok? It's regarded as the most biased UK ranking around which heavily promotes UK universities as well as Commonwealth nations such as Australia, NZ and Malaysia. Now could you all tell me why isn't Webometrics not accurate about Malaysian universities? USM which is the only APEX university is top up there with UTM and UM taking 2nd and 3rd places. They have even single out Oxbridge from their top 10 list because there are universities in the US who won Nobel Prizes 2-3X more than what Oxbridge has accomplished. Hello brother, or gal, I didn't mention about any rankings, so where did that pop out from. Screw the rankings, As they can't provide an accurate representation as there are many different schools and specialisms mixed within. All I say is, it is a well known fact that there is widespread biases in academic institutions in Malaysia, (and it's best not discussed here). So let's take it through practicality street: Any multinational employer would prefer a Nottingham and Monash graduate, or other foreign universities (within the top 10 league of it's own country's rankings), as opposed to a local university graduate. Although I'm a Malaysian and am saddened by this phenomena, but sadly, that is reality for now. Until the situation starts improving.
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

tanjinjack	Apr 19 2009, 10:07 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1202
Look at all my stars!! Senior Member 4,122 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Malaysia	QUOTE(thechetticompany @ Apr 19 2009, 09:32 PM) Don't joke with me with THES Rankings ok? It's regarded as the most biased UK ranking around which heavily promotes UK universities as well as Commonwealth nations such as Australia, NZ and Malaysia. Now could you all tell me why isn't Webometrics not accurate about Malaysian universities? USM which is the only APEX university is top up there with UTM and UM taking 2nd and 3rd places. They have even single out Oxbridge from their top 10 list because there are universities in the US who won Nobel Prizes 2-3X more than what Oxbridge has accomplished. Why suddenly you talk about THES ranking now? I thought you showed us Webometrics one.. Why change liao de hah.. Hahaha... Read the methodology for Webometrics one before you post. And, read the name of the ranking before you post.
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

farscope	Apr 19 2009, 10:34 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1203
Look at all my stars!! Senior Member 3,427 posts Joined: Apr 2007 From: Gangster Paradise	» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... « QUOTE(thechetticompany @ Apr 19 2009, 03:24 PM) Nottingham's new mock name given by the British themselves: Shootingham Where is Nottingham's reputation going over the years? QUOTE(thechetticompany @ Apr 19 2009, 05:02 PM) Because lo you know Nottingham la in Malaysia ranking among the other local universities: You see hor, Nottingham U Malaysia campus ranks 19th in Malaysia. Even Universiti Utara Malaysia is ranked higher than it when they can produce 300 Dean List recipients alone this year. Nottingham Malaysia and Nottingham UK both have different world rankings score. 845 Universiti Sains Malaysia 920 Universiti Teknologi Malaysia 962 University of Malaya 1053 Universiti Putra Malaysia 1146 Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia 1230 Multimedia University 1340 Universiti Teknologi Mara 1444 International Islamic University Malaysia 1630 Universiti Utara Malaysia 2770 Universiti Malaysia Sabah 3037 Monash University Malaysia 3086 Universiti Tenaga Nasional 3121 Universiti Teknologi Petronas 3297 Universiti Malaysia Sarawak 3495 Universiti Malaysia Terengganu 3521 Curtin University of Technology Sarawak Campus 4009 Universiti Malaysia Pahang 4112 Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris 4350 University of Nottingham Malaysia 4491 Universiti Tun Hussien Onn Malaysia 4528 Universiti Tun Abdul Razak 4758 Asia Pacific Institute of Information Technology 4834 Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka 4894 Taylor's College Malaysia 5602 INTI International Group of University & Colleges 5667 Help University College 5745 Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman 5793 Sunway University College 5867 Islamic Science University of Malaysia (USIM) http://www.webometrics.info/rank_by_country.asp?country=my wow.. i found u quite interesting.. 1st of all u come up with sth unrelated to our campus, question us regarding the reputation.. is there anything to do between the reputation of its uni to its location anyway? e.g. IF suddenly terengganu is in chaos, then can i say where's UMT's reputation going over the years? then suddenly u come up with a uni ranking to compare.. is there anything to do with the previous post u wrote? then suddenly u come up with the THES ranking and said it is UK biased and so on.. u r funny.. u totally made my day... FUNNY... Added on April 19, 2009, 10:49 pm » Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... « Design and Weighting of Indicators The unit for analysis is the institutional domain, so only universities and research centres with an independent web domain are considered. If an institution has more than one main domain, two or more entries are used with the different addresses. The first Web indicator, Web Impact Factor (WIF), was based on link analysis that combines the number of external inlinks and the number of pages of the website, a ratio of 1:1 between visibility and size. This ratio is used for the ranking, adding two new indicators to the size component: Number of documents, measured from the number of rich files in a web domain, and number of publications being collected by Google Scholar database. Four indicators were obtained from the quantitative results provided by the main search engines as follows: Size (S). Number of pages recovered from four engines: Google, Yahoo, Live Search and Exalead. Visibility (V). The total number of unique external links received (inlinks) by a site can be only confidently obtained from Yahoo Search, Live Search and Exalead. Rich Files ®. After evaluation of their relevance to academic and publication activities and considering the volume of the different file formats, the following were selected: Adobe Acrobat (.pdf), Adobe PostScript (.ps), Microsoft Word (.doc) and Microsoft Powerpoint (.ppt). These data were extracted using Google, Yahoo Search, Live Search and Exalead. Scholar (Sc). Google Scholar provides the number of papers and citations for each academic domain. These results from the Scholar database represent papers, reports and other academic items. The four ranks were combined according to a formula where each one has a different weight but maintaining the ratio 1:1: The inclusion of the total number of pages is based on the recognition of a new global market for academic information, so the web is the adequate platform for the internationalization of the institutions. A strong and detailed web presence providing exact descriptions of the structure and activities of the university can attract new students and scholars worldwide. The number of external inlinks received by a domain is a measure that represents visibility and impact of the published material, and although there is a great diversity of motivations for linking, a significant fraction works in a similar way as bibliographic citation. The success of self-archiving and other repositories related initiatives can be roughly represented from rich file and Scholar data. The huge numbers involved with the pdf and doc formats means that not only administrative reports and bureaucratic forms are involved. PostScript and Powerpoint files are clearly related to academic activities. http://www.webometrics.info/about_rank.html FYI, the so call webometrics ranking is juz..... haiz.. i seriously LOL-ed at this.. the ranking is based on web/links.. This post has been edited by farscope: Apr 19 2009, 10:49 PM
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

tanjinjack	Apr 19 2009, 10:49 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1204
Look at all my stars!! Senior Member 4,122 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Malaysia	QUOTE(farscope @ Apr 19 2009, 10:34 PM) » Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... « wow.. i found u quite interesting.. 1st of all u come up with sth unrelated to our campus, question us regarding the reputation.. is there anything to do between the reputation of its uni to its location anyway? e.g. IF suddenly terengganu is in chaos, then can i say where's UMT's reputation going over the years? then suddenly u come up with a uni ranking to compare.. is there anything to do with the previous post u wrote? then suddenly u come up with the THES ranking and said it is UK biased and so on.. u r funny.. u totally made my day... FUNNY... LOL... No la, we biased only...
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

Ibrahimovic	Apr 19 2009, 10:55 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1205
HolyHunk Senior Member 1,578 posts Joined: Aug 2007 From: Johor-Singapore	Just follow EQ Times ranking. It's far better than Guardian ranking with even include 'tuition fee' as a criteria. The is no perfect ranking system but some do have a good system in place.
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

farscope	Apr 19 2009, 10:55 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1206
Look at all my stars!! Senior Member 3,427 posts Joined: Apr 2007 From: Gangster Paradise	mayb i should learn how she speaks.. u see hor.. the webometric ranking ah.. is actually hor.. based on how ppl search the ni thru google/yahoo onli wo.. the hor, they judge other points by looking on how many files they got wo.. wa.. so geng leh.. see.. USM rank so high leh.. Nottingham sxxxx oo...!!! LOL.. oh my.. stomach ache..!!
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

bgeh	Apr 19 2009, 11:02 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1207
Regular Senior Member 1,814 posts Joined: Jan 2003	QUOTE(thechetticompany @ Apr 19 2009, 09:32 PM) Don't joke with me with THES Rankings ok? It's regarded as the most biased UK ranking around which heavily promotes UK universities as well as Commonwealth nations such as Australia, NZ and Malaysia. Perhaps you're right, it might be biased QUOTE Now could you all tell me why isn't Webometrics not accurate about Malaysian universities? USM which is the only APEX university is top up there with UTM and UM taking 2nd and 3rd places. I didn't know the APEX designation means that the university is the best in the country, when the funding for the APEX university hasn't even had the time to filter down to research projects or the students yet (and yes, this is why I don't understand people moaning about our APEX university not making it into the top 200 of THES, when the cash hasn't even had the time to make its rounds yet, these things take time, and we'll see the results (positive or negative) in a few years, but certainly not now) QUOTE They have even single out Oxbridge from their top 10 list because there are universities in the US who won Nobel Prizes 2-3X more than what Oxbridge has accomplished. Wikipedia: Academically, Cambridge is consistently ranked in the world's top 5 universities.[6][7] It has produced 83 Nobel Laureates to date, more than any other university in the world according to some counts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Cambridge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_laureat...ity_affiliation Only Columbia would beat Cambridge (88 vs. 83) using the same metric. Nothing close to 2x - 3x as you've claimed This post has been edited by bgeh: Apr 19 2009, 11:04 PM
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

tanjinjack	Apr 19 2009, 11:27 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1208
Look at all my stars!! Senior Member 4,122 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Malaysia	QUOTE(farscope @ Apr 19 2009, 10:55 PM) mayb i should learn how she speaks.. u see hor.. the webometric ranking ah.. is actually hor.. based on how ppl search the ni thru google/yahoo onli wo.. the hor, they judge other points by looking on how many files they got wo.. wa.. so geng leh.. see.. USM rank so high leh.. Nottingham sxxxx oo...!!! LOL.. oh my.. stomach ache..!! Ya la.. We should go and upload our U Drive online.. Hahaha.. Then see who will win! Added on April 19, 2009, 11:28 pmbgeh, Maybe he means all the US universities add together is more than OxBridge 2x-3x lo... This post has been edited by tanjinjack: Apr 19 2009, 11:28 PM
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

thechetticompany	Apr 19 2009, 11:35 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1209
Getting Started Junior Member 200 posts Joined: Sep 2008	Source: The latest criticism of the QS-THE league tables came from Andrew Oswald, Professor of Economics at University of Warwick:[12] "Such claims do us a disservice. The organisations who promote such ideas should be unhappy themselves, and so should any supine UK universities who endorse results they view as untruthful. Using these league table results on your websites, universities, if in private you deride the quality of the findings, is unprincipled and will ultimately be destructive of yourselves, because if you are not in the truth business what business are you in, exactly? Worse, this kind of material incorrectly reassures the UK government that our universities are international powerhouses. Let us instead, a bit more coolly, do what people in universities are paid to do. Let us use reliable data to try to discern the truth. In the last 20 years, Oxford has won no Nobel Prizes. Cambridge has done only slightly better. Stanford University in the United States, purportedly number 19 in the world, garnered three times as many Nobel Prizes over the past two decades as the universities of Oxford and Cambridge did combined. " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/THES_-_QS_Wor...kings#Criticism
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

bgeh	Apr 19 2009, 11:44 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1210
Regular Senior Member 1,814 posts Joined: Jan 2003	QUOTE(thechetticompany @ Apr 19 2009, 11:35 PM) Source: The latest criticism of the QS-THE league tables came from Andrew Oswald, Professor of Economics at University of Warwick:[12] "Such claims do us a disservice. The organisations who promote such ideas should be unhappy themselves, and so should any supine UK universities who endorse results they view as untruthful. Using these league table results on your websites, universities, if in private you deride the quality of the findings, is unprincipled and will ultimately be destructive of yourselves, because if you are not in the truth business what business are you in, exactly? Worse, this kind of material incorrectly reassures the UK government that our universities are international powerhouses. Let us instead, a bit more coolly, do what people in universities are paid to do. Let us use reliable data to try to discern the truth. In the last 20 years, Oxford has won no Nobel Prizes. Cambridge has done only slightly better. Stanford University in the United States, purportedly number 19 in the world, garnered three times as many Nobel Prizes over the past two decades as the universities of Oxford and Cambridge did combined. " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/THES_-_QS_Wor...kings#Criticism Then perhaps you should've provided the context in which you made your statement But really, if the THES rankings are so biased, what makes the Webometrics rankings so much better, when they have no explicit aim to try to measure academic performance directly, but indirectly instead through the internet, which doesn't always have a strong correlation to academic prowess, no?
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

tanjinjack	Apr 19 2009, 11:50 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1211
Look at all my stars!! Senior Member 4,122 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Malaysia	QUOTE(thechetticompany @ Apr 19 2009, 11:35 PM) Source: The latest criticism of the QS-THE league tables came from Andrew Oswald, Professor of Economics at University of Warwick:[12] "Such claims do us a disservice. The organisations who promote such ideas should be unhappy themselves, and so should any supine UK universities who endorse results they view as untruthful. Using these league table results on your websites, universities, if in private you deride the quality of the findings, is unprincipled and will ultimately be destructive of yourselves, because if you are not in the truth business what business are you in, exactly? Worse, this kind of material incorrectly reassures the UK government that our universities are international powerhouses. Let us instead, a bit more coolly, do what people in universities are paid to do. Let us use reliable data to try to discern the truth. In the last 20 years, Oxford has won no Nobel Prizes. Cambridge has done only slightly better. Stanford University in the United States, purportedly number 19 in the world, garnered three times as many Nobel Prizes over the past two decades as the universities of Oxford and Cambridge did combined. " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/THES_-_QS_Wor...kings#Criticism Hey hey, in the last 6 years, University of Nottingham won 2!
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

thechetticompany	Apr 19 2009, 11:54 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1212
Getting Started Junior Member 200 posts Joined: Sep 2008	QUOTE(bgeh @ Apr 19 2009, 11:44 PM) Then perhaps you should've provided the context in which you made your statement But really, if the THES rankings are so biased, what makes the Webometrics rankings so much better, when they have no explicit aim to try to measure academic performance directly, but indirectly instead through the internet, which doesn't always have a strong correlation to academic prowess, no? Do not underestimate the power of the internet. Most of the journals and work published by universities are made on the net. Webopedia believes that by measuring how much formal traffic and activity of a university, they can determine roughly how good the university is. By referring to the internet as a main source, they are not only referring to websites or student activities but library databases, discoveries, news and achievements are taken into account. As for THES, if you read their method peer evaluation makes up a huge portion of the way they rate universities which many professors and education related staffs claimed that it's flawed as who knows anyone can be bribed to say good about another. There can be many discreet reasons when you rely on people's opinion.
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

bgeh	Apr 20 2009, 12:08 AM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1213
Regular Senior Member 1,814 posts Joined: Jan 2003	QUOTE(thechetticompany @ Apr 19 2009, 11:54 PM) Do not underestimate the power of the internet. Most of the journals and work published by universities are made on the net. Webopedia believes that by measuring how much formal traffic and activity of a university, they can determine roughly how good the university is. By referring to the internet as a main source, they are not only referring to websites or student activities but library databases, discoveries, news and achievements are taken into account. As for THES, if you read their method peer evaluation makes up a huge portion of the way they rate universities which many professors and education related staffs claimed that it's flawed as who knows anyone can be bribed to say good about another. There can be many discreet reasons when you rely on people's opinion. Then why doesn't the IAS fare well in rankings at all? http://www.ias.edu/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Advanced_Study [Note: The IAS is an autonomous body from Princeton University, though it is closely affliated with it - and Princeton isn't even in the top 40 in Webometrics] Perhaps let's put it another way, why doesn't anyone criticize the Webometrics ranking? Maybe it's in the following paragraph: QUOTE We intend to motivate both institutions and scholars to have a web presence that reflect accurately their activities. If the web performance of an institution is below the expected position according to their academic excellence, university authorities should reconsider their web policy, promoting substantial increases of the volume and quality of their electronic publications. Copied it word for word, and it was that part that they bolded. Are they implicitly admitting in that statement that the web performance isn't really correlated to the academic excellence if the university chooses not to put it online? Does that also mean that if they decided to put all their papers online, open access to all, instead of in journals, they could 'manipulate' the figures, thereby making it flawed? Maybe it is because of that implicit admission that this is not a 'serious' ranking that no one's making it a target for critiques edit: we're clearly going off topic here too This post has been edited by bgeh: Apr 20 2009, 12:54 AM
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

farscope	Apr 20 2009, 01:09 AM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1214
Look at all my stars!! Senior Member 3,427 posts Joined: Apr 2007 From: Gangster Paradise	yeap.. u 2 really way out of the topic and the purpose of this thread.. thanks to the lunatic thechetticompany who pops out from no where and claims whatever she claims.. so sick of it.. if u wanna debate on the ranking n stuffs.. go open yr own thread and dun kacao other ppl's thread.. it serves u no good.. anyway, thanks to bgeh who made things bit clearer even thou we dunno who r u..
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

evilprincess89	Apr 20 2009, 02:18 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1215
New Member Junior Member 49 posts Joined: Jul 2007	she sounds like she wanna bring down the uni's reputation... hmmph
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

Batusai	Apr 20 2009, 03:59 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1216
Weeeeeee Senior Member 2,066 posts Joined: Oct 2007	well da bottom line is?? nottingham a good place to study rite?? i might be enrolled in july
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

tanjinjack	Apr 20 2009, 04:05 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1217
Look at all my stars!! Senior Member 4,122 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Malaysia	QUOTE(Batusai @ Apr 20 2009, 03:59 PM) well da bottom line is?? nottingham a good place to study rite?? i might be enrolled in july Come come. You have heard enough things about how good it is already. And you also see the students defending their own university ma.. So, if you have the money, then come!
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

FCUK89	Apr 20 2009, 04:15 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1218
www.bigvisionsocialmedia.com Senior Member 955 posts Joined: Jun 2006 From: Farmer's River	COME to the FIELD... We are playing FRISBEE from 5 to 7. If you are reading this and you are free later, just come. Say you seen from Lowyat Forum one. "Keep it flying. "
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

Iliveunderwater	Apr 20 2009, 06:15 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1219
On my way Senior Member 599 posts Joined: Feb 2005 From: Petaling Jaya	QUOTE(thechetticompany @ Apr 19 2009, 09:32 PM) Don't joke with me with THES Rankings ok? It's regarded as the most biased UK ranking around which heavily promotes UK universities as well as Commonwealth nations such as Australia, NZ and Malaysia. Now could you all tell me why isn't Webometrics not accurate about Malaysian universities? USM which is the only APEX university is top up there with UTM and UM taking 2nd and 3rd places. They have even single out Oxbridge from their top 10 list because there are universities in the US who won Nobel Prizes 2-3X more than what Oxbridge has accomplished. Huh? promotes UK universities? Most of the top universities are American in the QS THES ranking.
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

XxAC3xX	Apr 21 2009, 09:24 PM Show posts by this member only \| Post #1220
Casual Junior Member 380 posts Joined: Feb 2008 From: KL	QUOTE(crazy142857 @ Apr 17 2009, 11:05 PM) Mobility program is for any of ur study years except first year and final year. During your mobility, you still pay the tuition fees in RM. If you study in UK for final year, it's called 'transfer'. It's like you transfer to become a student of UK campus, meaning you'll have to pay the tuition fees in pounds but you get to graduate there (if you don't fail, of course). Some ppl do half here then transfer over to UK, in order to save some $$ since for their 1st year (and 2nd year) they pay in RM. Added on April 17, 2009, 11:11 pm I've not tried the food their though I've been going back to UNMC every week even when i've been working for almost a year already. But i still always eat out from campus. Best if you have a car, or can car pool with your friends, as there's lots of good food in semenyih, kajang, Bandar Teknologi Kajang, broga, cheras selatan, etc, those not-too-far-of places. Go explore, it's fun. Or ask your senior. You can also climb broga hill, find semenyih dam, drive pass Nirvana@midnight, see the sunset/sun rise @ lookout point, etc. hw hard is it to get the mobility scheme? wat requirements? do foundation year count as 1st year thr?
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

« Next Oldest · Education Essentials · Next Newest »

138 Pages « < 59 60 61 62 63 > » Top

Topic ClosedOptions

Change to:

0.0337sec

0.39

6 queries

GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 14th December 2025 - 10:29 PM

All Rights Reserved © 2002- 2025 Vijandren Ramadass (~unite against racism~)

Removal Request

Powered by Invision Power Board © 2025 IPS, Inc.