I wrote this piece for Thanh Nien online, English edition, but I don't know whether they will use it, so here it is for anybody who will listen to me;-).
---
An announcement has recently been made by the research team led by Prof Dr Nguyen Phuong Nga from Vietnam National University, Ha Noi that a ranking system for Vietnamese universities is being developed. The team promised that the first ranking results will be released soon, possibly in a few months’ time.
While university ranking is now considered a worldwide phenomenon, I believe it should be handled with great care in a country like Vietnam where the “false achievement disease” (ie, cheating in plain English) is rampant. Also, university ranking only works in strong civil societies where access to good data is a right, and customer protection is strong. Both of these conditions are still lacking in Vietnam.
Condering the current situation in Vietnam, I believe the existence of a university ranking system, especially one supported or recognised by the Ministry of Education and Training, will have a detrimental effect on the quality of higher education in Vietnam, rather than improve it. Once a university is ranked on the number of, say, doctoral degree holders no matter in what fields or of what quality, then this will push universities and university lecturers to more cheating of all kinds to have a sufficient number of PhDs. Likewise with publications and citations. Meanwhile, the low quality of higher education in Vietnam, especially at post-graduate levels, is already a severe headache for the country’s education leaders. I strongly believe that ill-prepared rankings of universities will only worsen the situation.
Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn uniranking. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng
Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn uniranking. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng
Thứ Bảy, 6 tháng 12, 2008
Thứ Ba, 2 tháng 9, 2008
Battle of the rankings
Battle of the rankings
American universities have begun a rebellion against academic league tables. British universities should join them
Nguồn: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/27/highereducation.usa?gusrc=rss&feed=uknews
Annually since 1983, US News & World Report has published a table of rankings – we would call them league tables – of American universities and degree-granting colleges. As late August approaches, university presidents, who will have been told in advance of the positions of their institutions in the tables, prepare press statements pointing out how well they have done, if not overall then – hopefully – at least in some sub-category. This good news will appear on their websites, and will be exploited in promotional and recruiting literature.
But this year the really good news is not that Harvard has come top, displacing last year's No1 (Princeton), or that "HYP" – Harvard, Yale and Princeton – almost invariably occupy the top three places. No. The really good news is that more US-based higher-education institutions than ever before have refused to take any part whatsoever in the so-called "reputational" survey, the results of which comprise the single greatest component of the formula used by US News in compiling its rankings tables.
This refusal rate has been growing steadily. In former times the participation rate in the reputational survey was around two-thirds. In 2006 it fell to 58% and in 2007 to 51%. This year it dropped to 46%.
US News argues that there is a certain inevitability about this fall – including (a US News spokesperson has alleged) the impact of "survey fatigue" and the preoccupation of university and college executives with financial matters and with the demands of a higher education act recently passed by Congress after two years of bitter controversy over lax accreditation ("quality assurance") arrangements. But it is clear that a major factor in the growing revolt against the rankings culture has been Education Conservancy, a pressure-group-cum-thinkthank established in 2004 with the object of helping "students, colleges and high schools overcome commercial interference in college admissions".
Last year Education Conservancy launched a campaign to persuade university and college presidents to sign a pledge committing themselves and their institutions "to disengage from US News and World Report's rankings" by refusing to take part in its reputational survey and by refraining from using its rankings in promotional and recruitment literature. Initially the list of signatories was heavily biased towards liberal arts colleges. But the evidence is unmistakable that major universities are joining the revolt: the University of Illinois at Chicago, for instance, and the University of New Hampshire.
The reputational survey accounts for a full 25% of ranking outcomes. Presidents, provosts (generally chief academic officers) and deans of admissions of American universities and colleges are asked to rank the academic programmes of "peer" institutions. US News claims that presidents, provosts and deans of admissions equate to "top academics". But of course they don't. Another 20% is accounted for by "retention" – the proportion of freshman students who return the following year and eventually graduate. US News claims that the higher this proportion "the better a school [HE institution] is apt to be at offering the classes and services students need to succeed". But it is equally possible that institutions with low academic standards will attract high retention rates. A further 5% of rankings outcomes are based on the percentage of alumni who donate money to the institutions from which they graduated. This has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of education provided. There is more than anecdotal evidence to suggest that institutions run campaigns to persuade as large a number of alumni as possible to donate very small amounts.
The plain fact is that none of the indicators used by US News measure either the academic standards that obtain at the institutions ranked, or the actual quality of the education provided. But obsession with place in the rankings tables has skewed and suborned educational priorities. Happily, it is clear that a revolt against this unwelcome trend is now gathering momentum.
League tables have had a similarly perverse effect on British higher education. An HE institution that awards more firsts and upper seconds will improve its position in these tables. But academic standards may well have declined. Conversely, a low retention rate may actually reflect high academic standards, but will inexorably damage an institution when league-table positions are being calculated (and may also attract government-imposed financial penalties).
Newspapers publish league tables to make money. They are here to stay and – in any case - some of the information they use is already in the public domain. But that does not mean that universities and colleges need collaborate with them, or welcome or exploit their findings. It would be no bad thing if British universities were to launch on this side of the pond a campaign similar to that being run so successfully by Education Conservancy in the US. If British vice-chancellors are unwilling or unable to summon the courage to take this step, perhaps Education Conservancy can be persuaded to open a branch here in the UK.
Comments:
tangerinedream
Aug 27 08, 11:25pm
I know from a friend who works in a university that the management has recently started a drive to ensure that departments handout more first-class degrees. Of course it is not couched in quite so stark terms, just in case the media get hold of it, but the implication is very clear and very well understood. For some perverse reason handing out first class degrees has been linked to university attainment. As a result degree inflation will happily join GCSE and A-level inflation. Indeed, amongst teacher training colleges there is now a push to have graduates attaining Masters level qualifications. Another government initiative if you hadn't guessed. And how was this achieved? By handing Masters level qualifications for what once would have passed as bog standard degree work. And in some cases A-level work.
The particular University in question handed out 20 credits towards a Masters degree (out of 180) simply for completing a two week refresher course at A-level standard for new PGCE students in the subject they were planning to teach. To introduce some vague assessment criteria upon completion of the refresher course the students had to write a 1500 word essay on "what they had learnt". For this to be deemed Masters level work is an absolute scandal, but the universities do it because the government pushes it. No doubt it will be reeled off in the future by the education Secretary as evidence of "improving standards" under Labour.
Recommend? (1)
Report abuse
Clip | Link Monkeybiz
Aug 28 08, 1:54am
Full-cost recovery on courses has had a corrosive effect on taught post-graduate course quality in particular. Now, for some departments it is the biggest source of income and supports most of the untenured staff. This of course is a result of the unwillingness of government to fund higher education to the level it deserves, given the priority of an educated workforce for a nation's economy. The result is that more and more students are admitted with less and less qualification and to maintain the level of recruitment, more and more of these people are passed are a poorer level of performance than 5 years ago. They go on to, in most cases, perfom underwhelmingly in their jobs as "experts" and most lack skills I would expect from undergrads, while fresh grads are for the most part ignorant of their subject areas on graduation, thanks to "Smarties" degrees. Education as a business - I blame the business studies and management departments - shoot the lot of them. My own university has shot up the rankings of the Times HES in recent years but frankly everyone I speak to on Faculty finds it incomprehensible and morale is lower than I've even known it to be - simply a widget production system now.
Recommend? (1)
Report abuse
Clip | Link lefthalfback
Aug 28 08, 4:10am
Iread every damn one of those books and articles when my oldest was graduating from High School. In retrospect, those rankings are useless.
Everybody knows what the "...best..." schools are.
what counts is your kid and what he/she wants and "..fit...".
Recommend? (0)
Report abuse
Clip | Link stevejones123
Aug 28 08, 9:07am
Much more important than attacking the rankings is to attack the ridiculous research review juggernaut that results in academics spending all their time producing articles in peer-reviewed journals that nobody but themselves, and sometimes the peer reviewer ever read.
I was taught English by, amongst others Raymond Williams and George Steiner. Neither ever attained a chair at their home university because of university politics, but under the present system neither would have attained tenure.
Recommend? (2)
Report abuse
Clip | Link jaapdenhaan
Aug 28 08, 11:07am
Alfie Kohn defines competition as any situation where one person's success is dependent upon another's failure. http://www.shareintl.org
Recommend? (0)
Report abuse
Clip | LinkGo to all comments
American universities have begun a rebellion against academic league tables. British universities should join them
Nguồn: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/27/highereducation.usa?gusrc=rss&feed=uknews
Annually since 1983, US News & World Report has published a table of rankings – we would call them league tables – of American universities and degree-granting colleges. As late August approaches, university presidents, who will have been told in advance of the positions of their institutions in the tables, prepare press statements pointing out how well they have done, if not overall then – hopefully – at least in some sub-category. This good news will appear on their websites, and will be exploited in promotional and recruiting literature.
But this year the really good news is not that Harvard has come top, displacing last year's No1 (Princeton), or that "HYP" – Harvard, Yale and Princeton – almost invariably occupy the top three places. No. The really good news is that more US-based higher-education institutions than ever before have refused to take any part whatsoever in the so-called "reputational" survey, the results of which comprise the single greatest component of the formula used by US News in compiling its rankings tables.
This refusal rate has been growing steadily. In former times the participation rate in the reputational survey was around two-thirds. In 2006 it fell to 58% and in 2007 to 51%. This year it dropped to 46%.
US News argues that there is a certain inevitability about this fall – including (a US News spokesperson has alleged) the impact of "survey fatigue" and the preoccupation of university and college executives with financial matters and with the demands of a higher education act recently passed by Congress after two years of bitter controversy over lax accreditation ("quality assurance") arrangements. But it is clear that a major factor in the growing revolt against the rankings culture has been Education Conservancy, a pressure-group-cum-thinkthank established in 2004 with the object of helping "students, colleges and high schools overcome commercial interference in college admissions".
Last year Education Conservancy launched a campaign to persuade university and college presidents to sign a pledge committing themselves and their institutions "to disengage from US News and World Report's rankings" by refusing to take part in its reputational survey and by refraining from using its rankings in promotional and recruitment literature. Initially the list of signatories was heavily biased towards liberal arts colleges. But the evidence is unmistakable that major universities are joining the revolt: the University of Illinois at Chicago, for instance, and the University of New Hampshire.
The reputational survey accounts for a full 25% of ranking outcomes. Presidents, provosts (generally chief academic officers) and deans of admissions of American universities and colleges are asked to rank the academic programmes of "peer" institutions. US News claims that presidents, provosts and deans of admissions equate to "top academics". But of course they don't. Another 20% is accounted for by "retention" – the proportion of freshman students who return the following year and eventually graduate. US News claims that the higher this proportion "the better a school [HE institution] is apt to be at offering the classes and services students need to succeed". But it is equally possible that institutions with low academic standards will attract high retention rates. A further 5% of rankings outcomes are based on the percentage of alumni who donate money to the institutions from which they graduated. This has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of education provided. There is more than anecdotal evidence to suggest that institutions run campaigns to persuade as large a number of alumni as possible to donate very small amounts.
The plain fact is that none of the indicators used by US News measure either the academic standards that obtain at the institutions ranked, or the actual quality of the education provided. But obsession with place in the rankings tables has skewed and suborned educational priorities. Happily, it is clear that a revolt against this unwelcome trend is now gathering momentum.
League tables have had a similarly perverse effect on British higher education. An HE institution that awards more firsts and upper seconds will improve its position in these tables. But academic standards may well have declined. Conversely, a low retention rate may actually reflect high academic standards, but will inexorably damage an institution when league-table positions are being calculated (and may also attract government-imposed financial penalties).
Newspapers publish league tables to make money. They are here to stay and – in any case - some of the information they use is already in the public domain. But that does not mean that universities and colleges need collaborate with them, or welcome or exploit their findings. It would be no bad thing if British universities were to launch on this side of the pond a campaign similar to that being run so successfully by Education Conservancy in the US. If British vice-chancellors are unwilling or unable to summon the courage to take this step, perhaps Education Conservancy can be persuaded to open a branch here in the UK.
Comments:
tangerinedream
Aug 27 08, 11:25pm
I know from a friend who works in a university that the management has recently started a drive to ensure that departments handout more first-class degrees. Of course it is not couched in quite so stark terms, just in case the media get hold of it, but the implication is very clear and very well understood. For some perverse reason handing out first class degrees has been linked to university attainment. As a result degree inflation will happily join GCSE and A-level inflation. Indeed, amongst teacher training colleges there is now a push to have graduates attaining Masters level qualifications. Another government initiative if you hadn't guessed. And how was this achieved? By handing Masters level qualifications for what once would have passed as bog standard degree work. And in some cases A-level work.
The particular University in question handed out 20 credits towards a Masters degree (out of 180) simply for completing a two week refresher course at A-level standard for new PGCE students in the subject they were planning to teach. To introduce some vague assessment criteria upon completion of the refresher course the students had to write a 1500 word essay on "what they had learnt". For this to be deemed Masters level work is an absolute scandal, but the universities do it because the government pushes it. No doubt it will be reeled off in the future by the education Secretary as evidence of "improving standards" under Labour.
Recommend? (1)
Report abuse
Clip | Link Monkeybiz
Aug 28 08, 1:54am
Full-cost recovery on courses has had a corrosive effect on taught post-graduate course quality in particular. Now, for some departments it is the biggest source of income and supports most of the untenured staff. This of course is a result of the unwillingness of government to fund higher education to the level it deserves, given the priority of an educated workforce for a nation's economy. The result is that more and more students are admitted with less and less qualification and to maintain the level of recruitment, more and more of these people are passed are a poorer level of performance than 5 years ago. They go on to, in most cases, perfom underwhelmingly in their jobs as "experts" and most lack skills I would expect from undergrads, while fresh grads are for the most part ignorant of their subject areas on graduation, thanks to "Smarties" degrees. Education as a business - I blame the business studies and management departments - shoot the lot of them. My own university has shot up the rankings of the Times HES in recent years but frankly everyone I speak to on Faculty finds it incomprehensible and morale is lower than I've even known it to be - simply a widget production system now.
Recommend? (1)
Report abuse
Clip | Link lefthalfback
Aug 28 08, 4:10am
Iread every damn one of those books and articles when my oldest was graduating from High School. In retrospect, those rankings are useless.
Everybody knows what the "...best..." schools are.
what counts is your kid and what he/she wants and "..fit...".
Recommend? (0)
Report abuse
Clip | Link stevejones123
Aug 28 08, 9:07am
Much more important than attacking the rankings is to attack the ridiculous research review juggernaut that results in academics spending all their time producing articles in peer-reviewed journals that nobody but themselves, and sometimes the peer reviewer ever read.
I was taught English by, amongst others Raymond Williams and George Steiner. Neither ever attained a chair at their home university because of university politics, but under the present system neither would have attained tenure.
Recommend? (2)
Report abuse
Clip | Link jaapdenhaan
Aug 28 08, 11:07am
Alfie Kohn defines competition as any situation where one person's success is dependent upon another's failure. http://www.shareintl.org
Recommend? (0)
Report abuse
Clip | LinkGo to all comments
Thứ Bảy, 9 tháng 8, 2008
Kết quả xếp hạng trường đại học VN theo Webometrics
Xin sử dụng link dưới đây và vào country: Vietnam để xem.
http://www.webometrics.info/rank_by_country_select.asp
http://www.webometrics.info/rank_by_country_select.asp
Kết quả xếp hạng của Webometrics Tháng 7/2008: MỚI!!!
Bạn có biết về Webometrics, phải không? Vậy bạn cũng biết là họ mới công bố kết quả xếp hạng lần 2 của năm 2008 chứ? Dưới đây là bài viết của họ để giới thiệu kết quả lần này. Nói tóm tắt: Cũng như các hệ thống xếp hạng khác, các phương pháp và kỹ thuật thu thập số liệu để xếp hạng của họ lại vừa thay đổi. Vậy nếu bạn muốn có trường của bạn có vị trí cao trong bảng xếp hạng của họ, xin vui lòng đọc kỹ bài đọc dưới đây (đã được dịch song ngữ - well, rough translation, done at one sitting) để hỗ trợ những người nào có trình độ tiếng Anh chưa vượt quá trình độ B2 của CEF (tức khoảng 5.5 - 6.0 IELTS). Read, and enjoy!!! (Chỉ một yêu cầu: khi sử dụng, xin ghi nguồn, và dịch giả: Vũ Thị Phương Anh, ĐHQG-HCM!)<br />
-----
Since 2004, the Ranking Web is published two times (January & July) per year. This ranking has the largest coverage with more than 16,000 Higher Education Institutions worldwide listed in the Directory. Web presence measures the activity and visibility of the institutions and it is a good indicator of impact and prestige of universities. Rank summarizes the global performance of the University, provides information for candidate students and scholars, and reflects the commitment to the dissemination of scientific knowledge.
Từ năm 2004 đến nay, Webometrics đã công bố kết quả xếp hạng của mình 2 lần mỗi năm vào tháng Giêng và tháng Bảy. Hệ thống xếp hạng này có độ bao phủ lớn nhất trong tất cả các bảng xếp hạng, với tổng số trên 16,000 trường đại học trên khắp thế giới được nêu trong danh bạ. Sự hiện diện trên trang Web (web presence) của các trường được đo lường bằng các hoạt động và khả năng nhận diện của các trường, và đây là một chỉ báo tốt để đo lường sự tác động cũng như uy tín của trường đại học. Thứ hạng trong bảng xếp hạng của Webometrics tóm tắt hoạt động toàn cầu của trường đại học, cung cấp thông tin cho các sinh viên tiềm năng và các học giả, và phản ánh sự cam kết đối với việc phổ biến thông tin khoa học.
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.
Mục tiêu của chúng tôi là nhằm động viên các trường đại học cũng như các học giả tạo ra một sự hiện diện trên trang Web sao cho phản ánh được một cách chính xác hoạt động của họ. Nếu hoạt động trên trang web của một trường thấp hơn vị trí mong đợi của nhà trường dựa trên sự xuất sắc về học thuật của mình, thì lãnh đạo nhà trường cần xem xét lại chính sách về trang web của mình, và động viên sự gia tăng đáng kể về khối lượng cũng như chất lượng của việc công bố các ấn phẩm điện tử của mình.
Những thay đổi lớn
Chúng tôi đã áp dụng một chính sách đặt tên mới sử dụng chữ viết thường cho các trang web đã được liệt kê để cải thiện độ dễ đọc. Chúng tôi cũng đang cố gắng đưa thêm hoặc sửa chữa lại các chữ cái và các dấu đặc biệt, vì thế chúng tôi rất mong trong thời gian này quý vị kiên nhẫn chờ đợi thêm một chút nữa.
Major changes
We have adopted a new naming policy using lowercases for the listed sites in order to improve readability. We are working on adding or correcting the lost special characters and accents, so we kindly ask for your patience in the meantime.
Cơ sở dữ liệu về các trường đại học mà chúng tôi có đã được cải thiện và cập nhật, với thêm 3,000 đề mục mới hoặc được sửa chữa, trong đó có cả việc đưa vào tất cả các tên tiếng Anh của các trường đại học của Ba Lan. Nếu bạn thấy rằng đơn vị của bạn không có trong danh mục được liệt kê, xin vui lòng gửi cho chúng tôi một thư điện tử để chúng tôi có thể đưa thêm vào trong phiên bản cập nhật.
The database has been completely revised and updated with about 3,000 entries added or corrected, including English names for all the universities of Poland. If you see that your institution is not already listed, please feel free to send us an email so we can add it to the updated version.
Chúng tôi cũng có đưa thêm vào một "khu vực" mới được gọi là thế giới Ả Rập (với các tên miền có đuôi dz, bh, km, dj, eg, er, iq, jo, kw, lb, ly, mr, ma, om, ps, qa, sa, so, sd, sy, tn, ae, ye), khu vực này được tạo ra để chỉ vùng Trung Đông (không kể Iran bây giờ đã được chuyển sang khu vực Châu Á)và Bắc Phi.
A new "region" has been introduced that it is called Arab World (dz, bh, km, dj, eg, er, iq, jo, kw, lb, ly, mr, ma, om, ps, qa, sa, so, sd, sy, tn, ae, ye), which is meant to cover the Middle East (excluding Iran which is now transferred to Asia) and North Africa.
Còn về phương pháp xếp hạng thì chỉ báo Scholar đã được tính toán lại, và bây giờ chỉ số này được thu thập từ điểm trung bình giữa số liệu tổng và số liệu của giai đoạn 2001-2008. Do một số trục trặc kỹ thuật nên yếu tố G cho 1000 trường đại học đầu tiên không được xem xét đến để tính chỉ báo nhận diện, nhưng trong lần công bố kết quả tới chúng tôi sẽ tiếp tục sử dụng.
Regarding ranking methodology, the Scholar indicator has been recalculated, so it is now obtained from the mean between total figures and those for the period 2001-2008. Due to some technical problems the G-factor for the first 1,000 universities is not yet taken into account for the visibility indicator, but we intend to use it in the next edition.
Về các thực tiễn tồi (bad practices)
Việc sử dụng các nông trại liên kết (link farms) và các liên kết trả lại (paidback links) để cải thiện vị trí xếp hạng trong Webometrics là điều không thể chấp nhận vì đây không phải là một cách làm mang tính hàn lâm và nó phản lại với chính mục đích của hệ thống xếp hạng của chúng tôi. Những trường nào có áp dụng các thực tiễn này không có chỗ trong hệ thống xếp hạng này và sẽ không được liệt kê trong những lần công bố kết quả tiếp theo. Chúng tôi sẽ kiểm tra ngẫu nhiên để xem xét sự đúng đắn trong các dữ liệu mà chúng tôi thu thập được.
Regarding bad practices
The use of link farms and paid backlinks to improve the position in our Webometrics Rankings is not aceptable as this is a non academic practice and it is contrary to the aims of this Ranking. The involved institutions does not have a place in our Ranking and will not be classified in future editions. Random checks are made to ensure the correcteness of the data obtained.
Ghi chú
Phần có tên gọi là "Ghi chú" cung cấp thông tin về các trường có cách đặt tên không tốt, kể cả việc có các tên miền trùng lắp. Nếu tên của một trường có kèm thêm một con số thì quý vị sẽ tìm thấy một lời nhận xét trong mục Ghi chú.
Notes
The section called Notes is providing information about institutions with bad naming practices, including duplicate domains. If a number appears after the name of the university you will find the corresponding detailed comments at the Notes section
-----
Since 2004, the Ranking Web is published two times (January & July) per year. This ranking has the largest coverage with more than 16,000 Higher Education Institutions worldwide listed in the Directory. Web presence measures the activity and visibility of the institutions and it is a good indicator of impact and prestige of universities. Rank summarizes the global performance of the University, provides information for candidate students and scholars, and reflects the commitment to the dissemination of scientific knowledge.
Từ năm 2004 đến nay, Webometrics đã công bố kết quả xếp hạng của mình 2 lần mỗi năm vào tháng Giêng và tháng Bảy. Hệ thống xếp hạng này có độ bao phủ lớn nhất trong tất cả các bảng xếp hạng, với tổng số trên 16,000 trường đại học trên khắp thế giới được nêu trong danh bạ. Sự hiện diện trên trang Web (web presence) của các trường được đo lường bằng các hoạt động và khả năng nhận diện của các trường, và đây là một chỉ báo tốt để đo lường sự tác động cũng như uy tín của trường đại học. Thứ hạng trong bảng xếp hạng của Webometrics tóm tắt hoạt động toàn cầu của trường đại học, cung cấp thông tin cho các sinh viên tiềm năng và các học giả, và phản ánh sự cam kết đối với việc phổ biến thông tin khoa học.
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.
Mục tiêu của chúng tôi là nhằm động viên các trường đại học cũng như các học giả tạo ra một sự hiện diện trên trang Web sao cho phản ánh được một cách chính xác hoạt động của họ. Nếu hoạt động trên trang web của một trường thấp hơn vị trí mong đợi của nhà trường dựa trên sự xuất sắc về học thuật của mình, thì lãnh đạo nhà trường cần xem xét lại chính sách về trang web của mình, và động viên sự gia tăng đáng kể về khối lượng cũng như chất lượng của việc công bố các ấn phẩm điện tử của mình.
Những thay đổi lớn
Chúng tôi đã áp dụng một chính sách đặt tên mới sử dụng chữ viết thường cho các trang web đã được liệt kê để cải thiện độ dễ đọc. Chúng tôi cũng đang cố gắng đưa thêm hoặc sửa chữa lại các chữ cái và các dấu đặc biệt, vì thế chúng tôi rất mong trong thời gian này quý vị kiên nhẫn chờ đợi thêm một chút nữa.
Major changes
We have adopted a new naming policy using lowercases for the listed sites in order to improve readability. We are working on adding or correcting the lost special characters and accents, so we kindly ask for your patience in the meantime.
Cơ sở dữ liệu về các trường đại học mà chúng tôi có đã được cải thiện và cập nhật, với thêm 3,000 đề mục mới hoặc được sửa chữa, trong đó có cả việc đưa vào tất cả các tên tiếng Anh của các trường đại học của Ba Lan. Nếu bạn thấy rằng đơn vị của bạn không có trong danh mục được liệt kê, xin vui lòng gửi cho chúng tôi một thư điện tử để chúng tôi có thể đưa thêm vào trong phiên bản cập nhật.
The database has been completely revised and updated with about 3,000 entries added or corrected, including English names for all the universities of Poland. If you see that your institution is not already listed, please feel free to send us an email so we can add it to the updated version.
Chúng tôi cũng có đưa thêm vào một "khu vực" mới được gọi là thế giới Ả Rập (với các tên miền có đuôi dz, bh, km, dj, eg, er, iq, jo, kw, lb, ly, mr, ma, om, ps, qa, sa, so, sd, sy, tn, ae, ye), khu vực này được tạo ra để chỉ vùng Trung Đông (không kể Iran bây giờ đã được chuyển sang khu vực Châu Á)và Bắc Phi.
A new "region" has been introduced that it is called Arab World (dz, bh, km, dj, eg, er, iq, jo, kw, lb, ly, mr, ma, om, ps, qa, sa, so, sd, sy, tn, ae, ye), which is meant to cover the Middle East (excluding Iran which is now transferred to Asia) and North Africa.
Còn về phương pháp xếp hạng thì chỉ báo Scholar đã được tính toán lại, và bây giờ chỉ số này được thu thập từ điểm trung bình giữa số liệu tổng và số liệu của giai đoạn 2001-2008. Do một số trục trặc kỹ thuật nên yếu tố G cho 1000 trường đại học đầu tiên không được xem xét đến để tính chỉ báo nhận diện, nhưng trong lần công bố kết quả tới chúng tôi sẽ tiếp tục sử dụng.
Regarding ranking methodology, the Scholar indicator has been recalculated, so it is now obtained from the mean between total figures and those for the period 2001-2008. Due to some technical problems the G-factor for the first 1,000 universities is not yet taken into account for the visibility indicator, but we intend to use it in the next edition.
Về các thực tiễn tồi (bad practices)
Việc sử dụng các nông trại liên kết (link farms) và các liên kết trả lại (paidback links) để cải thiện vị trí xếp hạng trong Webometrics là điều không thể chấp nhận vì đây không phải là một cách làm mang tính hàn lâm và nó phản lại với chính mục đích của hệ thống xếp hạng của chúng tôi. Những trường nào có áp dụng các thực tiễn này không có chỗ trong hệ thống xếp hạng này và sẽ không được liệt kê trong những lần công bố kết quả tiếp theo. Chúng tôi sẽ kiểm tra ngẫu nhiên để xem xét sự đúng đắn trong các dữ liệu mà chúng tôi thu thập được.
Regarding bad practices
The use of link farms and paid backlinks to improve the position in our Webometrics Rankings is not aceptable as this is a non academic practice and it is contrary to the aims of this Ranking. The involved institutions does not have a place in our Ranking and will not be classified in future editions. Random checks are made to ensure the correcteness of the data obtained.
Ghi chú
Phần có tên gọi là "Ghi chú" cung cấp thông tin về các trường có cách đặt tên không tốt, kể cả việc có các tên miền trùng lắp. Nếu tên của một trường có kèm thêm một con số thì quý vị sẽ tìm thấy một lời nhận xét trong mục Ghi chú.
Notes
The section called Notes is providing information about institutions with bad naming practices, including duplicate domains. If a number appears after the name of the university you will find the corresponding detailed comments at the Notes section
Đăng ký:
Bài đăng (Atom)