I found this interesting:
The combined quality of America's top-200 universities vastly outstrips that of any other country, with only the UK standing out from the rest of the pack. Hence the prima facie credibility of the market fundamentalists' argument.
But if we correct for size, this credibility instantly vanishes. If we divide the number of top universities for each country by its population, the US plummets to 14th place on the international league table of university systems. If we divide the number of top universities by each country's GDP, the wealthy US still manages no better than 14th. And if we divide the number of top institutions by total spending on higher education to measure value for money, then the US - which spends more of its national wealth on higher education than any other country - drops into the bottom quarter of the table: to 16th of the 20 countries for which we have relevant data.
Examining UK performance in the same way is no less instructive. Relative to GDP, the UK is in third place, behind only Hong Kong and the Netherlands. Relative to total spending on higher education (for which we lack data for Hong Kong and Switzerland), the UK claims first place, offering six times better value for money than the US. And in terms of value offered for public spending on higher education, the UK is in a league of its own: offering a 50 per cent better return on public investment than the nearest rival, and far more value than the other countries that fund higher education partly through relatively high tuition fees.
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=417652&c=1
But does this take into account teaching quality, ie how good they are at teaching the students. Of course the UK will be good value because we have probably the shortest bachelor's degrees available anywhere, but what of the quality of graduates that we produce?
BTW, if you are going to plagiarise an article, I would'nt put the link at the bottom, take time to formulate your own arguements would be my advice
======= Date Modified 07 Oct 2011 10:42:08 =======
Sorry to say but I was not hoping to get this work published as my own on here. Think it is pretty clear enough for a casual forum.
Maybe some people should allow themselves to get out Ph.Dwarrior mode and relax.
======= Date Modified 07 Oct 2011 11:01:23 =======
It's nothing about academia - it's about good t'internet etiquette. I know non-academic forums where you'd have been pulled up for the same thing. The way you put it, it sounded like you'd done your own analysis of the Times Data and were presenting a finding that you thought was interesting. All you had to do what put quotation marks. Not exactly rocket science.
To be honest I don't really give a monkeys in this instance, but you didn't seem to get why someone mentioned plagiarism, hence why I gave an explanation.
I really don't care. If anyone is silly enough to think I am posting this as my own I think they could do with a nap
PostgraduateForum Is a trading name of FindAUniversity Ltd
FindAUniversity Ltd, 77 Sidney St, Sheffield, S1 4RG, UK. Tel +44 (0) 114 268 4940 Fax: +44 (0) 114 268 5766
An active and supportive community.
Support and advice from your peers.
Your postgraduate questions answered.
Use your experience to help others.
Enter your email address below to get started with your forum account
Enter your username below to login to your account
An email has been sent to your email account along with instructions on how to reset your password. If you do not recieve your email, or have any futher problems accessing your account, then please contact our customer support.
or continue as guest
To ensure all features on our website work properly, your computer, tablet or mobile needs to accept cookies. Our cookies don’t store your personal information, but provide us with anonymous information about use of the website and help us recognise you so we can offer you services more relevant to you. For more information please read our privacy policy
Agree Agree