Current location - Education and Training Encyclopedia - Educational Knowledge - Ministry of Education's First University Ranking
Ministry of Education's First University Ranking
The first ranking of universities by the Ministry of Education is "Evaluation of Higher Education in China" published by 1997, and the ranking of China University by the Ministry of Education is 1995.

The university ranking of 1995 is the only time that the Ministry of Education ranks universities. The rankings that have appeared since then are all folk lists. At that time, the rankings of universities in geology, minerals, forestry and petroleum were generally higher than now. For example, China University of Mining and Technology ranks 24th in China, with engineering 15.

According to the ranking analysis of universities by the Ministry of Education 1995, the top universities in China 10 are: Tsinghua, Peking University, Nanda University, Zhejiang University, Xi Jiaotong University, Harbin Institute of Technology, Fudan University, Huazhong University of Science and Technology (now Huazhong University of Science and Technology), Southeast University and Northwestern Polytechnical University.

At that time, universities were classified according to engineering, comprehensive education, agriculture and medicine, that is to say, the characteristics of universities at that time were still outstanding, engineering came first and Zhejiang University came second. Peking University is the first comprehensive class and Nanda is the second comprehensive class.

For example, Xi Jiaotong University and Harbin Institute of Technology are also very top universities in China, both of which can enter the top ten in China. Fudan University's own strength is also first-class, ranking seventh in the country. However, Shanghai Jiaotong University was not so lucky, and even the top 20 in China was not shortlisted.

Problems and defects in ranking:

1. First of all, the ranking criteria are not clear enough, and the evaluation criteria of different universities are different, so it is difficult to make a fair comparison.

2. Secondly, the ranking is too simple and rude, and only the hardware facilities and teachers of the school are considered, while the factors such as the quality of education and the comprehensive quality of students are ignored.

3. In addition, the credibility of this ranking has been questioned because the Ministry of Education has not published specific ranking details and scoring standards.