i read somewhere in this forum that uac mite scale uni marks - after all getting a distinction average at usyd or unsw with a smarter cohort should be valued higher than going to uws and getting a distinction average. does any1 knw if uac scales our gpas?
-
Looking for HSC notes and resources? Check out our Notes & Resources page
UAC scale uni marks? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter aaa666
- Start date
Untrue. I have word from UAC themselves that they convert marks from different institutions, because not all Universities use the same marking scheme.hellomike said:
Whether or not "scaling" goes on between institutions that use the same marking scheme is a different matter. But there is definitely a conversion process that UAC uses for certain Universities.
Jessica_00
Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2005
- Messages
- 120
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- N/A
How is that possible? 0_onatstar said:
melsc
Premium Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2004
- Messages
- 6,365
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2005
I have been told they do scale, however it is unfair to assume UWS students recieve D's easier because of lower UAI's etc... Like anyother uni there must be fewer HD's than D's etc, it may be slightly easier due to the supposed lack of competition but the uni still has standars to uphold and HD's and D's are not given out like candy, besides UAI's do not guarantee success in a course. It would also be unfair to assume that a law student at UWS does not work as hard if not harder than a single degree student at another institution.aaa666 said:
Few things first,Jessica_00 said:
- each university is different
- universities are subjective
Now given the two items above, if we have a fairly uniform distribution of variation between students perceptions and the associated universities then we can expect in many cases (or well on bos at least), we will hear the opinions of
- Uni X is easier than Uni Y
- Uni Y is easier than Uni X
But given the rather un-unformity of BOS, we will either see more of a X > Y and probably less of Y > X.
So just remember it depends on people's perceptions, work ethic and so on. Some courses to some people are easy, to others they are hard.
stop telling that anecdote. multiple bosers transferred from UWS to USYD and they all say that USYD is heaps harder to do well at.natstar said:
... i also hear that UAC throws away all UWS applicants, since it's not a real uni.
And the only real scaling they do is for students from non-standard grading schemes (e.g. Maquarie (sp)). These grades need to be converted to the 7-point scale that most other unis utilise.
melsc
Premium Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2004
- Messages
- 6,365
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2005
UWS marks would need to be converted because ours are 10cp/subject and our GPA system is weird
The quality of candidates at UWS is worse. full stop. i'm sure you're willing to admit that. UWS uses the same marking standard as other unis, i.e. grades will be loosely distributed around the bell curve. Now, you tell me, is it easier to get a D against worse students, or around better ones with the same distribution of marks?
Your friend could be affected by numerous factors. For instance:
a) She may not have been able to transfer all her subjects over, and had to repeat some. Repeating a subject (or a similar one) results in a higher mark the second time round
b) if she lives closer to the city, her travel time has gone down, leading to more sleep, more absorption of material and more time to study
c) It is fun to say you're outside of the norm. Some people like to brag about hard subjects being easy for them. Your friend may be trying to do a similar action 'ohh im so not studying at all and gettin good (read: very average) marks'.
d) Uni is hard to get adjusted to for the first year. After this, it gets much easier, as you learn time management, effective studying techniques, etc.
And a person-by-person basis isn't particularly applicable here. Hiphop got credits and above at UWS, but at USYD, he gets a below credit average (from memory). He even is retaking subjects he's taken at UWS, yet is still finding higher marks difficult to attain. Is this a relevant way of comparing the ease of attaining marks at one uni over another for all candidates? No. It's only really relevant for the individual.
Your friend could be affected by numerous factors. For instance:
a) She may not have been able to transfer all her subjects over, and had to repeat some. Repeating a subject (or a similar one) results in a higher mark the second time round
b) if she lives closer to the city, her travel time has gone down, leading to more sleep, more absorption of material and more time to study
c) It is fun to say you're outside of the norm. Some people like to brag about hard subjects being easy for them. Your friend may be trying to do a similar action 'ohh im so not studying at all and gettin good (read: very average) marks'.
d) Uni is hard to get adjusted to for the first year. After this, it gets much easier, as you learn time management, effective studying techniques, etc.
And a person-by-person basis isn't particularly applicable here. Hiphop got credits and above at UWS, but at USYD, he gets a below credit average (from memory). He even is retaking subjects he's taken at UWS, yet is still finding higher marks difficult to attain. Is this a relevant way of comparing the ease of attaining marks at one uni over another for all candidates? No. It's only really relevant for the individual.
It's pretty hard to maintain the 95+ average you obtain in your first year throughout the later years of a course. Yes the example is a bit extreme (and yes people do obtain those sorts of averages in first year) but it just goes to show that your vague comment doesn't really 'prove' anything. I mean you said your friend did "good" (with a credit average) but then again if uni marks are bell curved then it doesn't take much to fall from a "good" (ie. credit) mark to a pass mark. Let me summarise, there is very little difference between a pass and a low to mid credit.
I think it's a bit silly to say such and such a university marks harder than another one. The actual course should be specified because courses with subjective marking shouldn't be compared at all.
I'm just saying that your comment about how people's marks can go down in later years doesn't really prove anything (this is indepdent of whatever point you're trying to make). Because like I said, I'm sure that we can agree that regardless of how much effort you put in, it is extremely difficult to maintain a 95+ average. On the other hand, you could study the same way and your average could easily fall from 66 to 62 (ie. credit to pass). So your assertion that USYD's marking is easier solely on the basis of a mark shift from pass to credit isn't valid.
Anyway I'm not interested in a waah-fest, I'll leave that to others.
It's rather obvious on general grounds as to why courses with subjective marking can't be compared. If you think otherwise, could you please enlighten me as to how you can objectively compare two courses with subjective marking? After all, what point is there in making a comparison if it's not an objective one?
Anyway I'm not interested in a waah-fest, I'll leave that to others.
Last edited: