[circusmind]

Originally Posted by FreshOffTheBoat

sure torts is torts as u say. but different unis have different methods of delivery, levels of funding, quality of lecturers, facilities etc. these all play a part in determining the quality of the course. [i think this is where the disagreement lies]

Of course. But I suggest the difference in this regard between individual lecturers/courses within a given faculty would be far greater than that between different faculties considered as a whole. The quality of facilities is not so much an issue with a law school--all you need is a law lib. Sure, shiny buildings and moot courts are nice, but the actual value added to a legal education with this sort of investment is much less than it would be in, for example, a science or medical degree where labs etc. really go to the core of the learning process.

(disclosure: ANU law student disillusioned with less-than-sexy law school buildings)

the content may be the same, but the methods of teaching, assessment, and facilities vary greatly. the courses are not clones of each other. as long as a course covers the content in a appropriate manner, it will be accredited. some are on the boderline, some are well above it.
again, with the analogy of the resturuants. they all provide food, but the quality of the food varies.

Again, the variety within a given faculty negates the notion that a more 'prestigious' uni will consistently have a superior standard of courses. You should remember that many criticisms have been levelled at sandstone institutions at various times about their reticence to move forward in their teaching methods. Age and ivy is not necessarily conducive to enlightened teaching. Likewise top researchers are not always crash hot lecturers, and vice versa. As you rightly note, prestige is not necessarily based on undergrad experience, and indeed rarely is.

ANU is a top notch uni no doubt. but u need to realise that ANU isnt the best uni in australia for its teaching of law. it is for research/science, completely different.

Indeed. And that is precisely my point. Students should choose their degrees based on a finer apreciation of what various institutions have to offer. I didn't choose ANU because I thought: 'ANU > everyone else'. I thought that, for me, with an interest in public policy/govt. work, and a focus on public/constitutional/international law, ANU was the best uni for me. Making this sort of decision is harder than just saying Uni X > Uni Y, but it is also far more accurate.

To take your restaurant analogy: you don't order seafood at a steakhouse in Alice Springs. The choice of restaurant should be tailored towards what you are specifically looking for in a meal.