Ha firstly an answer to what the original post was about;
Follow your dreams, humanities is alot more self motivated work, well atleast arts is (and anyone whose about to slam me for arts, trust me i proberbly do more work then u do) and even though its "volunatry" you are expected to do it. I do alot more at home work then science but i have less compulsary hours at university.
Everyone i know who does law loves it, so i would suggest you follow what your heart tells you. You can always transfer and its a long time to be doing something you dont like and rather expensive if you take a science degree.
Now my comment on the side Debate;
Look im sorry but i'm gonna side with Melb on this one. Look im sure you can get hired with a UWS degree. Yes i'm sure we all know someone who did. BUt lets look at this realically. And just to piont out, Melb never said that going to usyd made us superior people in any moral or social sense, just that were reciveing a better education. So tehers no piont in attacking him saying hes demoting a persons worth on teh grounds of a university degree. Hes merely applying the same ranking sstem to our degrees that teh government already did back when we were alocated uais, and the cuttoffs for the universities where determined.
So you want to argue there's no difference in universities. I'm sorry but thats just stupid. The whole uai system is designed to make a stratified university system. If there was no difference in uni's, wouldnt all unis offer the same courses, and there'd be a standardised uai enterance. This would thus set a leve by which you could argue there id no difference in universities.
The fact is the more "academically inclined people" with the higher uai's go to the "better" instutions. Those of you who wish to argue that UAI's have no bearing on your academic ability have a piont, but it is the only reference of ranking the government has, and it is realistically a measure of your scholarly abilities. Lets face it, we have in australia a league of 8, and look im sorry but UWS isnt on it. Look i come form the western suburbs, and while i admit i attend usyd, the fact remains i attend it and travel the stupid distance every day for the simple fact its better. For me there is access to better informed and knowledgable lecturers, greater resources and the courses are more challanging. Unfortunatly it's fairly obvious that the more academic people go to the institutions of UNSW, Usyd, Macquaire, ect. Thus teh combined intellegence, and the lecturers who in my experience double as tutors are higher. Uni is a collective learning xperience, and thus it would be senisible that beacuase the students who have shown themselves to be superior (and lets face it the UAI are alla bout ranking us in superiority) combined with distinguished tutors/lectueres, it woulod be hard to argue that these people are not recieving a "better" education.
And the fact is employers now this. I have a friend who had a slightly lower uai then me, who went to UWS because she got a sholarship. When people ask me what university i attend and i answer university of Sydey, they are impressed, there's an aura of presitge and respect attatched, whether ir not one agrees with that is irelevent, teh gerneral perception is what it is. When she says UWS people are not impressed and just assumes that part and parcle of growing up in the western suburbs, that you would attend a commonly oercieved "inferior" university.
Look im not saying its impossible to get hired with a UWS degree. But think about it. If say myself, and another person from perhap UWS went for the same job. We have similar extra cirrcular experiences, we both present well, are articulate and we have the same grade piont average from our respective uni.I believe, and i know enough people who haveI believe, and i know enough people who have business and hire people, that i would be hired because it is percieved that it's harder to achieve a high grade piont average at Usyd then it is at UWS ect.
The fact remains there is a sytem of grading to universities whether we as students agree with it, and depite concerns on whether its a fair grading system, im sorry but Melbournian is right, in the eyes of the general public there is a perception of superiority. It would be like saying there is no difference in high schools. That stupid and everyone knows it, James Ruase would be horrified to be compared to say Plumpton high. There is a difference, and even if its just a fincial advantage, theres "ivy leagues" equivalent universities in Australia, and they generally have more money thus superior staff, services, and thus higher uai cutt offs because student wish to attend them, thus the university can take the "cream of the crop".
Unless they change the system by which students qualify for university it will be impossible to argue there is no difference to uni's. Hence why Usyds' cuttoffs rarely fall past 85, and UWSs' are regularily in the 70s. You cant tell me that there is no difference in the ideas that are expressed in a tutorial between the two students. The fact remains one has demosnstartated that they can comprehende a greater level of teh information being expressed, and that has an affect on what they will contribute to a tutorial.
Thats not to say Usyd ect are always suprerior, Macquaire is superior if you wish to study Egyptology (stcicking to what i know) because they have Kanawati. Lectireres also make a difference, and i challange you to fins a WORLD renowed professor that doesnt teach in one of the "presitigous" universities!!!!!!!!! Thus its largely impossible to argue conclusivly Usyd is ALWAYS the best in every disapline in every subject, but i do think one must be realistic and realise there are "better" and "worse" unis!
And by the way, that derogitory comment on collage students was pathetic. Seriously such sweeping generalisations are pathetic. His living arrangement for the past year would not have had a massive impact on his identity!
Ok im done!
