Australian University Teaching Rankings (2 Viewers)

[neo o]

I've had dreadful lecturers for Chinese but my tutors have been OK. I've had great tutors in all my law subjects so far (my torts tutor was outstanding) but this year, one of my lecturers for contracts and one for ethics (unfortunately the people who take the most classes) are god awful (while the other two are excellent bar ones constant need to drift off into leftist diatribes and tell us that he has a MBBS and a LLB).

From what I've heard from other people here, the Asian Studies faculty is usually quite average to below average (though Japanese is meant to be quite good). Most sciences, engineering (bar Comp subjects which are supposed to be dreadful) and arts subjects are great. I haven't heard anyone complain (or say anything positive) about commerce, economics or acturial so I'll just assume that they are average .

 

[Minai]

But isn't unsw the best commerce school?

I've had some one or two unspeakably terrible law teachers. thankfully one of them moved to usyd law. Their gain I Guess!

However I've had some 'best teacher ever' type teachers in law and arts. In particular in arts I've had some excellent tutors and lecturers.

Yes its the best commerce school in research and educational material, but I doubt it'd get a good teacher rating.

I guess it's just my bad luck maybe that I got the crummy lecturers

 

[...]

well thing is
not every lecturers teaching in UoW are top-class, and not every lecturers teaching in unsw are crummy

when we all go out there and apply for jobs, it all comes down to who we are, and how we manage ourselves in the big world

employers won't go "oh look its Minai, gee he went to UNSW, the teachers apparently sucks there so i won't hire him" but rather "hmm, this Minai bloke seems like a smart bloke, lets give him an interview"

 

[Generator]

employers won't go "oh look its Minai, gee he went to UNSW, the teachers apparently sucks there so i won't hire him" but rather "hmm, this Minai bloke seems like a smart bloke, lets give him an interview"

The point is that, according to the figures (formed with the help of one third of the graduating student body), those attending UOW would be better placed to look like a smart person as a result of a better teaching environment. I don't disagree with what you are saying, but you are saying it in a way that suggests that the standard of teaching makes no difference, even though I doubt that that was your intention.

 

[Meldrum]

yay for uow

Yeah, you can say that, but do any students go there because its the best ranked uni or because it's all they can get into?

 

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

dun u get a grace period where u try to impress them?
then if they dun lik u... no further education and u get the real dull jobs..

 

[santaslayer]

Yeah, you can say that, but do any students go there because its the best ranked uni or because it's all they can get into?

That question has no standing in this topic:

1) The rankings have only been out last week. We never "offically" knew anything about a Regional university being able to kick the crap out of sydney unis. That being said, it is quite obvious that a quite a number of people in this foruum already knew how UoW rocked and chose to go to that uni. Without Wings is a prime example.

2) Other Sydney universities have always brainwashed people into believeing sandstone-ness is the way to go. I don't need to prove that, it is blatantly obvious, esp during Open Days. It is a natural reaction that people accept various Sydney universities to be top ranked already. You've been to some and I've been to some. (Open days)

3) Some people go to UoW because it is within proximity. Ranking has no effect on their university preferences. I know a chinese dude (yes, its always the asians) that got 99.90, well within the reach of any course in any university. Proximity was his prime concern. We aren't all idiots that couldn't get a uai above #.


.

 

[Meads]

lol i dont have the luxury of choosing a uni...i just want to make sure i bloody get into one.

 

[SashatheMan]

all the good unis in sydney are ranked low. this must be wrong . the end

 

[...]

The point is that, according to the figures (formed with the help of one third of the graduating student body), those attending UOW would be better placed to look like a smart person as a result of a better teaching environment. I don't disagree with what you are saying, but you are saying it in a way that suggests that the standard of teaching makes no difference, even though I doubt that that was your intention.

thing is
if you are smart, you will succeed and get good grades from any uni
but if you are not, then theres not difference going to UoW or UNSW

 

[...]

I think that may be the case.

stop being so bitter

one day you say UNSW, USYD's law school is more prestigous than others, and now you are saying ppl graduated from UNSW will be targetted? If you are smart, no one really cares where you graduated from, of course there are barriers at the start, but that can be overcome by hardwork and delication

 

[Generator]

thing is
if you are smart, you will succeed and get good grades from any uni
but if you are not, then theres not difference going to UoW or UNSW

So I guess that you were saying that the standard of teaching (in general) makes no difference. Rightio.

 

[...]

So I guess that you were saying that the standard of teaching (in general) makes no difference. Rightio.

so are you saying lecturers teaching in UNSW should not be teaching because of their "quality"??

 

[Generator]

so are you saying lecturers teaching in UNSW should not be teaching because of their "quality"??

You are suggesting that the standard of teaching makes little difference to the eventual outcome, and that it is as though the entire act of teaching is essentially pointless as either you have it or you do not. All I am trying to say is that you wrong to suggest such a notion. As I said, I agree with you (as did Asquithian) in that smart people with an ounce of determination should achieve their goals no matter where they study in Australia, yet to study at a university with a higher standard of teaching can only help both those who have it and those that do not to improve their standing within their chosen field of study.

 

[...]

yeah

but one should not base their uni preferences(or brag how good their uni is/was) purely on these data
thing is, these numbers mean nothing. A lot of university rankings outside Aust. are done based on post grad research results, not how good their undergrad teaching is.

 

[Generator]

yeah

but one should not base their uni preferences(or brag how good their uni is/was) purely on these data
thing is, these numbers mean nothing. A lot of university rankings outside Aust. are done based on post grad research results, not how good their undergrad teaching is.

Ah, I suggest that you look at what is being discussed before you go any further. The figures used to create this ranking scheme were derived in order to determine a university's capabilities in the field of teaching and to determine which institutions would gain access to the $250 million pot of gold that is being made available by the federal government in addition to regular government funding. In other words, we are discussing university rankings in terms of teaching (what would be of most benefit to undergrads in Australia, arguably), not university performance as a whole, and the figures do count for quite a bit.

 

[Cyan_phoeniX]

i wish they had rankings for particular departments. i wanna see the psychology rankings!!

having general rankings for say employer purposes etc doesnt seem particularly smart though (i know this one wasnt about that, but in general). A uni could have a A+ department (i.e. psych) and a E- department (i.e. music) and be given some general crappy C grade. When another uni could have 2 B grade departments and given a B overall. Students only need to go to one department, so going to the C grade uni will be better for a psych student. if you dont get what im saying thn .. weh..

 

[STFU]

Yea I think it would be smarter to rank uni's by department.

 

[Generator]

That makes sense, cyan, but I doubt that it's a practical consideration when the DEST is prepared to base 3 of the 7 measures on student surveys, of which only one third of graduating students bother to complete (according to reports).

 

[...]

Ah, I suggest that you look at what is being discussed before you go any further. The figures used to create this ranking scheme were derived in order to determine a university's capabilities in the field of teaching and to determine which institutions would gain access to the $250 million pot of gold that is being made available by the federal government in addition to regular government funding. In other words, we are discussing university rankings in terms of teaching (what would be of most benefit to undergrads in Australia, arguably), not university performance as a whole, and the figures do count for quite a bit.

yes i know, and there are many flaws in that

firstly: how can one define "the quality of teaching" in universities

ppl expects to be spoon fed during high school, and in uni they are suppose to be on their own. So if the lecturer ends up writing the whole course on the screen and you were expected to note everythign down and not work it out on your own, is that considered to be good teaching?
Or does good teaching means the out come of the unit study guide?

should failure rate be considered? after all, high failure rate could very well mean poor teaching whereas low failure rate means good teaching

cos then it all comes down to this

i do believe asqy when he saids unsw's law school is a lot better than some of the others, and indeed Minai do go to one of the best commerce undergrad school around, but how does that justify unsw's ranking?