Sydney versus UNSW - whats the difference? (1 Viewer)

[AsyLum]

20% for participation? HAHAHAHAH oh shit :S

 

[erawamai]

well i know for torts,
at sydney, we have 80% exam and 20% take home assignment
at unsw, it is 50% take home assignment, 20% for just attending class and 30% exam
i wonder which uni will giv out more hd's...

...and we all know how exams are the greatest for testing a persons legal ability. It allows people to fudge better. Time doesn't permit anything in-depth. People who don't know anything can get away with fudging. You can't do that in assignments.

20% for class participation. Not just for attending class. Also from what I remember when I did torts it was 50% exam 40% take-home 10% CP. Also just because the exam is worth less doesn't mean it is easier or smaller. Torts is till a 3 hour exam at unsw as it is at usyd. So overall, in terms of assessment, you do less of it at usyd.

It's also nice to know that usyd still hasn't fully endorsed Socratic teaching. You don't even assess whether the person can talk or present their thoughts orally. There is no incentive for the students to question or discuss the legal issues. Just sit back and give it too me!

Last session for admin law there was no CP. Everyone just sat there in silence while the teacher spoon fed. It was wonderful

 

[gordo]

err did u miss my point entirely?
i said unsw hands out higher marks than usyd in particular subjects,
wat are u ranting about?

and your analysis on the teaching process is so flawed i won;t even begin..

oh and beleive me, they don;t need an incentive to discuss legal issues, they don;t fukn shut up in class with all their stupid hypotheticals which would never happen in real life.

 

[04er]

...and we all know how exams are the greatest for testing a persons legal ability. It allows people to fudge better. Time doesn't permit anything in-depth. People who don't know anything can get away with fudging. You can't do that in assignments.

wow u sure are lost. I thought take home assignments were easier!? While they might expect more from a take home assignment, you have a lot more time to make up for that difference and then still more time to go beyond it. Sheesh. L-o-g-i-c... use it.

20% for class participation. Not just for attending class. Also from what I remember when I did torts it was 50% exam 40% take-home 10% CP. Also just because the exam is worth less doesn't mean it is easier or smaller. Torts is till a 3 hour exam at unsw as it is at usyd. So overall, in terms of assessment, you do less of it at usyd.

that's in 'YOUR' opinion. Try both unis then compare.

It's also nice to know that usyd still hasn't fully endorsed Socratic teaching.

err... last time I checked... students were speaking 90%++ of the time during class, despite a '0%' class participation weighting.

Last session for admin law there was no CP. Everyone just sat there in silence while the teacher spoon fed. It was wonderful

Shows how much initiative unsw law students have.

You don't even assess whether the person can talk or present their thoughts orally.

True for Torts. Yet you admit it was the same for your admin law. I encourage you check the usyd law faculty handbook. And see how 'little' class participation is generally required from us in other law subjects.

There is no incentive for the students to question or discuss the legal issues. Just sit back and give it too me!.

again, this only emphasises how lazy unsw law students are. They need 'assessment weighting' incentives to participate. The only incentive they should need is to test and improve their legal reasoning and related skills.

Hey, it looks like your entire 'argument' backfired.

 

[erawamai]

wow u sure are lost. I thought take home assignments were easier!? While they might expect more from a take home assignment, you have a lot more time to make up for that difference and then still more time to go beyond it. Sheesh. L-o-g-i-c... use it.

Yes take home are easier in a way. But the issue wasnt how easy the assessment is. It is more of a question of what is the best way to judge a persons ability. Exams are not the best for judging how well someone can apply the law. 3 hours is not much time to go into depth. Exams only show the marker that the student knows the framework. No student has time to get into complex arguments that show their ability in exams.

I also refuse to take logic lessons from someone who thinks Corby is innocent because channel 9 said so.

20% for class participation. Not just for attending class. Also from what I remember when I did torts it was 50% exam 40% take-home 10% CP. Also just because the exam is worth less doesn't mean it is easier or smaller. Torts is till a 3 hour exam at unsw as it is at usyd. So overall, in terms of assessment, you do less of it at usyd.

that's in 'YOUR' opinion. Try both unis then compare.

Are you going to make an argument as to how usyd has a heavier assessment than unsw?

Gordo made a comment about how usyd assessment is better or harder. Inferring that it is easier to get a HD at unsw because of the structure of assessment...
...This is rather untrue. I presented an argument as to why the assessment structure at unsw isn't as easy as he makes out.

I also presented an argument as to why usyd assessment may be easier...

well i know for torts,
at sydney, we have 80% exam and 20% take home assignment
at unsw, it is 50% take home assignment, 20% for just attending class and 30% exam
i wonder which uni will giv out more hd's...

By suggesting that unsw has 20% CP and a lower % exam gordo seems to think that this will result in more HD's or that it is somehow easier. The argument made, in case you didnt read it, was that the percentage worth of the unsw torts exam is less than usyd but is still a three hour an exam. The inference being that you hav to work 'harder' and complete more various assessment tasks in order to get your mark.

If you would like to present a counter argument other than 'its your opinion' then do so. But at the moment none of us has the opportunity to be at both unis. Your suggestion that I should try both unis before I say something applies to gordo and you to.

err... last time I checked... students were speaking 90%++ of the time during class, despite a '0%' class participation weighting.

You still are not assessed on participation in torts.

True for Torts. Yet you admit it was the same for your admin law. I encourage you check the usyd law faculty handbook. And see how 'little' class participation is generally required from us in other law subjects.

Class participation was not assessed in Admin. However there was a 20% presentation mark.

 

[erawamai]

err did u miss my point entirely?
i said unsw hands out higher marks than usyd in particular subjects,

That is rather odd considering that a fair few unsw academics have had stints at usyd or obtained their degree from usyd and vice versa.

But anyways my response is based on this part of your post.

well i know for torts,
at sydney, we have 80% exam and 20% take home assignment
at unsw, it is 50% take home assignment, 20% for just attending class and 30% exam
i wonder which uni will giv out more hd's...

I'll just suggest that your reasoning above is flawed.

Which goes along the line of.

*Because unsw has more assessments and assesss CP heaps of people get HD's*

Brilliant.

 

[gordo]

u can suggest watever u like, but it isn;t flawed because its true... (if u read my initial post in this thread on the first page)

and in regards to "By suggesting that unsw has 20% CP and a lower % exam gordo seems to think that this will result in more HD's or that it is somehow easier."...
you're only kidding yourself if u think otherwise.

stduent's should not need incentive to participate in class, its university, you are there to learn. This argument does not pertain in any form to student's who are in class participating ONLY so they can get their 20%...i find it hard to beleive u'd presume otherwise.

i also don;t know why u keep saying at unsw u learn how to apply where as at usyd u don't cause we are assessed from exams. They are problem based exams which means u have to HAVE an actual knowledge of how all the concepts work, rather than a 50% take home assignment where u have all the time in the world to look them up. saying limited exam time means u can;t express all your knowledge is bs and u know it.

and u persist in saying your exam is just as much work as ours PLUS u have the take home assignment and the CP (not to mention this is 20% free for students who are there to actually engage with the subject regardless) so u get a more all round assessment...i ask u how again this refutes my inital point that its easier to do well in torts at unsw than usyd??...it doesn't in the slightest.

 

[neo o]

well i know for torts,
at sydney, we have 80% exam and 20% take home assignment
at unsw, it is 50% take home assignment, 20% for just attending class and 30% exam
i wonder which uni will giv out more hd's...

The final mark at the end of the course is bell curved, idiot and there are a set amount of high distinctions, distinctions and credits that most law schools hand out. From memory, UNSW hands out quite alot of distinctions (about 15-20% and there is a thread about it somewhere around here) compared to Sydney's 10-15% but both universities hand out the same amount of high distinctions <5%.

Also, every time that you post you try to qualify what you say by saying "Oh, a partner at a huge law firm told me this, so it must be true and you must be wrong". Perhaps you should try to create logical, well researched, structured arguments instead of using second hand information and hearsay.

 

[santaslayer]

Both unis are percieved to be highly reputable.

 

[erawamai]

Both unis are percieved to be highly reputable.

Just like UOW is perceived to be rather good too. What's your point santa?

 

[heidi_kak]

Both unis are percieved to be highly reputable.

'i' before 'e', except after c.

 

[neo o]

'i' before 'e', except after c.

Please try to respond to their posts with constructive arguments. Try to post something sufficient.

 

[gordo]

The final mark at the end of the course is bell curved, idiot and there are a set amount of high distinctions, distinctions and credits that most law schools hand out. From memory, UNSW hands out quite alot of distinctions (about 15-20% and there is a thread about it somewhere around here) compared to Sydney's 10-15% but both universities hand out the same amount of high distinctions <5%.

Also, every time that you post you try to qualify what you say by saying "Oh, a partner at a huge law firm told me this, so it must be true and you must be wrong". Perhaps you should try to create logical, well researched, structured arguments instead of using second hand information and hearsay.

yek ok moron,
that's why torts' marks arn't moderated to a bell curve.
shut your hole and tops for your research mate.

 

[erawamai]

yek ok moron,
that's why torts' marks arn't moderated to a bell curve.

Are you sure?

 

[neo o]

yek ok moron,
that's why torts' marks arn't moderated to a bell curve.
shut your hole and tops for your research mate.

I see that you're taught the finer points of debate and argument at the University of Sydney too, excellent! Seriously though, that post didn't make sense . "That's why" is a qualifier, i.e.: a few people at the University of Sydney struggle with engaging in debate, that's why their results are bell curved. That's why what gordo? If what you're trying to say is that results for torts aren't bell curved at Syndey, why not? EVERY OTHER LAW COURSE IS AT UNSW. If you ask me, more people tend to be scaled down rather than up when subjects are bell curved, so again your argument is shit because if that's the case, there are actually fewer HDs awarded at UNSW.

 

[Rorix]

They aren't bell curved unless there's perceived to be a problem, is what I remember Jenni Millbank saying last year. And by 'a problem', they mean results outside the quotas.

edit: im talking about usyd

 

[erawamai]

They aren't bell curved unless there's perceived to be a problem, is what I remember Jenni Millbank saying last year. And by 'a problem', they mean results outside the quotas.

edit: im talking about usyd

I believe teachers, in general, say that results are not bell curved. But the results, as they fall, just happen pretty much fit a bell curve.

 

[gordo]

I see that you're taught the finer points of debate and argument at the University of Sydney too, excellent! Seriously though, that post didn't make sense . "That's why" is a qualifier, i.e.: a few people at the University of Sydney struggle with engaging in debate, that's why their results are bell curved. That's why what gordo? If what you're trying to say is that results for torts aren't bell curved at Syndey, why not? EVERY OTHER LAW COURSE IS AT UNSW. If you ask me, more people tend to be scaled down rather than up when subjects are bell curved, so again your argument is shit because if that's the case, there are actually fewer HDs awarded at UNSW.

ok...
except my friend doing law at unsw specifically asked the head of law and was told no law subjects are moderated at unsw.
and fuk off with your irrelevant nit picking into my internet discourse...loser

 

[neo o]

They aren't bell curved unless there's perceived to be a problem, is what I remember Jenni Millbank saying last year. And by 'a problem', they mean results outside the quotas.

edit: im talking about usyd

Basically a bell curve then, at any rate we were talking about the amounts of HDs given out, so same deal.

ok...
except my friend doing law at unsw specifically asked the head of law and was told no law subjects are moderated at unsw.
and fuk off with your irrelevant nit picking into my internet discourse...loser

So now it's "a friend told me". UNSW has bands at the least (re: my other posts), meaning that they have the same amount of or a very similar amount of HDs and Ds handed out. This isn't irrelevant nitpicking by the way gordo, you were fucking wrong and I called you on it. UNSW hands out the same amount of HDs on average, and a very similar amount of Ds on average as Usyd.

 

[gordo]

wat, u brush off my last post with a grain of salt cause a friend told me,
i may as well just ignore yours cause they come out your fukn arse hole.
fuk, you really are a moron.
think wat ever u like, i was just trying to tell u how it actually works but you've got some vendetta against knowing the truth, so fuk if i care

and yes, reducing to the level of doing an expose on my use of internet discourse is pathetically amusing.

go ring unsw to prove yourself wrong.

i;ve got no more to say on this subject, so watever, have the last word if u don;t want your elite reputation here on BOS to have been hurt.
adios