True that Bachelor of Commerce sucks at Usyd? (1 Viewer)

[Blahtooh]

I originally wanted to do a bachelor of commerce (marketing) at Usyd but heaps of people have been telling me how its not that great ...too theoretical, not flexible enough etc etc. So now I am really confused.

Would anyone be able to give me some first hand insight into the bcomm course at usyd. Like the pros and cons and if the rumours are true. I mean does it really suck and do employers really infinitely prefer UNSW grads?

thanks in advance!

 

[Rorix]

Don't know about marketing majors but I'd be suprised. The BCom @ USYD degree has improved markedly since about 5 years ago.

 

[egarrz]

I'm doing first year commerce at sydney. I'm planning to do a marketing major (currently doing marketing research 1) and so far the degree seems fine. I have mates at UNSW and doesn't seem much different. Sorry I'm not much help, I just don't think its all bad.

 

[jb_nc]

yes. it is very true,. usyd sucks. you should do b business at uws. theere course is far suprior and they have a much better campus and social life.

trust me you will not regret it

 

[Blahtooh]

well yes someone in the industry would be nice but I don't know where to look, that and can't be bothered to go look. My other option was prob UTS but not sure about that either. Good news i guess that the degree is getting better and first year seems good to someone.

well thanks for your replies. greatly appreciated.

 

[xiao1985]

yes. it is very true,. usyd sucks. you should do b business at uws. theere course is far suprior and they have a much better campus and social life.

trust me you will not regret it

some objective opinions there...

Though I only did first semester marketing, from what I could gather, it is right now very case study based. Tutorial focuses quite abit on group work. Not sure about later years though (1st year always tend to be more interesting)

 

[stazi]

some objective opinions there...

Though I only did first semester marketing, from what I could gather, it is right now very case study based. Tutorial focuses quite abit on group work. Not sure about later years though (1st year always tend to be more interesting)

that is quite a silly opinion. A first year subject isn't representative of the marketing major as a whole, or career prospects.


I'm a third year student chasing an extended major in marketing. I can say that I know quite a bit about industry recruitment practices, and the differences in the marketing majors offered by different universities.

In the past, marketing at usyd has been quite poor, but this has changed about 3 years ago, as the discipline was restructured, better professors were brought in, and a far broader range of subjects was offered.

The main difference b/w USYD and UNSW marketing, is that USYD is relatively theoretical and application-based, whilst UNSW is stuck between being vocational and theoretical based.

From what I understand, USYD graduates tend to be more effective marketers in the long-run, as they have quite a bit of knowledge as to how things actually work (i.e. underlying principles behind all your decisions), rather than simply how to do things. USYD graduates are thus taught to be more critical and analytical, which is certainly a good quality to have in marketing.

However, it is more difficult to find a job after graduation in marketing if you complete the major at USYD, unless you also get work experience on your own accord whilst studying. UNSW has work placement, where you get credit for working in a company.

In terms of recruitment, from the people I have spoken to, many of the companies do favour USYD and UNSW students. The UNSW student may simply look better as they have work experience (as mentioned above). However, a USYD student with work experience can end up looking better.

Either way, both are good unis to go to

 

[Trebla]

It wouldn't be ethical for an employer to favour someone purely on the basis of which uni they went to...

 

[Rorix]

It wouldn't be ethical for an employer to favour someone purely on the basis of which uni they went to...

I don't see why not.

But ethical or not, they do.

 

[stazi]

It wouldn't be ethical for an employer to favour someone purely on the basis of which uni they went to...

...why not? it is ethical. it is unethical to select someone on the basis of their race. it is ethical to accept someone on the basis of the quality of their education.

 

[koecko]

i think that ppl r talking up unsw commerce way too much atm. i was in the same position as u last yr, and a lot of what i heard was that unsw was better than usyd. in the end, they r pretty much exactly the same. and in first yr, our course seems nearly identical to unsw students. after talking to a few accounting proffessionals last yr, they said usyd and unsw would look no different on a resume. not sure about marketing tho. but i would think its not really a big deal. usyd has a very good reputation in general.

also, dont let last yrs uai fool u. while unsw b comm was a tad higher, they also accepted heaps of ppl who got circa 90 etc. so in the end, i dont think the uai is a very good indicator.

 

[what971]

USyd is better than UNSW in my opinion. At least I want it to be...

 

[Trebla]

it is ethical to accept someone on the basis of the quality of their education.

How is it? Here's a compare the pair example:
Student A - went to USYD to study a degree (say Commerce). He/she manages Pass average in the degree after graduation.
Student B - went to UWS to study the same degree. He/she manages Distinction average + Honours in the degree after graduation.

Would it be ethical for an employer to pick student A, simply because he/she came from USYD, regardless of their obvious differences in achievements?

Selection of an employee shouldn't be based on which uni one went to. It shouldn't be about the "quality of their education", but the quality of the individual. In the end it's the same degree and its the difference in achievements that count because they kinda show your committment to the degree.

I know that some employers do practice this (which is unfortunate) but the fact is that it would be unfair to judge someone purely on that basis.

 

[uhawww]

It's pretty dumb to compare someone with honours to someone who doesn't in the way you just did.



And yeah no idea where you heard it "sucks" at USyd. UNSW is a tad overrated, they're about on par (other than what stazi pointed out).

 

[Trebla]

It's pretty dumb to compare someone with honours to someone who doesn't in the way you just did.

Please explain. I was merely making my point (that it is unethical for an employer to favour someone purely on the basis of which uni they went to) which was questioned previously, by using an obvious example...

 

[uhawww]

Please explain. I was merely making my point (that it is unethical for an employer to favour someone purely on the basis of which uni they went to) which was questioned previously, by using an obvious example...

If the usyd student had honours too they'd probably hire them. That's what the point was.

 

[ditto]

I'm doing Bachelor of Commerce at UNSW and I know that our course materials goes into more detail than the B Business at UTS, in which the equivalent of two of our subjects (ECON1101 and ECON1102) are taught as one.

I'm not sure about USYD, and I think it would be just as good as ours?

I'm loving first yr at UNSW, people r so friendly and luckily the lecturers make the coursework interesting and I enjoy the practical based projects! hehe only problem, they give us too much hw!

well goodluck with your selection + hsc

i better study for midsems!

 

[stazi]

How is it? Here's a compare the pair example:
Student A - went to USYD to study a degree (say Commerce). He/she manages Pass average in the degree after graduation.
Student B - went to UWS to study the same degree. He/she manages Distinction average + Honours in the degree after graduation.
Would it be ethical for an employer to pick student A, simply because he/she came from USYD, regardless of their obvious differences in achievements?
Selection of an employee shouldn't be based on which uni one went to. It shouldn't be about the "quality of their education", but the quality of the individual. In the end it's the same degree and its the difference in achievements that count because they kinda show your committment to the degree.
I know that some employers do practice this (which is unfortunate) but the fact is that it would be unfair to judge someone purely on that basis.

Please explain. I was merely making my point (that it is unethical for an employer to favour someone purely on the basis of which uni they went to) which was questioned previously, by using an obvious example...

That was a nonsensical point. You need to have a more direct comparison rather than "this guy goes to UWS, gets all HDs, does honours, does an MBA, whilst this guy goes to harvard and barely manages to pass all his subjects. Who will they hire?".

Also, the quality of an individual is correlated to the quality of their education. If I get a fantastic education, I would be more advanced in my knowledge of a particular field than someone who received a much worse education.

As I have said, UNSW marketing grads tend to be excellent practically upon graduation, whilst USYD grads are excellent theoretically. If I was an employer without a strong graduate training program, where I need an applicant able to get a running start and independently manage the marketing efforts for a brand, then I would choose the UNSW graduate.
If I wanted an employee who would stay within the organisation for many years, offering lots of career advancement, and training, then I would hire the USYD candidate.

Is this unethical? I don't think so.

 

[Blahtooh]

Hey the posts since my last visit/post have been much more helpful, thanks everyone (esp. Stazi). Good to know it doesn't 'suck' and is comparable to UNSW Bcomm. Yeah, most likely I'll go to Usyd then even though the commerce building is kinda icky.

 

[chronicfootball]

u guys realise dont you that qualifications are not the only selection criteria for a job. personal attributes, leadership skills, work ethic etc are also important. dont think that an employer looks at two candidates and says "hmm he has a BCom at UNSW but she has a BCom as USYD, ill choose so and so". its based on more than your education, there will be an interview and a descision will be made on how suitable the employer thinks you are. its not all black and white, there is always employer discretion. a BCom at UNSW and USYD would be virtually identical in the eyes of an employer, both are highly regarded institutions with approved degrees. do whats best for you in terms of suitability, convenience etc