Uni Entry System about to Collapse (SMH) - (re: UNSW) (2 Viewers)

[MoonlightSonata]

my friend who got a uai of 95.05, who beat me in maths 2 and 3 unit, english and chemistry, did not get into UNSW commerce (which was his first preference). whilst i got a uai 3-4 less than him and got in.
is there anything i can do?

If your friend obtained a UAI above the cut-off and did not receive an offer, tell him to phone the UAC immediately.

 

[Raginsheep]

Problem is, its below the cutoff.

 

[Sparcod]

Well, I was just wondering how there are some peoplewho got UAIs worse than that poor kid (no pun) actually got offered.

 

[poloktim]

Oh no doubt. This is the trashiest article I've seen in a while from SMH.

The amount of rubbish in it is astounding. They need to get their facts straight.

And the whole "crisis" rhetoric is very disappointing.

Agreed. I'd expect that sort of scaremongering in The Telegraph, but not in SMH. Very disappointing indeed.

On another note, what's the big deal? Nobody who got on or over the cut-off was denied entry, UNSW stressed that themselves. They simply allocated a few places for people who got below the cut-off but met other requirements. Other universities do this all the time, especially for early entry programmes run. They allow people into the university based on criteria other than the UAI. Also, I think as an institution of higher learning, especially if they have a reputation to protect, UNSW has every right to hand-pick its students in cases as their admissions office sees fit.

Now onto the full-fee problem the article mentioned. What the hell? They're implying that these students are taking our CS places. I thought they had to work hard in their first year of uni (that's full-fee) in order to try again next year. Aren't they proving by hard work in their first year that they're capable of uni work? =\

 

[stazi]

exactly. its .05 below the cutoff. he may have slipped by unsw's radar, and theres nothing he can do about it.

 

[RideTheLightnin]

I got into B Commerce at UNSW with a 86.00 UAI....so stoked

But i did get
Adv Eng - 83
MX1 - 65
MX2 - 66

Fuck im lucky

 

[YBK]

I got into B Commerce at UNSW with a 86.00 UAI....so stoked

But i did get
Adv Eng - 83
MX1 - 65
MX2 - 66

Fuck im lucky

ahaha! yeah you are! but hey, you made it! lol!!


ummm my marks were mid band E3s for both MX1 and MX2 and a low band 5 for advanced english (83 too i think..)

 

[RideTheLightnin]

ahaha! yeah you are! but hey, you made it! lol!!


ummm my marks were mid band E3s for both MX1 and MX2 and a low band 5 for advanced english (83 too i think..)

Haha yeah go us! I feel a bit bad though...for these people who got 94.xx and what not and didnt make it....but then again life isnt fair

 

[stephenchow]

I reckon they just drew names out of a hat for those who didnt meet the requirements

 

[mimiian]

English and maths results are good indicators. Much better indicators than some random assortment of subjects which produce a UAI. Imagine the person who gets a UAI of 95 but did Biology, Chemistry, PE, Art, Religion, Design & Tech, Music. Using the UAI to assess the person's abilities in Commerce in such a situation would be fairly silly. Much better to look at a combination of UAI and English/maths.

As I said,

Furthermore, failing 2u maths doesn't mean one is doomed to fail in Commerce, majors such as economics or management or marketing require less numerical skills. The fact that everyone takes English as a subject does not automatically qualifies that there is no problem using that as a standard. People who do not excel in English are not necessarily bad Commerce students, there are friends of mine who did ESL english or standard english for HSC but still manage to achieve high marks for commerce subjects in uni. The link between Commerce and English is not as apparent as the link between Law or Literature and English.

Using people's naive subjects selection at the end of year 10 is not a good indicator at all. Using it to assess the person's abilities in Commerce in such a situation would be fairly silly. Very few students at year 10 had a definite idea of what wanted to do and their subjects selection can be influenced by a lot of things other than a pure dedication to Commerce. A student who gets a UAI of 95 but didn't take maths may be as suitable for Commerce as student getting high 80ish UAI. Much better to let the nerds at UNSW admit that they should give warning and tell the students their selection criteria before the release date.

 

[dan_viper88]

Man, I missed out when the cutoff was 95. I just transfered the next year, it's not a big deal. I could have studied at Usyd, UTS or Macquarie. Of the people that 'missed out', if it was close they can go to USYD, if it was a bit off they can go to UTS, and if it was further they can go to Macquarie. Or they can do a B Ec and transfer. I did a B Ec for a year and changed to a B Com. It is seriously not a big deal.

It was mentioned in the UAC booklet, whether students read it or not is not important. It's not the uni's job to say hey look we consider certain subjects to get into commerce and point it out to every student. They placed it in the booklet, thats that.

Are you seriously going to sit there and tell me that if you knew 100% that UNSW considers maths for entry, your marks would have improved, or for english? I don't think so.

As for the people who took standard english - your school probably wouldnt have let you take advanced anyway.

And all those people harping on about 4 unit maths, it looks to me like they have looked at 2 and 3 unit people. Again, your going to go from no maths to 4 units, or even 3. Wake up to yourself.

Well if the university did state that they strongly would choose 1 student over the other for doing 4unit maths over someone who did 2unit maths for example then applicants to the course (B comm) Definatelly DO HAVE THE RIGHT to know what the exact selection criterion is, by withholding critcal selection information like this it may drastically affect someones decsion in which course they would pick in their preferences. The UNI shouldnt provide misleading information to students, i dont agree in your comments, how can you sit and say that its not really a big deal that they didnt clearly state that maths was required, Off course it makes a diffenece, if the UNSW wants to sit and give out offers to below UAI students then they Should clearly state THAT THERE IS SOME FLEXIBILTY IN THE SELECTION PROCESS FOR B COMMERCE STUDENTS!

 

[stephenchow]

Well if the university did state that they strongly would choose 1 student over the other for doing 4unit maths over someone who did 2unit maths for example then applicants to the course (B comm) Definatelly DO HAVE THE RIGHT to know what the exact selection criterion is, by withholding critcal selection information like this it may drastically affect someones decsion in which course they would pick in their preferences. The UNI shouldnt provide misleading information to students, i dont agree in your comments, how can you sit and say that its not really a big deal that they didnt clearly state that maths was required, Off course it makes a diffenece, if the UNSW wants to sit and give out offers to below UAI students then they Should clearly state THAT THERE IS SOME FLEXIBILTY IN THE SELECTION PROCESS FOR B COMMERCE STUDENTS!

It has been said many times before, it's all in the UAC guide.

 

[YBK]

Well if the university did state that they strongly would choose 1 student over the other for doing 4unit maths over someone who did 2unit maths for example then applicants to the course (B comm) Definatelly DO HAVE THE RIGHT to know what the exact selection criterion is, by withholding critcal selection information like this it may drastically affect someones decsion in which course they would pick in their preferences. The UNI shouldnt provide misleading information to students, i dont agree in your comments, how can you sit and say that its not really a big deal that they didnt clearly state that maths was required, Off course it makes a diffenece, if the UNSW wants to sit and give out offers to below UAI students then they Should clearly state THAT THERE IS SOME FLEXIBILTY IN THE SELECTION PROCESS FOR B COMMERCE STUDENTS!

Some people REALLY need to learn how to read.

 

[mimiian]

Sorry thats the dumbest thing I have heard. English and maths are like the building blocks of commerce in Australia. If it was Germany we would have German and maths.

Anyway, another point. UAI is a complete waste of time. Complete idiots get into courses with high uais. How does a uai measure suitability for a course??? Its effectively scaling subjects according to how a) you perform in that subject b) for people taking that subject, how they perform in their other subjects, and what those subjects are. Eg. Economics is a high scaling subject, as is phsycis because a large quantity of able students take the subject. anyway back to topic, how does a uai of of 99.7 with ESL 4 unit maths, physics, and chemistry mean you are suitable for com/law at usyd.

How does a uai of 97 with fuck i dont know pdhpe, biology, design and technology, modern history, advanced english prepare you for commerce at unsw?

why the fuck do you have a commerce course at every university, where there is a compulsorary economics subject in 1st year and yet HSC economics is not a prereq? It's stupid. Seriously, half the course hasnt even studied economics.

How can you accept people with an inflated UAI when they didnt attempt any maths??? Especially when you have a calc and a stats course as core and all the unis.

I know people are going to say something like. We'll just cause we didn't do it doesn't mean we can't. Especially RE maths. Sure thats true. But say back in year 10, they did tell you that to study commerce at uni economics, maths 2 unit, andvanced english, and business studies are all pre reqs. How many people would actually stick with that. you get what to choose one subject.

in my mind half the people who are complaining now would have gone an entirely different direction had they really known.

The uni's should have seperate applications and make their own decisions on who they accept based on their own criteria. If you don't like what unsw, tough luck. what are you going to do?? oh whats that...nothing

Sorry thats the dumbest thing I have heard. Neither English nor maths marks are good indicator of a student's suitability for Commerce.

Anyway, another point. UAI is NOT a complete waste of time. Complete idiots DO NOT get into courses with high uais. Only people who put their efforts into HSC and studied efficiently can into these high UAI courses. UAI effectively show that how much effort you put into your study and how efficiently you studied. A student with 95 UAI but didn't take maths may be as suitable for Commerce as a student with high 80ish UAI but good maths/English marks.

And I can tell you "How does a uai of 97 with fuck i dont know pdhpe, biology, design and technology, modern history, advanced english prepare you for commerce at unsw?" Because the student with 97 UAI is an intelligent student who can study efficiently and take bridging course for maths if he or she really wants to study commerce.

Uni should not suddenly decided to adopt their own selection criteria without informing the students. If you really like what UNSW is doing, tough luck, no other uni has used UNSW way of using their own selection process and UNSW has received lots of criticism for it. what are you going to do?? oh whats that...crying at home while thinking of another way to beat USyd in cut-off for Commerce

 

[lilkiwicutie89]

Maths shouldnt be a prerequisite for commerce, because as you said, its not all maths. And sometimes if their is Maths it isnt difficult at all and would require a few weeks of a bridging course.This move will change the lanscape of the UAI system and i predict that if they continue with this scheme, in a couple of years the whole system will be scraped or revamped.

AGREED..

im prob. doing a bridging cosure.. for statistics -_-

 

[dan_viper88]

It has been said many times before, it's all in the UAC guide.

Look mate i know exactly how to read all it saids in the UAC guide is that maths and english are recommended subjects BUT nowhere does it say that there is a flexible entry scheme that students with good individual subject marks can get in to B Comm with low UAI'S. It may say in the uac guide that for "limited courses at the UNSW, good performance in HSC subjects may be taken in to consideration" BUT NO WHERE IN THE UAC GUIDE OR THE UNSW B COMMERCE COURSE DESCRIPTOR DOES IT SAY THAT THERE IS FLEXIBLE ENTRY SCHEME FOR STUDENTS WITH UAI'S 10 POINTS BELOW THE PUBLISHED CUT OFF! Get real man! You obviously have the reading and understanding problem!

 

[dan_viper88]

It has been said many times before, it's all in the UAC guide.

Refer to comments made above (another misunderstood person)!

 

[dan_viper88]

Sorry thats the dumbest thing I have heard. Neither English nor maths marks are good indicator of a student's suitability for Commerce.

Anyway, another point. UAI is NOT a complete waste of time. Complete idiots DO NOT get into courses with high uais. Only people who put their efforts into HSC and studied efficiently can into these high UAI courses. UAI effectively show that how much effort you put into your study and how efficiently you studied. A student with 95 UAI but didn't take maths may be as suitable for Commerce as a student with high 80ish UAI but good maths/English marks.

And I can tell you "How does a uai of 97 with fuck i dont know pdhpe, biology, design and technology, modern history, advanced english prepare you for commerce at unsw?" Because the student with 97 UAI is an intelligent student who can study efficiently and take bridging course for maths if he or she really wants to study commerce.

Uni should not suddenly decided to adopt their own selection criteria without informing the students. If you really like what UNSW is doing, tough luck, no other uni has used UNSW way of using their own selection process and UNSW has received lots of criticism for it. what are you going to do?? oh whats that...crying at home while thinking of another way to beat USyd in cut-off for Commerce

100% Correct! This is the best thing ive heard all day! Right on man youve got the idea! I absolutely agree with your comments! Theres is no way that what UNSW has done is correct. The only people supporting there decision to give places to inferior UAI students is the people who actually got in cheaply to the B Comm with crapier UAI scores!

 

[Smeed]

It has been said many times before, it's all in the UAC guide.

Maybe you should reread my earlier post and properly investigate the matter before you make such statements:

For those people stating that the UAC guide gives warning by stating that "Performance in selected subjects - limited courses only" can be a determining factor, they should also have noted that right under this it states that these "limited courses" will detail information regarding such schemes in their relevant sections. However nowhere in the "Commerce and Economics" section is there any mention of any special entry scheme, while for other courses such as Engineering, details of any flexible entry schemes are clearly boxed and highlighted.

 

[dan_viper88]

Maybe you should reread my earlier post and properly investigate the matter before you make such statements:

Your absolutely right Smeed some people here are obviously only selectivelly reading and understanding want they want to and not comprehending all of the facts! If a UNI wants to give flexible entry for a particullar course than for God sakes it SHOULD be outlined in the course description.

For those of you with such BIG understanding problems i will provide you with an example to clarify it for you- The USYD allows people applying to the B Architecture to be considered into to the course with a UAI of 5 points below the published cut off. This Flexible entry scheme is clearly outlined to students in the course descriptor before applying.
If the USYD can provide students with a clear indicator of selection criteria then why can't the UNSW!