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

[mimiian]

Reading lessons for you. He doesn't go to unsw.

Reading lesson for you, I said IF it is filled by people like him. When did i ever say he go to UNSW?

 

[Raginsheep]

Reading lesson for you, I said IF it is filled by people like him. When did i ever say he go to UNSW?

Then you should make your sentences clearer,

I already got the place I want, but certainly not in UNSW, if it is filled with people like you.

 

[poloktim]

Seriously, do u really think u can get a high UAI without any effort into ur study? Ask any sensible man anywhere and you will get the answer NO! What you said is purely subjective individual experience and people have no way of assuring what you said it's true.

What you said is also just as presumptuous. You have no way of proving everybody with a high UAI studied their arse off. Working hard can improve your chances (with a rather high probability that it will), but that doesn't mean that not working at all will definitely destroy them. Sure you won't have a good chance of getting a decent UAI putting no effort in, but you could be one of the few that knows what they're doing, and doesn't need to study.

What about people who get a UAI of 95 but didn't take Maths and missed the official cut-off by 0.1. It is absurd to suggest that these students are no more suitable commerce student than student who get 80ish UAI but did math. After all there are a lot of commerce majors such as Marketing and Management which requires less numerical skill and these students who didn't do maths can still excel in them.

It's not absurd at all. These people missed out on being selected because they failed to meet the selection criteria. That is they didn't achieve the required UAI, or the UNSW Commerce admissions office didn't see them as a very beneficial addition to their faculty. Everybody in Commerce is still required to take accounting, and possibly quantative methods. Mathematics and English were also the key selection factors, not just mathematics.

Yes, University do have the right to choose people which it believes will be able to do the required work better. But it should INFORMED the students what is their selection criteria and how they select it. As dan_viper88 said it: 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!

It said there were alternate entry schemes for UNSW. It's not the university's problem if some students failed to contact the faculty regarding this.

yes, no other uni has got criticism for it because they TELL students what they expect.

Not all universities do. Some universities simply offer places to people who don't meet the published selection criteria. I know of one in particular that does. They're not required to publish all forms of selection criteria. Again, it's the discression of the university.

If you read the UAC guide, you will find Medicine requires an interview and UMAT, similar with Creative Arts or Engineering. Again, 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!

See the above.

Also, has it occurred to anybody that UNSW Commerce might have decided to follow through with this scheme after the UAC guide was published? While it's undesirable, and regretful that this might happen, it's always a possibility.

I already got the place I want, but certainly not in UNSW if it is filled with people like you.

Ad-hominem. Anyway:

I don't go to UNSW. I am defending them.

 

[dan_viper88]

Edited dan_viper88 post since he seems to lack a grasp of basic english grammar.




Tom, Dick or Harry CAN NOT DO EXT 2 MATHS IF THEY DO NOT HAVE PASSION FOR IT OR ARE NOT GOOD AT THE SUBJECT!!! If they do the ext 2 course and get high marks in it, then clearly they are able to do commerce. Provided they achieve an acceptable mark in their other subjects. That is exactly what UNSW did anyway. A UAI of >85 isn't bad.

If you do well in maths, it means you are a capable student and can do good in almost anything. Add to that a good grasp of language, and you have the PERFECT commerce student.

If somebody is simply EXCELLENT at literature and has NO IDEA about maths, then they will NOT do good in commerce. They can get a 100 UAI but if their subjects are irrelevant to the course they're going to do at uni, then what makes you so sure they'll succeed in the course.

You do realise there are people who are good at art style subjects such as music, languages but COMPLETELY crap at scientific subjects. What place does that kid have in commerce, even if he did achieve a high UAI?

And people say that you dont always know what you're going to do when you pick your subjects in year11. Well, that's not all that relevant because you are supposed to pick the subjects that you ENJOY, and NOT the ones that will give you a chance to get into the course that you THINK you'll enjoy.

All you people saying that you would've done maths if you knew it increased your chances of being accepted in commerce should think twice about it, if maths increases your chance of getting into commerce, then it means it's relevant to the course. Now if you didnt chose to do maths because you dont enjoy it, then why would you even think about doing commerce?

UNSW was fair. Stop complaining.

Look mate if correcting my post is the best response that you have to my comments then your not worth the time of day as you can't logically converse with someone. By the way my english skills are far superior to yours as i am sure i got a far better mark then you in HSC English.

 

[dan_viper88]

I already got the place I want, but certainly not in UNSW if it is filled with people like you.

Your 100% correct all these inferior uai scored people can stick there offers where the sun doesn't shine, as far as im concerned i got the exact offer that i wanted. If the UNSW want to let anyone into their degrees then good luck to them, but dont sit and publish that the minimum UAI cut off is 95.10 to make your uni look superior. If your going to allow students with UAI'S of 85 into the course then state that your minimum accepted UAI into your course is 85 not 95+!

 

[dan_viper88]

BA
HA
HA
HA
HA
HA
HA
HA
HA
Because HSC English is the world-wide gauge for proficiency in the English language right?

No but in NSW it gives you a good indicator!

 

[poloktim]

Your 100% correct all these inferior uai scored people can stick there offers where the sun doesn't shine, as far as im concerned i got the exact offer that i wanted. If the UNSW want to let anyone into their degrees then good luck to them, but dont sit and publish that the minimum UAI cut off is 95.10 to make your uni look superior. If your going to allow students with UAI'S of 85 into the course then state that your minimum accepted UAI into your course is 85 not 95+!

Perhaps it's the candidates who are more concerned about which university has the higher UAI, and not the universities themselves.

I don't quite get your fascination with a cut-off though. They published the cut-off at 95.10 because they were willing to accept anybody who got 95.10+, other than that, they hand-picked people who they believed could stand a chance doing the course.

 

[YBK]

No but in NSW it gives you a good indicator!

It is a good indicator.
It gives you a good indication.



Yes, I'm sure you did better than me.

 

[dan_viper88]

No it doesn't, HSC english is the biggest load of bullshit in the entire world that does not show if you have any abilities with english whatsoever, all it shows is can you memorise left leaning bullshit and regurgitate it with enough flowery words.

I say this having gotten 96 in it, so shut the fuck up. You're wrong.

Your such a hypocrite, one your saying that HSC English is bullshit and then on the otherhand your trying to support your claim by stating that you know better then me by telling me you got 96 in HSC English.

If your so proficient in the English language then why are you resorting to swearing. LOSER!

 

[dan_viper88]

Damn straight, and what's wrong with that?

It's just like offering courses via interview and student application, there's nothing wrong with it. Just because some people who had UAI's under the amount got in doesn't mean that suddenly there are dropkicks doing the course. It means that they have spare places and allocate them to people who deserve them through other means.

It's fucking retarded to have an issue with this.

All i've been saying in the last 100 bloody threads is that if they want to give out extra places then tell applicants that they are going to give out these extra places
before hand. I dont have a problem if they give out more places, i think its great. But i strongly believe that they should at least notify students that they are going to do this!

 

[dan_viper88]

Oh fantastic argument. How is that even relevant to the task at hand? I'm saying a barely shaved chimp could do well at english if they memorised the talking points.

Which is what people do. English is not for creative people. And I'm demonstrating that I did well in the subject by learning the talking points you ill-informed degenerate fool.

Why on earth is this such an issue for you? You're a disgrace to the name Daniel.

By the way MORON my names not DANIEL.
Fuck you man, im not the one who started all this English language bullshit! I was just intially concerned with the way the UNSW went about there offering of places. The rest of all your comments are a bunch of crap.

 

[poloktim]

Damn straight, and what's wrong with that?

It's just like offering courses via interview and student application, there's nothing wrong with it. Just because some people who had UAI's under the amount got in doesn't mean that suddenly there are dropkicks doing the course. It means that they have spare places and allocate them to people who deserve them through other means.

It's fucking retarded to have an issue with this.

I agree. It should have been a non-issue. UNSW isn't the first university to do this at all. Somebody who knows the article's author probably didn't get into UNSW commerce (I'm being rather presumptuous, I know).

 

[dan_viper88]

Why are you concerned? Lay it out. No one's missing out, your anger is misguided and unfounded.

So far all I'm seeing is ill-placed intellectual arrogance.

The only anger that im projecting is towards the rude comments that you made towards me in your threads. Like ive said a million times before im glad that their giving out more places to people but i just dont like the way they went about it, they should have at least said that they were going to do this prior.

 

[dan_viper88]

ALSO COOL MORON YOU WANNA FIGHT SHARKS VERSUS JETS LETS GO MAN I'M LAYIN IT ALL DOWN ON THE TABLE BUDDY BY THE WHARF LETS GO MAN BARE KNUCKLE I KNOWSO MANY WAYS TO KILL A MAN I COULD TAKE A FUCKIN PIMENTO AND SHOOT YOU AND BAM YOU'D BE DEAD MAN

DEAD I TELLS YA.

I'mma warning you boy

WOW someone needs a psychiatrist!!!

 

[vnblueberry]

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

thing is, i feel so bad for my friend
i mean, my uai was WAY off (4-5uai) cutoff, he was .05, beat me in all maths and english. and didnt get in. are you sure there is NOTHING he can do about it?

 

[poloktim]

"And it's a disgrace that they're letting people into medicine by letting them do some other exam when they all have a UAI or some other jazz".

Fucking retarded the lot of it.

I used medicine as an example as to other ways universities look at accepting people with more criteria than just a UAI. UNSW isn't the first to develop other selection criterion, and they deserve non of this harassment.

It's good to have other selection criterion than just a number. More ways than one.

 

[stazi]

short of him contacting the dean an outlining his situation (unlikely to work), or waiting for the late round, no there isn't.

Predicted response:
"I got into B Commerce with a 90 UAI. My friend beat me in maths and english and got 95.05. Can he get in?"
"The cutoff is 95.10. No"

 

[sunjet]

dan_viper88 since when do universities publicly announce how many spots they have for a course?

 

[mimiian]

What you said is also just as presumptuous. You have no way of proving everybody with a high UAI studied their arse off. Working hard can improve your chances (with a rather high probability that it will), but that doesn't mean that not working at all will definitely destroy them. Sure you won't have a good chance of getting a decent UAI putting no effort in, but you could be one of the few that knows what they're doing, and doesn't need to study.

What you said is presumptuous. It is common sense that people who achieve high UAI generally do put effort into their study. And with absolutely no effort in study you probably won't get a very high UAI at all, unless ur definition of high is 30ish. What I said merely states the obvious, why do you keep using these extremely few examples to rebut a generally accepted fact which everyone agreed upon.

It's not absurd at all. These people missed out on being selected because they failed to meet the selection criteria. That is they didn't achieve the required UAI, or the UNSW Commerce admissions office didn't see them as a very beneficial addition to their faculty. Everybody in Commerce is still required to take accounting, and possibly quantative methods. Mathematics and English were also the key selection factors, not just mathematics.

Yeah sure, they failed to meet the selection criteria which the UNSW simply decided to adopt overnight without properly INFORM the students. As Smeed said "naturally you would expect at least 2 years warning for something like this so people would know which subjects to pick to assist them in receiving offers for their desired course."

It said there were alternate entry schemes for UNSW. It's not the university's problem if some students failed to contact the faculty regarding this.

First of all, there is not enough reasonable notice for students to know there are other criteria. Alternate entry schemes generally means EAS or special place for Indigenous Australians. In any other uni for any other field, if there is another selection criteria other than UAI, the UAC guide clearly states. eg: Medicine requires interview and UMAT. And Let me REPEAT dan_viper88's word again: "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 10 points below the published cut-off!"

Let me quote another one:

Performance in Year 12 subjects - limited courses only.For details read the relevant sections in the UNSW entry..
now feeling i'm on something, i look up the UNSW commerce entry in the guide and saw no details regarding this..except (paraphrasing) 'for addictional information read the handbook or ring the institution' then as some people (including the vulturous SMH reporter) i rang the number but it was engaged..
this all seems very dodgy to me, but i think this is enough to remove them of liability. Though this does seem to be a competitive practice directed at USYD..considering their commerce cut-offs were higher last year signifiing a more in demand course (thus in the eyes of many) better quality (although not necessarily true) UNSW may of been lured to rise the cut-offs for pure ego..
to me this does seem dodgy..for people getting higher UAIs (a point or more) than last years commerce cut-offs and not getting in because other people who got 85 took their place..i do question UNSW...

The fact that the vast majority of HSC students (that's why the news came as a surprise to everyone) do not know UNSW commerce accept students below the cut-off (exclude EAS) shows the lack of reasonable notice. Maybe it's time for these nerds at UNSW to communicate with students more often.

Not all universities do. Some universities simply offer places to people who don't meet the published selection criteria. I know of one in particular that does. They're not required to publish all forms of selection criteria. Again, it's the discression of the university.

Only UNSW and UTS are frequently offering places to people below the cut-off. And "The cutoffs indicate the lowest uai accepted for entry into the course they do not represent the average ability of the students accepted for the course" (refer to page 73 of 2007 UAC guide). What's the point of a selection criteria if people can get into the course without meeting the selection criteria?

Also, has it occurred to anybody that UNSW Commerce might have decided to follow through with this scheme after the UAC guide was published? While it's undesirable, and regretful that this might happen, it's always a possibility.

This doesn't give them the excuse of not informing the students about their selection criteria. And no uni should suddenly decides to throw in a selection scheme without informing the students. It's like one day UNSW medicine suddenly decides that everyone who wants to do Medicine must did PDHPE for HSC while don't clearly tell the students about their new selection criteria, how unreasonable is that?

Ad-hominem. Anyway

I did not use the statement "I already got the place I want, but certainly not in UNSW if it is filled with people like you" to construct any logical argument, I was merely stating a personal opinion about the place i want to be or don't want to be, hence there is no logical fallacy or Ad-hominem in that sentence.

 

[mimiian]

I used medicine as an example as to other ways universities look at accepting people with more criteria than just a UAI. UNSW isn't the first to develop other selection criterion, and they deserve non of this harassment.

It's good to have other selection criterion than just a number. More ways than one.

I agree that it is good to have other selection criterion than just UAI, but all I am asking is that UNSW INFORMS the students about their new selection criteria. In any other uni for any other field, if there is another selection criteria other than UAI, the UAC guide clearly states it. eg: Medicine requires interview and UMAT.