X
xeuyrawp
Guest
As a relevant (but aside) note, I really think that people need to get over the whole universities = vocational training. The Australian community with its warped ideas of education and work is one of the reasons why the country is such an intellectual and cultural wasteland.
You go to the best, the best universities in the world and for the first few years of your study, you aren't doing vocational training. This is because these universities have and always will be providers of theoretical and general training. The view in these countries has always been that if you want to go out and work, the top universities are not where you go. Maybe you go to a college, technical school, or one of the practical universities.
It's completely related to the issue that people in this country are obsessed with what they can 'do with' their degrees. Of course then, the degrees must have a suitable name, like Bachelor of Actuarial Studies, Bachelor of Media, Bachelor of Marine Biology, etc. When students are in school, they're happy to do things like Extension English and History, but suddenly when they come to uni, it's about a job? It's just crazy. Go to these best universities in the world, and you're looking at one of a handful of named degrees with a whole lot of flexible majors suitable to their areas. Australia seems to have it ass-backwards with huge amounts of named degrees which are inflexible and not at all suited to anything except bureaucracy.
I really think that people need to realise that university isn't for everyone, and as such, universities shouldn't cater for everyone. But of course it's now a money-making exercise (at Macquarie especially). Universities in Australia really don't seem to care about providing an awesome education to students so much as providing them with what they want.
Going back to the thread: Not sure why people completely misrepresent what Macquarie's doing. It's not a massive Core curriculum like the University of Chicago (which noone here would know about given that no Australian unis have the guts to do it), let alone the 'Melbourne Model'. What is happening is:
- Students choose a general area at the beginning of their degree as they do now,
- along the way (usually at the beginning), they have to do one People, Planet, and Participation unit. What this means is that essentially natural scientists have to do a human science unit and vice versa. It's one fucking subject; I'm not sure why the media has such a problem understanding it. I would go so far as to say it's a token effort when compared against Melbourne and even the decent Core curricula of those top unis. The Participation component is pretty straight-forward, but again it is essentially one semester's subject (ie 1/4 time) worth of volunteer work in some form,
- a Capstone unit, which is effectively a unit taken at the end of their study which aims to bring together all their learning in a sort of mini-thesis and seminar.
Ie, it's really not that much; at the most, it's one subject you wouldn't ordinarily do + a couple months of part-time volunteer work + another small unit.
So, do I think that what Macquarie is trying to do is good? Yes. Are they going about it the wrong way? Of course, it's Macquarie.
Edit: Ack, as for 'building ethical and moral character', that honestly sounds ridiculous, especially coming from a Vice Chancellor who suggested that unit conveners can't be trusted setting their own textbooks as texts because conveners would rip off students. What a fuckwit. Try leading from the top, Steven.![Roll Eyes :rolleyes: :rolleyes:]()
/waits to be called an elitist or something.
You go to the best, the best universities in the world and for the first few years of your study, you aren't doing vocational training. This is because these universities have and always will be providers of theoretical and general training. The view in these countries has always been that if you want to go out and work, the top universities are not where you go. Maybe you go to a college, technical school, or one of the practical universities.
It's completely related to the issue that people in this country are obsessed with what they can 'do with' their degrees. Of course then, the degrees must have a suitable name, like Bachelor of Actuarial Studies, Bachelor of Media, Bachelor of Marine Biology, etc. When students are in school, they're happy to do things like Extension English and History, but suddenly when they come to uni, it's about a job? It's just crazy. Go to these best universities in the world, and you're looking at one of a handful of named degrees with a whole lot of flexible majors suitable to their areas. Australia seems to have it ass-backwards with huge amounts of named degrees which are inflexible and not at all suited to anything except bureaucracy.
I really think that people need to realise that university isn't for everyone, and as such, universities shouldn't cater for everyone. But of course it's now a money-making exercise (at Macquarie especially). Universities in Australia really don't seem to care about providing an awesome education to students so much as providing them with what they want.
Going back to the thread: Not sure why people completely misrepresent what Macquarie's doing. It's not a massive Core curriculum like the University of Chicago (which noone here would know about given that no Australian unis have the guts to do it), let alone the 'Melbourne Model'. What is happening is:
- Students choose a general area at the beginning of their degree as they do now,
- along the way (usually at the beginning), they have to do one People, Planet, and Participation unit. What this means is that essentially natural scientists have to do a human science unit and vice versa. It's one fucking subject; I'm not sure why the media has such a problem understanding it. I would go so far as to say it's a token effort when compared against Melbourne and even the decent Core curricula of those top unis. The Participation component is pretty straight-forward, but again it is essentially one semester's subject (ie 1/4 time) worth of volunteer work in some form,
- a Capstone unit, which is effectively a unit taken at the end of their study which aims to bring together all their learning in a sort of mini-thesis and seminar.
Ie, it's really not that much; at the most, it's one subject you wouldn't ordinarily do + a couple months of part-time volunteer work + another small unit.
So, do I think that what Macquarie is trying to do is good? Yes. Are they going about it the wrong way? Of course, it's Macquarie.
Edit: Ack, as for 'building ethical and moral character', that honestly sounds ridiculous, especially coming from a Vice Chancellor who suggested that unit conveners can't be trusted setting their own textbooks as texts because conveners would rip off students. What a fuckwit. Try leading from the top, Steven.
/waits to be called an elitist or something.
Last edited by a moderator: