UNSW imposes minimum entry score of 80+ ATAR (2 Viewers)

[someth1ng]

On what basis could you justify that?

Firstly, let me ask you, how many graduates are unemployed or can only find casual or part-time employment?

Have a look here:http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4102.0Chapter6002008
PEOPLE AGED 25-64 YEARS: HIGHEST NON-SCHOOL QUALIFICATION shows that there's a pretty constant amount of diplomas and advanced diplomas but Bachelors degrees are getting more and more common. If there are quite a lot of unemployed graduates, I think there's a problem.

 

[someth1ng]

Here, you can find the number of students in a year: http://firstyear.chem.usyd.edu.au/chem1901/exam_statistics.shtml
Here, you can find the mark distribution of students: http://assign3.chem.usyd.edu.au/firstyear/exam_statistics.cfm?unit=chem1901&session=june&year=2012

 

[brent012]

Here, you can find the mark distribution of students: http://assign3.chem.usyd.edu.au/firstyear/exam_statistics.cfm?unit=chem1901&session=june&year=2012

I'm not familiar with that site but as far as I can tell they are only counting passing students, did you add up the bar graph frequencies and compare to the stats in the first one? (i cbb doing it lol)

 

[someth1ng]

Here, you can find the number of students in a year: http://firstyear.chem.usyd.edu.au/chem1901/exam_statistics.shtml
Here, you can find the mark distribution of students: http://assign3.chem.usyd.edu.au/firstyear/exam_statistics.cfm?unit=chem1901&session=june&year=2012

I'm not familiar with that site but as far as I can tell they are only counting passing students, did you add up the bar graph frequencies and compare to the stats in the first one? (i cbb doing it lol)

If my counting is correct, in the final exam, there were 242 students that passed out of 246 students (I counted this last time too and got the same number). That's less than 2% that failed the final exam.

It's unlikely that much more than that failed because of quizzes/lab. Realistically, a maximum, I would say would be around 3-4%.

In 2011, 215 passed the CHEM1901 exam out of 219 students - that's like ~2% failure rate.
In 2012, 243 passed the CHEM1901 exam out of 246 students - that's like ~2% failure rate.

In 2011, 462 passed the CHEM1101 exam out of 521 students - that's like ~8% failure rate.
In 2012, 714 passed the CHEM1101 exam out of 776 students - that's like ~8% failure rate.

In 2011, 406 passed the CHEM1001 exam out of 503 students - that's like ~19% failure rate.
In 2012, 421 passed the CHEM1001 exam out of 487 students - that's like ~14% failure rate.

The average failure rate would be like 10% if you include CHEM1001.

Maybe I did make a counting error but that's not too relevant.

 

[brent012]

It's unlikely that much more than that failed because of quizzes/lab. Realistically, a maximum, I would say would be around 3-4%.

It's a bit counter intuitive but does the normal level chem subject have a more reasonable fail rate? The advanced subject likely has a good sample of students, most of them would have been high achievers in the HSC to be doing the advanced course or intrinsically motivated to choose the advanced subject over the normal one. 3-4% is still extremely low though.

 

[someth1ng]

It's a bit counter intuitive but does the normal level chem subject have a more reasonable fail rate? The advanced subject likely has a good sample of students, most of them would have been high achievers in the HSC to be doing the advanced course or intrinsically motivated to choose the advanced subject over the normal one. 3-4% is still extremely low though.

Around 8% for the exam, so maybe 11-12% overall.

Fundamentals varies a lot more where the fail rate for the exam is around 15-20% - I would expect maybe 20-25% fail rate overall.

I'm not surprised that the fail rate for lower levels is higher because as far as I know, quite often, they are all scaled against each other (this also happens in physics).

 

[asianese]

TBH....UNSW didn't need to make this public at all...They should just restrict the number of available places on all courses and the ATAR's would NATURALLY go up - as opposed to this external minimum of 80. As some have said it seems like a publicity stunt...

 

[isildurrrr1]

TBH....UNSW didn't need to make this public at all...They should just restrict the number of available places on all courses and the ATAR's would NATURALLY go up - as opposed to this external minimum of 80. As some have said it seems like a publicity stunt...

it is. pretty much all UNSW courses are already 80+ atar

 

[EpikHigh]

TBH....UNSW didn't need to make this public at all...They should just restrict the number of available places on all courses and the ATAR's would NATURALLY go up - as opposed to this external minimum of 80. As some have said it seems like a publicity stunt...

Of course it's a publicity stunt. By imposing this benchmark they'll seem more 'prestigious'

 

[Emily Howard]

I agree with the cut-off - in fact, I think the minimum should be higher than 80 - more around 85, I think.

The UTS one is here: http://www.uts.edu.au/future-studen...ool-students/apply-school/eligiblity-criteria

lol

i raked up D's in my first degree n i was under 80

wat bullshit

 

[Emily Howard]

ps dis wos at unsw

 

[albertcamus]

Also like a lot of people just go to uni because it seems the "normal thing to do" and don't really work at uni at all - a lot of the people in this group are probably those with lower ATARs.

 

[AnimeX]

How many people actually get below 80?

Is it 50 people per 0.05 mark of ATAR?

 

[brent012]

How many people actually get below 80?

I believe ~70 ATAR is the middle of the HSC cohort

 

[golgo13]

How many people actually get below 80?

Is it 50 people per 0.05 mark of ATAR?

It depends on a year to year basis, when i did it, 17% of those that applied to UAC for and ATAR got 90+.
I think its a scheme to reduce the amount of graduates flooding the market, just a thought no real backing hahahah

 

[brent012]

I think its a scheme to reduce the amount of graduates flooding the market, just a thought no real backing hahahah

It won't though, the saturated fields mostly have high cut offs.

 

[LoveHateSchool]

Most UNSW courses are above 80 anyway.

Just wondering if the flat 80 cut off is not counting 1) Their subject bonus point scheme that is pretty generous, 2) AAA (yeah sleect rural schools AAA might be quite now as they give it to anyone wanting to study at UNSW) and 3) Not really 80 due to EAS and other schemes.

Unis seems to be in a race to have high cut offs, but than have so many alternative schemes that the inflation just makes them look prestigious. Anyway, for a lot of course a mere number is not the best measure anyway.

 

[enoilgam]

Also like a lot of people just go to uni because it seems the "normal thing to do" and don't really work at uni at all - a lot of the people in this group are probably those with lower ATARs.

I've definitely noticed this - some people just seem to be there for the sake of it - but I dont think it always correlates to ATAR.

On the issue, it doesnt seem like it will have much impact anyway considering UNSW cut-offs. If they are serious about actually improving the quality of degrees, maybe they should consider diversifying their application process as opposed to relying solely on something arbitrary like an ATAR cut-off.

 

[brent012]

I've definitely noticed this - some people just seem to be there for the sake of it - but I dont think it always correlates to ATAR.

Bit of a generalisation, but from my observation a lot of these people are attracted to commerce degrees.

 

[enoilgam]

Bit of a generalisation, but from my observation a lot of these people are attracted to commerce degrees.

Commerce is a decent general degree if you arent too sure what you want to do.