Disadvantage going to UWS? or not? (1 Viewer)

[Jacks]

Why should people who don't put the effort into getting higher UAIs get to go to uni? I live in North Parramatta, went to a public school in Western Sydney, and am one of the few students in my school who got a UAI of 90+...the reason for this being that the other students were all lazy fucks who barely did any work. Now most of these students are going to the Uni of Western Sydney, and it is quite amazing to me that these people are actually able to go to University.
Universities are meant to be meritocratic insitutions; not just anyone should be able to get a degree. One might even argue that students being able to attend universities such as UWS which have lower cut-offs may actually be contributing to the skills shortage, because these lower-quality candidates are doing degrees instead of learning trades at TAFE

And yes, you generally will be at a disadvantage going to UWS over another University unless you supplement with better grades/extra-curricular activites. UWS has poorer prestige - both at home and abroad - poorer facilities, poorer-quality students and a poorer academic reputation. the end

Getting a lower UAI and getting into UWS does not guarantee anybody a degree. A degree is something you have to work for and earn regardless of what university you attend. If they are as lazy as you say they are, then perhaps they will not satisfy UWS' minimum requirements and be put on conditional enrolment or be asked to leave. I say this of course without entering into the entire debate concerning whether or not one's UAI actually represents their effort or intelligence...of course it does in a fair amount of cases, and perhaps it is true about the people you use as examples, but I'm sure you are aware it is not true in every case.

I think this debate can be ended quite simply. Those who don't go to UWS, but think negatively of it, just be silently ecstatic that you don't study there. Those who do go to UWS and have no qualms studying there have nothing to answer to except their own satisfaction, and if there happen to be any students going to UWS that think they will be disadvantaged by going there, spend your time studying instead of writing in these forums and transfer out.

 

[melsc]

Yes, I can't speak for Hypertrophy but I know I chose UWS for a few reasons:
1. They are the only uni to offer law/criminology as Natstar said
2. My UAI (94.0) would only get me into the other uni's full fee UTS, perhaps UNSW
3. Distance/travelwise it is quick, easy and cheap, only $50 to park for the year and it takes me 20 mins to each campus
4. I got a partial scholarship
5. I like the practical nature of the course
6. I didn't like the other combinations avaliable at other uni's
7. Despite bad rep the course seems great and the students do well in moot competitions etc
8. I know a few grads who spoke highly of it and did well

As for Hypertrophy he had the choice between UTS and UWS and there is a thread somewhere about it in the law forum.

 

[hYperTrOphY]

Well elaborate for me - what made you go there? Be honest.

It is the only uni to offer Criminology and Law.
It's location is optimal.
I was offered a scholarship.

UWS is the university which will best meet my interests, location and current circumstances - on the surface it would appear an easy decision. The only factor which made me question UWS was its level of prestige. In the end, I had to decide what was more important: doing the course I want, where I want, with financial assistance - but lacking prestige; or doing a course I am not as interested in, at a location further away, putting more pressure on my financial position - with the added benefit of attending a uni which is more 'prestigious'. My decision was that the added prestige of the university - not the graduate - did not compensate the benefits I would be missing out on if I chose not to go to UWS.

If I do well enough academically, I would hope that any employer would consider my results - my prestigiousness - as more important than that of the university of which I attended. In saying that, I maintain that if I find the quality of the education received at UWS as not adequate, I will transfer.

 

[melsc]

Actually you can't do it at USYD and UNSW, do you think we wouldn't have check it out first? There is no Criminology major in the USYD Soc sci course and UNSW has a specific degree called Soc Sci (Criminology) which is not able to be combined with law only standard soc sci.

I wondered if I was offered a place in another uni would I take it? I still don't know, lucky for me my UAI made that decision for me.

 

[hYperTrOphY]

What I want to know is if the majority of UWS students (ie, obviously they couldn't get into a better university, while a minority may have picked UWS for other reasons, im sure most of its students couldnt get into one of the other universities), would still have picked UWS had they been offered a comparable course at UTS/USYD/NSW/UOW/UMQ?

Probably not.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

What I want to know is if the majority of UWS students (ie, obviously they couldn't get into a better university, while a minority may have picked UWS for other reasons, im sure most of its students couldnt get into one of the other universities), would still have picked UWS had they been offered a comparable course at UTS/USYD/NSW/UOW/UMQ?

Well if you were so smart you would have realised the obvious answer to the question is no - because from examples we can see that people whom recieve higher uai's usually go to UNSW/USYD/UTS/UMQ....

 

[melsc]

politik, I still dont know why you even care

 

[melsc]

Yes ,but had I got into another uni I would not feel the need to put other's down to make myself feel important. I would never put anyone down based on where they study whether it be uni, tafe, private institutions and I would not make generalisations about things I just don't know for a fact. I also wonder what your opinion would be like if you went to UWS?

Many people here have agreed UWS is not the greatest uni and yet you still aren't satisfied, please just stop causing trouble. Its times like this we need a mod to keep things under control when immaturity and trolling cause problems.

 

[melsc]

And why is that? I still think it is not very nice for you to put people down based on their university, I hate that kind of snobbery. You don't have to come in here and cause trouble yet you choose to. Please in the future, make your comments about UWS and then leave.

 

[nwatts]

And why is that? I still think it is not very nice for you to put people down based on their university, I hate that kind of snobbery. You don't have to come in here and cause trouble yet you choose to. Please in the future, make your comments about UWS and then leave.

Ah I think you'll find he's putting down the university not its students. Anyone's allowed to voice their views on a particular institution.

 

[melsc]

Ah I think you'll find he's putting down the university not its students. Anyone's allowed to voice their views on a particular institution.

He actually does put down the students, I have no problem with him voicing his opinion about the uni provided he is mature and fair about it. These threads come up often and I don't expect people to lie and tell everyone that the uni is perfect but I would expect some respect for both the students and the institution, after all you don't have UWS students discussing the shortfalls of the other uni's in their subforums

 

[nwatts]

He actually does put down the students, I have no problem with him voicing his opinion about the uni provided he is mature and fair about it. These threads come up often and I don't expect people to lie and tell everyone that the uni is perfect but I would expect some respect for both the students and the institution, after all you don't have UWS students discussing the shortfalls of the other uni's in their subforums

That's because the shortfalls of other unis in comparison to those of UWS are negligible.

The problem is not with people criticising UWS, it's with how UWS students respond in their uni's defence. You guys go overboard, when there is no reason to defend what is a sub-par university. UTS is one year older than UWS and compare the two unis. One is a glorified tafe, the other is an extremely competitive university. Stop defending UWS. Most of you are there because you can't make it into other universities. Hypertrophy is one of the few who have actually chosen to go there.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Excellent post.

sub-par university

One is a glorified tafe

This is why we need more inter-uni competition

 

[nwatts]

We cant change the fact that it was established only 11 years ago. We cant change the fact that there are more established, longer living uni's in the same city that have had time to build a reputation and find a niche that people can base comparisons on.

Oh shut up. Compare UWS and UTS. There's a year or two difference in age between them. UTS houses what's arguably our country's finest communication faculty. It's an extremely competitive option for those looking at IT-based degrees. It's a very good university. UWS is the same age and it has nothing.

 

[melsc]

I don't feel I am going overboard. Personally I think calling it a glorified tafe is stupid, there is nothing wrong with tafe and UWS is a university whether you like it or not.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

UWS is the same age and it has nothing.

I imagine if UWS was all at one campus (say in one large building at parramatta) and had a different name (western sydney has negative connotations) there would be less hate for UWS.

I do hope you understand however that a University that has a general perception of lower-achieving students (and before someone assumes that this is my opinion, I dont at all think that UWS students are any less intelligent than any other tertiary student), is a disadvantage for the future of those students? Sure it's great to have a University that caters to students who don't have the outlandish entry requirements for other Universities, but ultimately, why create a University as such when the students are disadvantaged by this 'perception'?

True - UWS Students are somewhat disadvantaged by this 'perception', but I think it's debatable how much of it is university perception and how much of it is just based upon perhaps poorer candidates which graduate from UWS.

Why charge students the same fees as those who attend other Universities when they may earn a lower starting salary (and hence be disadvantaged in paying off their debt).

I think UWS fees are lower actually :/

 

[Benny1103]

I must say that it's good that natstar no longer goes crazy in these sorts of threads, unlike some other angered (but in denial about it) lass.

 

[melsc]

I imagine if UWS was all at one campus (say in one large building at parramatta) and had a different name (western sydney has negative connotations) there would be less hate for UWS.

:uhhuh: I agree

 

[hYperTrOphY]

I think if I went to UWS I honestly wouldnt involve myself in such politics. I didnt come here to change your opinion, I simply want people to accept the fact that UWS is such and such and see if someone can suggest a way of fixing UWS's status problem. Whats the point of having a University at all if it has such a bad reputation/perception?

University prestige is about a high opinion of the institution due to its previous success. Thus, by the very definition of prestige it is obvious it is something that has to be developed over time. This can be illustrated by looking at the history of most, if not all, Sydney universities. UTS, Macq etc were once considered far from prestigious. However, over time, these uni's developed and the more graduates they produced, the more opportunity the university had of gaining a positive repuatation and thus prestige. One could argue that UWS has developed faster than its rival Sydney universities. In due time, UWS may reach a level similar to USyd/UNSW/UTS/Macq.
Edit: I was unaware that UTS was established only 2 years before UWS.

In saying that, UWS does have some characteristics which could inhibit its development. Most significantly, in my opinion, is the uni's lower cut-offs. Cut-offs are perceived by prospective students as representing the quality of the uni and/or the course. Consequently, students put their preferences in order of UAI cut-off. The high achievers end up at the same universities and the cycle continues. Offering less places could be one way to fix the problem, but that would most likely be considered 'politically incorrect'.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

One could argue that UWS has developed faster than its rival Sydney universities. In due time, UWS may reach a level similar to USyd/UNSW/UTS/Macq.

Before politik responds to this with 'BUT UTS IS ONLY A BIT OLDER!' what would essentially become UTS is much older and more organised than what eventually would become UWS.

Offering less places could be one way to fix the problem, but that would most likely be considered 'politically incorrect'.

I think it would be a good idea for UWS to set up some 'special' degrees that perhaps they specialise in. Criminology would be a good idea (given that we're in western sydney )...

With the introduction of the Medical school next year (which looks great by the way) I think we'll have a course that will start attracting much higher uai's.

There is no doubt that it is the 'perception'

Oh but what I'm saying is... perhaps perception matches reality... and the reason why UWS graduates have lower starting sallaries etc is because the graduates are of a poorer quality for personal reasons, not university bias