New gpa style (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Kutay
- Start date
redruM
Breathe and Stop
- Joined
- May 11, 2004
- Messages
- 3,954
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2003
Oh snap!!GoodToGo said:
I thought I would be the only one to question that...I looked it up at dictionary.com and Pwar's used it perfectly. Yeah it has the same meaning as restrospectively.
I realised, when it comes to most things, you can't fuck with him.
X
xeuyrawp
Guest
I read up to there. (I'm kiddingredruM said:
) Anyway, go for a Commonwealth dictionary like Chambers. You'll feel better about yourself and your intellectual snobbery.
Me neither. From what I gather, some guy heard something in a lecture, with someone telling him something similar, and that something is vaguely related to mark aligning or some such.GoodToGo said:
goldendawn
ὄσον ζῆς...
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2004
- Messages
- 1,579
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
GoodToGo said:
n00bs,
- Retroactive denotes that past (already complete) circumstances will be affected. Retrospective denotes looking into the past.
There used to be some really good (and really old) posts on this stuff but I don't know what has happened to the search function lately, it doesn't come up with anything a lot of the time.
Basically, it's a number from 0(?) to 100, based on your actual mark, rather than your grade.
http://www.science.usyd.edu.au/cstudent/ug/wam.shtml
1. What is a WAM?
A Weighted Average Mark (WAM) is the average mark in the units of study completed by a student, weighted according to the credit point value and academic level of the particular unit.
Basically, it's a number from 0(?) to 100, based on your actual mark, rather than your grade.
http://www.science.usyd.edu.au/cstudent/ug/wam.shtml
1. What is a WAM?
A Weighted Average Mark (WAM) is the average mark in the units of study completed by a student, weighted according to the credit point value and academic level of the particular unit.
X
xeuyrawp
Guest
For the noobs:
I don't think that Macquarie uses WAMs at all, although I could be wrong.
Also note that Macquarie uses a different GPA system to UAC and the other unis. Macquarians have a GPA of 0-4 versus the 0-8 or whatever it is of UAC.
So for all of us who are math illiterate:
GPA = average based on grades, ie Distinctions and Credits,
WAM = average based on marks, ie 82 and 73.
I don't think that Macquarie uses WAMs at all, although I could be wrong.
Also note that Macquarie uses a different GPA system to UAC and the other unis. Macquarians have a GPA of 0-4 versus the 0-8 or whatever it is of UAC.
Since both GPA and WAM systems are per credit point averages, a High Distinction in a 4cp subject is worth more than a High Distinction in a 3cp subject.iambored said:
The academic level bit doesn't count for Macquarie (if WAMs counted...).
So for all of us who are math illiterate:
GPA = average based on grades, ie Distinctions and Credits,
WAM = average based on marks, ie 82 and 73.
Last edited by a moderator:
scarecrow_of_oz
Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2003
- Messages
- 412
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2003
i would LOVE for them to change our current GPA system
i've got two 74s for law, mostly D's and a few decent HD's (for the law GPA only - i suck at economics)- but by macian logic i may as well have two 65's and 75s for the rest - it just seems kind of harsh to cock up ur gpa so badly over a bare miss in one subject combined with some really good other grades
i've got two 74s for law, mostly D's and a few decent HD's (for the law GPA only - i suck at economics)- but by macian logic i may as well have two 65's and 75s for the rest - it just seems kind of harsh to cock up ur gpa so badly over a bare miss in one subject combined with some really good other grades
clairegirl
the name's Anne!
amen sisterscarecrow_of_oz said:
X
xeuyrawp
Guest
Yeah, double amen.clairegirl said:
The current system is a bit demotivating.
WE didn't make this up, it was mentioned in the lecture, but it has been misinterpreted - I think it is very much like the WAM thing adopted by the likes of UNSW and maybe (not 100% sure) the traditional GPA will still be used as well. It might just be a leveller between us and other unis when we graduate. We might have a Pass average but our average mark is 64 whereas a UNSW student might have a Pass average of 50.
televators
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2004
- Messages
- 169
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
as somebody already said earlier, a boundary has to be set somewhere...so no, your system is fair enough (probably too fair, imo), and you dont deserve grade adjustments. Popping up borderline marks is stupid (considering mq adjusts marks anyways, from my memory). It is unfortunate you just missed out, but "them's the brakes, sister."scarecrow_of_oz said:
evidence:
in a 70% weighted chemistry exam last year...i answered less than 50% of the exam (literally put put to paper, that is)...and still ended up with a CR 68 as my final mark....so it looks like (to me) that macquarie are already adjusting marks for the students benefit.
i dont understand why macquarie choose to use such a ridiculous grading/ gpa system. Awarding the same gpa for a distinction/ high distinction mark doesnt make sense, and just seems as a result of the continuing willingness (or should i say, stubborness) of macquarie university to be "different" from other institutions. Handing out less HD's/ D's doesnt really reflect the calibre of the institution, if anything it reflects the content isnt being taught (or absorbed) effectively.
The reason other institutions produce higher grades..is generally because those students are of a higher calibre, particularly across professional-accredited courses, where specific outcomes need to be met ( which are completely independent of the university)
by the same regard, why not call your degrees 'gobbledicooks' in essence to be "innovative"...better still 'certificate IV?'...lol..jks
seriously, though- it is unfortunate that you guys have to put up with it...as you have some bright minds there.
oh well...i guess you could always transfer...
redruM
Breathe and Stop
- Joined
- May 11, 2004
- Messages
- 3,954
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2003
Thats all I read of your post, and it should be enough to sum up how I feel.televators said:as somebody already said earlier, a boundary has to be set somewhere...so no, your system is fair enough (probably too fair, imo), and you dont deserve grade adjustments. Popping up borderline marks is stupid (considering mq adjusts marks anyways, from my memory). It is unfortunate you just missed out, but "them's the brakes, sister."
evidence:
in a 70% weighted chemistry exam last year...i answered less than 50% of the exam (literally put put to paper, that is)...and still ended up with a CR 68 as my final mark....so it looks like (to me) that macquarie are already adjusting marks for the students benefit.
i dont understand why macquarie choose to use such a ridiculous grading/ gpa system. Awarding the same gpa for a distinction/ high distinction mark doesnt make sense, and just seems as a result of the continuing willingness (or should i say, stubborness) of macquarie university to be "different" from other institutions. Handing out less HD's/ D's doesnt really reflect the calibre of the institution, if anything it reflects the content isnt being taught (or absorbed) effectively.
The reason other institutions produce higher grades..is generally because those students are of a higher calibre, particularly across professional-accredited courses, where specific outcomes need to be met ( which are completely independent of the university)
by the same regard, why not call your degrees 'gobbledicooks' in essence to be "innovative"...better still 'certificate IV?'...lol..jks
seriously, though- it is unfortunate that you guys have to put up with it...as you have some bright minds there.
oh well...i guess you could always transfer...
Cyan_phoeniX
Active Member
Just another thing. does the gpa system really matter? I mean, employers are going to look at your mark out of 100 anyway. The only time it matters is if you transfer.
televators, every uni uses some sort of scaling system. This thread was made based on little more than conjecture and misheard 'rumour' (since no one can substantiate a proper/official source, I cannot recognise it as otherwise).
Your argument for the giving out of 'more' HDs/Ds is flawed, since marks are in essence decided by the University. They are given guidelines and their content assessed before the accreditations are given out. Furthermore, 'professional' content is more or less of a generic detail. This has nothing to do with external forces forcing upon certain universities 'higher' expectations etc.
From what I gathered, universities use a bell curve system which does not entirely rely on your raw mark, and rather allocates you a mark based upon your rankings in the course amongst other things. Of course I will not claim to even be able to fathom such complex formulaes and the above should be taken with a grain of salt. But to say that MQ is alone in doing that is naive, or ignorant, take your pick.
Your argument for the giving out of 'more' HDs/Ds is flawed, since marks are in essence decided by the University. They are given guidelines and their content assessed before the accreditations are given out. Furthermore, 'professional' content is more or less of a generic detail. This has nothing to do with external forces forcing upon certain universities 'higher' expectations etc.
From what I gathered, universities use a bell curve system which does not entirely rely on your raw mark, and rather allocates you a mark based upon your rankings in the course amongst other things. Of course I will not claim to even be able to fathom such complex formulaes and the above should be taken with a grain of salt. But to say that MQ is alone in doing that is naive, or ignorant, take your pick.
televators
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2004
- Messages
- 169
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
asylum, i wasn't arguing against the scaling system....i was merely pointing out the fact that macquarie ALREADY use a (from my own experience) generous scaling system...and to introduce another backdoor entry just seems ridiculous. (geez third year arts students who cant read properly)
yes most universities use scaling in their subjects, but that wasnt the statement i was making.
better idea: change the quality of what defines a 65 (ie dumb down what is considered a 65 )...instead of proposing a hodgy-podgy system that goes 'well you got 'kinda' close to a 65..so we'll give you a 65 anyways...cos we're "innovative"
cyan..if your source is a professor of psychology from usyd...not... mq- then i guess your source is viable (however if its just a macq psych professor, youre just getting a biased academics opinion (unless he showed you real statistics).
yes most universities use scaling in their subjects, but that wasnt the statement i was making.
better idea: change the quality of what defines a 65 (ie dumb down what is considered a 65 )...instead of proposing a hodgy-podgy system that goes 'well you got 'kinda' close to a 65..so we'll give you a 65 anyways...cos we're "innovative"
cyan..if your source is a professor of psychology from usyd...not... mq- then i guess your source is viable (however if its just a macq psych professor, youre just getting a biased academics opinion (unless he showed you real statistics).
Last edited:
Ugh, another fucking clueless science fuck who doesn't understand the semantics of argument.
I stated that the scaling system used by every fucking uni is already generous you clueless sob. UNSW more than anyone is passing through clueless, illiterate and generally inferior asian internationals in search of more money and passing it off as some sort of 'international' program. Look around you, how many of students do you reckon can even comprehend a full page of english?
You seem to make a correlation between:
a) There are less 'higher marks' given out at MQ
b) Therefore, the teaching quality at MQ is worse, than say UNSW
c) As a result, UNSW, lets say as an example, produces more 'higher-calibre' students because they hand out more 'higher marks'
Therefore: MQ's mark/scaling system is worse than UNSWs because they...uh wait...logic doesn't seem to correspond does it?
Edit: Rereading your response, you have no clue about this thread? What backdoor entry? What relaxation of marks? What in fucks name are you on about?!
I stated that the scaling system used by every fucking uni is already generous you clueless sob. UNSW more than anyone is passing through clueless, illiterate and generally inferior asian internationals in search of more money and passing it off as some sort of 'international' program. Look around you, how many of students do you reckon can even comprehend a full page of english?
You seem to make a correlation between:
a) There are less 'higher marks' given out at MQ
b) Therefore, the teaching quality at MQ is worse, than say UNSW
c) As a result, UNSW, lets say as an example, produces more 'higher-calibre' students because they hand out more 'higher marks'
Therefore: MQ's mark/scaling system is worse than UNSWs because they...uh wait...logic doesn't seem to correspond does it?
Edit: Rereading your response, you have no clue about this thread? What backdoor entry? What relaxation of marks? What in fucks name are you on about?!
Last edited:
haha thats so lametelevators said:by the same regard, why not call your degrees 'gobbledicooks' in essence to be "innovative"...better still 'certificate IV?'...lol..jks
oh well...i guess you could always transfer...
you sound like this other guy i met from unsw, as in "i transferred to unsw cuz im too good for mq" and then make a big deal about it to i dunno.. put me down? cuz you know, going to a particular educational institution makes you top stuff.
anyway, i wouldn't transfer to another uni and redo stuff cuz of a grading system. lol how gay.
i'm happy with my gobbledicook. yay for my gobbledicook! =D