Sydney University to overhaul undergraduate degrees, research (1 Viewer)

[mreditor16]

http://www.smh.com.au/national/educ...raduate-degrees-research-20150531-ghcqex.html

The University of Sydney will dramatically reduce its number of undergraduate degrees, will rethink its research investments and face up to a cultural bias of "old, white males" in positions of power in a bid to unseat Melbourne as the best university in the country.

Two parts of the article that really struck me -

"We were willing to put a degree on just about everything, so we ended up with 122 undergraduate degrees ... I think Melbourne has six undergraduate degrees and we are certainly not talking about doing anything as radical as that, but 122 does not make a huge amount of sense and they are expensive to maintain."

Only 7 per cent of students are from disadvantaged backgrounds and one-third are from schools that charge at least $16,000 a year in fees.

What do you think, guys?

 

[Squar3root]

the part of the article that really struck me

"We are not only Australia's first university but for most of our history, we were indisputably Australia's best university, and arguably one of the best universities in the region."

 

[Amleops]

Not a bad idea. Definitely makes sense from a financial perspective to cut down the number of degrees so more money can go into research. The only undergraduate degrees they really couldn't do without are Arts, Science, Commerce and Education, the rest can be subsumed by those degrees and made into majors, or be offered at a postgraduate level.

USYD has historically been the best university in Australia, now it's one among a couple. I don't think USYD can "regain the preeminence" of being the best university in Australia within its own right again, especially since if they're successful I'm sure other universities would follow suit. But it would definitely help improve the quality of education as a whole, and ensure it remains competitive with Melbourne and other top Australian unis.

 

[mreditor16]

the part of the article that really struck me

haha I didn't mention it, because I wasn't sure if I was willing to begin another "usyd=elitist" discussion haha.

 

[D94]

the part of the article that really struck me

But it's true. Sydney University dominated higher education for most of its history. There's absolutely nothing elitist about that fact.

 

[Squar3root]

But it's true. Sydney University dominated higher education for most of its history. There's absolutely nothing elitist about that fact.

haha I didn't mention it, because I wasn't sure if I was willing to begin another "usyd=elitist" discussion haha.

just a bit of banter

 

[OzKo]

The third quote means nothing unless there's a comparison made between other universities. In other words, what's the average percentage of students from disadvantaged backgrounds who go to university?

USYD traditionally has higher entrance requirements, and students from more affluent areas traditionally achieve those marks. This doesn't classify as elitism. It is simply a reflection of supply and demand.

That isn't to say that affluence has no effect on academic performance. But personally, I put it down to an individual's drive to succeed. If you live in an affluent family, it is reasonable to assume that you are exposed to RL high performers. Even if you're not affluent, an individual's parents may value academic performance, and invest in their child's education. This is why you see a lot of migrant families from disadvantaged backgrounds sending their kids to top universities.

If it's a financial issue, then this reform is fine. If there's a well-meant agenda to improve diversity, this isn't the way to achieve it.

 

[Blue Suede]

How much are we going to lose is my question. How many subjects are going to end up being cut? How will this impact the social aspect of uni for students who are already overwhelmed by class sizes.

 

[Silly Sausage]

What about their shabby science and engineering facilities? Feels like I'm the 1960s when I'm in a lab.