Who plans to continue doing maths at uni? (2 Viewers)

[who_loves_maths]

Originally Posted by sikeveo
I think the quotas are a load of crap...
...
Casebash have you considered the PhB at ANU?

bite your own words. you don't think the PhB has a quota also? ... geez

EDIT: just for your info. i believe that the PhB(Arts) course at ANU has a quota of only 10 students... just like the BSc(Adv. Maths.) at USYD.

 

[Templar]

The point is that ANU will look beyond UAI for the PhB, whereas it's less flexible at USyd to gain entry into the said course without the UAI.

In addition, he meant that the quota for BSc (Adv Maths) is a load of crap, since you could easily do a BSc (Adv) and come out with the identical qualifications. The BSc (Adv Maths) course is solely there to sound good.

 

[who_loves_maths]

^ exactly. if it sounds good/better, then it isn't identical is it?

 

[Estel]

^ exactly. if it sounds good/better, then it isn't identical is it?

I'll be USYD, grab a standard degree, call it 'advanced' (but not change another thing), say only 10 people can do the 'advanced' variant and watch the cut-off jump 20 points. It sounds better... but would you not say it is for all intents and purposes identical?

(no offence to those studying BA Advanced)

 

[richz]

nice avvy, WLM, the birds got a big head though

 

[who_loves_maths]

Originally Posted by Estel
I'll be USYD, grab a standard degree, call it 'advanced' (but not change another thing), say only 10 people can do the 'advanced' variant and watch the cut-off jump 20 points. It sounds better... but would you not say it is for all intents and purposes identical?

no, in your case i'd call it identical anyday. but guess what? that's why you're not USYD.

the BSc(Adv. Maths) degree is not just a standard degree being advertised as an "advanced" degree. plz get your information right before senselessly denigrating the integrity of the university as a whole.

do you think the university or vice-chancellor Brown is an idiot or something? you think a level-headed university would go and grab a normal degree and turn it into an "advanced" degree by name just to see the cut-off jump by twenty?
what for? so less ppl would get into the otherwise "normal" degree?
you think the university wants less ppl to enter? you think they don't want you to go there and pay your annual fees and what have you?

you are one logic-defying person Estel.

USYD, nor UNSW, did not get its reputation by virtue of a dearth of enrolment. it's repute comes from it's popularity - that is, more ppl go there every year and that makes USYD happy!
not the other way round.

 

[Estel]

Wrong again. My example is true: BA = BA Advanced (and don't kid me)

 

[who_loves_maths]

^ did you even read my post before typing the 'W' word?

here's what i said for your convenience:

plz get your information right before senselessly denigrating the integrity of the university as a whole.

1) this thread was addressing the BSc(adv) vs. BSc(adv. maths) courses before you gratuitously jumped in with your BA course - and attempting in vain to somehow make an obscure connection between the Arts course and the Science courses.

2) as i said (quoted above) - you may not make a generalisation about an entire University as a unit, because it is NOT THE WHOLE UNIVERSITY that determines the structure of every single course within its regime. they are set by the separate Faculties.
so it is for this reason that (i) your attempt at connecting the BA course to the BSc(adv. maths) course fails, they are two completely different degrees, and, (ii) your use of the exemplary BA course is irrelevant, because all you need to do it take a look at the title of this thread:

Who plans to continue doing maths at uni?

yes, maths. no, not arts.

3) my previous argument about advertising a normal degree in an elevated sense being an illogical practice still stands - seeing as how you are unable to refute it.

and,
4) you are unable to back up you opinion that BA = BA(Adv.) with evidence.

...

 

[Templar]

the BSc(Adv. Maths) degree is not just a standard degree being advertised as an "advanced" degree. plz get your information right before senselessly denigrating the integrity of the university as a whole.

As a matter of fact, it is.

 

[who_loves_maths]

^ so you're saying the BSc(adv. maths.) degree is just a standard degree are you?
so it's the same/identical as a normal BSc degree with a plain major in maths?

ie. then by your logic, in which you suggested before that BSc(adv) is identical to BSc(adv. maths), the BSc(adv) is also infact identical to a normal BSc degree?

wow... this is something new!... because having researched a bit into the structures of the normal BSc and the BSc(adv.) degrees, i could have sworn that i'd seen some difference between the two.

 

[Liberal Scum]

It is exactly the same thing, except you're guaranteed entry to first semester SSP, which wouldn't be too hard if you had the UAI to get into it anyway. You graduate with a BSc(Adv), and then it'll say your majors. And BSc you can do the exact same subjects as a bsc(adv) would do and end up having them ask you if you want a bsc(adv) printed on your testamur because you fulfilled the prerequisites.

It is not an illogical practice, it makes the uni seem more presitgious by giving it higher cut offs.

 

[KFunk]

do you think the university or vice-chancellor Brown is an idiot or something? you think a level-headed university would go and grab a normal degree and turn it into an "advanced" degree by name just to see the cut-off jump by twenty?

Yes, the Usyd combined BSc, MBBS / BScMed, MBBS,

what for?

To scrape the crème off the top of the HSC latte so as to stop loosing so many of the top students in NSW to the UNSW undergraduate med program.

 

[sikeveo]

It is exactly the same thing, except you're guaranteed entry to first semester SSP, which wouldn't be too hard if you had the UAI to get into it anyway. You graduate with a BSc(Adv), and then it'll say your majors. And BSc you can do the exact same subjects as a bsc(adv) would do and end up having them ask you if you want a bsc(adv) printed on your testamur because you fulfilled the prerequisites.

It is not an illogical practice, it makes the uni seem more presitgious by giving it higher cut offs.

Are you sure it says that on your testamur?

 

[acmilan]

Are you sure it says that on your testamur?

Yeah afaik if you are in the BSc degree and satisfy the BSc Adv requirements you can graduate with a BSc Adv. I think you can do the same with a BSc (Adv Maths) if you've done the required maths units.

 

[Estel]

^ did you even read my post before typing the 'W' word?
...

yes, maths. no, not arts.

3) my previous argument about advertising a normal degree in an elevated sense being an illogical practice still stands - seeing as how you are unable to refute it.

and,
4) you are unable to back up you opinion that BA = BA(Adv.) with evidence.

...

i) No. You post half page things over little points and it's all waffle anyway.
ii) I was using that as an example that was clear cut. If you could see the truth in BA = BA Advanced, you could then graduate to see the BScAdv = BScAdv Maths.
iii) It's called making ppl with a shiny 99 uai not feel like they're wasting it. (edit: someone above made the point already. my bad)
iv) I don't need to back it up. Just like 1 + 1 = 2, only a pedant wants more.

 

[who_loves_maths]

Originally Posted by KFunk
Yes, the Usyd combined BSc, MBBS / BScMed, MBBS

errr... and your point?
you make it sound like the BSc has been scrapped and USYD now only offers the combined one with MBBS?
the BSc is still there on its own.
the reason why they are combining is to attract ppl to enter that course - which is what i said in my other post about the purpose of the university. so you're just supporting the fact that USYD wouldn't raise the UAI cutoffs for no reason - that would only curtail the university's own supply of students. it would be illogical.

also, do not forget that the MBBS degree was not an undergraduate degree at USYD before. so there was never any competition between UNSW and USYD before. hence, your statement quoted below is also wrong:

To scrape the crème off the top of the HSC latte so as to stop loosing so many of the top students in NSW to the UNSW undergraduate med program.

the USYD undergraduate med program has only been in place for two or so years.
and that is the ONLY reason why the UAI is high - because it is still in its "trial" stage. the quota for it is only 10 ppl.

i would unhesistantly bet anyone that as the years go on, USYD med program uai will decrease and its quota increase.

 

[Templar]

also, do not forget that the MBBS degree was not an undergraduate degree at USYD before. so there was never any competition between UNSW and USYD before.

That's why they came up with the combined degree, because USyd did not have a corresponding med course to compete with UNSW and hence were losing potential bright med students to UNSW for reasons outlined by KFunk.

The places would not increase dramatically as it will reduce the number of positions in USyd GMP. In addition, despite the maximum of 10 places allowed, when people withdrew from the course to pursue med at UNSW, there was no call up and only 6 people enrolled in the course.

With no disrespect to the people in the combined degree, it is pretty much a science degree with guaranteed entry into USyd GMP. Provided that they can pass GAMSAT and the interview, even less intelligent people like me can get into GMP and end up with the same result. It is simply there to sound prestigous.

 

[KFunk]

Templar basically said most of the extended comments I would have liked to make regarding the USyd combined med program. However, I feel I should say (to WLM) that given your issues with others calling you 'wrong' it's a tad arrogrant to say that I am ["your statement quoted below is also wrong"] when I'm making a fairly reasonable observation. Yes, I agree with you that the Usyd program was previously a purely graduate program - which is exactly why they instituted the combined program. USyd lacked an undergraduate program hence they were loosing talented students to the UNSW undergraduate program. I will stand by my point that the USyd combined med program currently stands to bring in talented students that might otherwise be lost.

 

[who_loves_maths]

^ KFunk, i sincerely apologise to you for my remarks. i shouldn't have used the tone of language that i did. sorry


but just to clarify what my intentions behind that post:

i was initially debating with Estel about the logical purposes of raising UAI cutoffs for "normal" courses by turning them into "advanced" courses; and i tried to make the point that universities do not turn normal courses into high-order UAI course because that would restrict enrolment into that course - which is undesirable for most universities.

so while i made that point, when you quoted me saying "you think a level-headed university would go and grab a normal degree and turn it into an "advanced" degree by name just to see the cut-off jump by twenty?" and replied with your "Yes, the Usyd combined BSc, MBBS / BScMed, MBBS", i felt frustrated because you didn't seem to understand my point...

you see, you did not answer my quoted question at all in your post. the point i tried to make in my last post was that USYD's combined BSc/MBBS degree does not count because it is not a "normal" degree turned into an "advanced" on account of the fact that it was never an undergraduate degree in the first place! it was never "normal".
the first time it appeared, it appeared in the form as it does today - the BSc/MBBS.
so i was making the point that this degree was never altered or embellished artificially by the university in any way prior to its current form.

it does not count as a "normal" degree that's been elevated into an "advanced" degree just to see the UAI "jump by 20". because the first time the course was offered, it had a UAI cutoff of 99.95 as it does today - nothing has changed, nor been uplifted.

moreover, you referred to the combination of the BSc and the MBBS degrees as an answer to my quote which frustrated me even more, because combining two degrees is not equivalent at all to elevating one normal degree into an advanced degree - which was what Estel and i were debating before you made your comment.

ie. the process of "BSc + MBBS ---> BSc/MBBS"
is not the same as "BSc ---> BSc(advanced)"
or, "BA ---> BA(advanced)"

i hope you can see the clear logic of this.


anyways, i wish you can understand my point now.
but like i said, i make no excuse for my tone of speech in my last post.
so once again, i apologise KFunk.

 

[Slidey]

i was initially debating with Estel about the logical purposes of raising UAI cutoffs for "normal" courses by turning them into "advanced" courses; and i tried to make the point that universities do not turn normal courses into high-order UAI course because that would restrict enrolment into that course - which is undesirable for most universities.

Quite right. Which is why they not only make the normal courses "advanced", but also leave the old normal courses intact.

That way when people do an advanced course they get to feel special.