UoM General Chat

[rery]

Hi rery, just a few things you've said have provoked my argumentative side: 

1. What exactly is looked down upon, pertaining to the selection of 'easy' breadths, in interviews?

2. VCE subjects that scale up include specialist and lote subjects. Biology/ chemistry scale up slightly. The subjects that scale up, are found to be difficult, and therefore are not actively pursued by many. The scaling then acts as an incentive to take these subjects in VCE, as the Victorian government for education has unabashedly admitted.

Based on this, then, I'd say that that breadth scoring for 'H1s' runs inversely proportional to VCE scaling.

Discussion is good!

1. Subjects like wine tasting and sports coaching that are almost inevitably H1s and like you said, serve as GPA boosters quite clearly contribute nothing to your study except for credit points (obviously this isn't true for those actually interested in these subjects, but these are probably going to be the minority given the apparent popularity of wine tasting among undergraduate-aged kids). So your GPA is worse than it first appears, and you've wasted time and money doing something that is usually neither useful nor enjoyable. I have friends with personal experience of this, having been called out by interviewers.

2. What you've just said strengthens my point. High scaling VCE subjects are both a challenge and serve as the VCE equivalent of a GPA booster (and I am only talking about the kids who toss up whether to do a subject they find more interesting or one they'll get more scaling from). 'Easy H1' subjects at university are only the latter.
Also whether or not a high scaling VCE subject actually works as an ATAR booster is irrelevant since this is how the aforementioned kids see it when they choose (or don't choose) it.

[simpak]

My greatest regret in life is that I didn't get to do breadth - I wanted to do a wine tasting breadth track so badly.  But I would have preferred to do it OUTSIDE of my degree.

[Mieow]

My greatest regret in life is that I didn't get to do breadth - I wanted to do a wine tasting breadth track so badly.  But I would have preferred to do it OUTSIDE of my degree.

Why didn't you get to do breadth?

[Shenz0r]

Still wanting to know why Glee Singing still exists as a legit subject, lulz.

I enrolled in Chinese in first year, got interviewed and was put in Chinese 7, but I noped the hell out of there because some people I knew who were very smart and hardworking absolutely got wrecked, especially if they continued it in second year (something about a 2000 word essay).

Now I'm not sure when I should start studying Chinese again.

Still, don't do something crappy like African Drumming etc for breadth to maximise your GPA, you're going to end up paying for it in HECs so make it worth something.

[simpak]

Why didn't you get to do breadth?

Because I am old.

I transferred to my course out of an old gen course, so I credited my breadth from the old course.
Edit: do children even know what 'old gen' means anymore?

[Shenz0r]

Because I am old.

I transferred to my course out of an old gen course, so I credited my breadth from the old course.
Edit: do children even know what 'old gen' means anymore?

So all the Arts/Commerce/UNIB subjects you did in first year were counted as breadths during your Science degree?

I can't imagine doing solely Science subjects for years on end.

[Limista]

If your prospective employer asks you 'Why did you choose to study subjects X and Y, when a large amount of the other applicants have studied electives more directly related to this field, rather than about choir and drumming techniques?', would you (the hypothetical you) be happy to answer 'The subject was low effort and easy and I wanted to pad my average rather than challenge myself'.

(this is obviously a contrived situation, but my point is that there is a very obvious reason why people disapprove)

I would assume a person going into such an interview has a degree of tact, and therefore, would not answer the question for the selection of an 'easy' breadth in such an inappropriate manner. Even though padding the average may have been the actual reason for pursuing the breadth, the interviewee is more than capable of responding to the question from a passionate angle, instead of something as mediocre as the subject being 'low effort'. Naturally, I am not advocating the telling of false truths during an interview, but I am suggesting there is a way to go about dictating the relevance of the breadth to a potential job or postgraduate degree. And whilst some breadths may not be directly related to the field for which we are being interviewed, many breadth subjects -- regardless of their content -- will always teach us skills that can be applied to most fields. Moreover, there is nothing wrong with justifying the obtuse nature of an 'easy' breadth selection process, as long as we focus on reinforcing to the interviewer that we have learned from our mistakes in choosing breadth X for the wrong reasons. It is then up to the interviewer as to how this information, on behalf the interviewee, is interpreted. If the interviewer chooses to be discriminatory or disapproving, then so be it. We cannot control the decisions made once we have said our piece. However, it is the manner in which we have selected certain breadths that we can justify.

2. What you've just said strengthens my point. High scaling VCE subjects are both a challenge and serve as the VCE equivalent of a GPA booster (and I am only talking about the kids who toss up whether to do a subject they find more interesting or one they'll get more scaling from). 'Easy H1' subjects at university are only the latter.
Also whether or not a high scaling VCE subject actually works as an ATAR booster is irrelevant since this is how the aforementioned kids see it when they choose (or don't choose) it.

The challenging VCE subjects are scaled up. Some breadths are 'easy'.

Easy breadths --> H1. Challenging VCE subject --> not necessarily 'H1' level of scaling.

If a breadth is easy, it means you are capable. Usually when you are capable at a subject, you like it. And if you like the breadth, you get a H1. In this scenario, we are viewing from a journey to result frame of mind.

If a VCE subject is challenging, it is difficult for you. You think you will take the subject based on its scaling. The scaling (H1) is the deciding factor of the subject you will choose. In this case, we are viewing from a result to journey frame of mind.

The instances I have outlined suggest an opposite mode of thought. Does this make sense? (hopefully!)

[simpak]

So all the Arts/Commerce/UNIB subjects you did in first year were counted as breadths during your Science degree?

I can't imagine doing solely Science subjects for years on end.

So, with an old gen degree, there is no breadth.  That kind of degree was before the Melbourne model, and I was the last year of intake (Arts (Media and Communications)), so I didn't get a chance to experience breadth in that degree. Media/Comm subjects could not be taken as breadth by other students, so couldn't be credited to a BSci when I transferred.  I credited 3 first year Arts. Then I did one breadth overseas at Penn, because it was easier to get credit for whatever breadth subject and I could choose a Science one - but it wasn't really the same as at Melb because it was Neuroscience related.

I enjoy doing only Science, all the time, ever.  After a year of an Arts degree, I had had my share of non-Science subjects forever and I was ready to never, ever look back!

[rery]

@Limista

The only real truth behind picking such subjects is that they're easy and will help your GPA. Yes you might be interested in the content of breadth X but ultimately you probably aren't going to pick it if it's difficult. You can talk about how African drumming and Glee Singing teach you unique and relatable skills but everyone knows this complete crap and pretty much any other subject is going to teach you more. In regard to learning from the mistake of picking joke subjects it's all well and good to repent and regret and talk about how you've learned to grasp learning opportunities, but if you've taken more than one of these I'd have to question why it took you 24+ weeks and ~$1500+ to learn that your time and money is better spent not doing the aforementioned rubbish.

The instances I have outlined suggest an opposite mode of thought. Does this make sense? (hopefully!)

No.

Both instances are driven by the same mode of thought. The reasons behind taking a VCE subject for its scaling and an easy H1 breadth subject are the same - to get a good score. Enjoying such a breadth is secondary to scoring highly in it, otherwise those who couldn't give a crap about pigskins and percussion (except for the x hours on which they are assessed on it) would pick something they like despite it being more challenging. So it isn't a 'journey to result frame of mind'.

If a breadth is easy, it means you are capable.

Or it means you've picked a breadth that is widely considered a joke and a free H1. If you read some of the reviews or general posts on these subjects you'll find such 'capability' would extend to anyone who is at the university.

[mahler004]

Discussion is good!

1. Subjects like wine tasting and sports coaching that are almost inevitably H1s and like you said, serve as GPA boosters quite clearly contribute nothing to your study except for credit points (obviously this isn't true for those actually interested in these subjects, but these are probably going to be the minority given the apparent popularity of wine tasting among undergraduate-aged kids). So your GPA is worse than it first appears, and you've wasted time and money doing something that is usually neither useful nor enjoyable. I have friends with personal experience of this, having been called out by interviewers.

2. What you've just said strengthens my point. High scaling VCE subjects are both a challenge and serve as the VCE equivalent of a GPA booster (and I am only talking about the kids who toss up whether to do a subject they find more interesting or one they'll get more scaling from). 'Easy H1' subjects at university are only the latter.
Also whether or not a high scaling VCE subject actually works as an ATAR booster is irrelevant since this is how the aforementioned kids see it when they choose (or don't choose) it.

In fairness, a good knowledge of wine is definitely an asset in some business carriers. Wine tasting is supposedly a very difficult subject - hardly an easy H1. All that said, I do agree that many people take it expecting an easy H1.

Completelty agree that random bludgy-sounding breadths won't serve you well in an interview.

[Russ]

I learned more about wine in a few months working with wine snobs/critics than I'll ever need to know

Even though padding the average may have been the actual reason for pursuing the breadth, the interviewee is more than capable of responding to the question from a passionate angle, instead of something as mediocre as the subject being 'low effort'. Naturally, I am not advocating the telling of false truths during an interview..

So, you'd agree that telling the truth about why you selected your subject would be disadvantageous? If so, I think that's really all that needs to be said.

[hobbitle]

Seriously, Chem Eng students, is it just me or does Shalcross have a major stick up his butt??

[Hancock]

From what I've heard, he seems like a decent dude. I had him in ESD1 2012 and thought he was alright. Which subjects did he run?

[hobbitle]

From what I've heard, he seems like a decent dude. I had him in ESD1 2012 and thought he was alright. Which subjects did he run?

He runs Material & Energy Balances and Chemical Process Analysis. I wanted to take them to keep Chem Eng open as an option for me. The prerequisites are Chem 1 and ESD1. I haven't taken either, but I HAVE taken ESD2 and Chemistry 2. And he won't give me permission to enrol unless I go "backwards" and take ESD1 and Chem 1. No thanks.

The Chem thing is especially ridiculous as there is a formal Accellerated pathway in first year Chem from Fundamentals into Chem2, which means MANY high achieving students don't take Chem 1. It's a joke.

[tomash95]

Did I just screw up? I have no clue what I'm going to do for Semester 2 this year (second year) so I only planned out my first semester (with a subject I'm thinking of swapping out for another anyway). The website says I need to enrol for both semesters. Am I going to incur a fee?