Postgraduate spots held for Year 12s at University of Melbourne

[Russ]

Until it's released by the MDHS student centre (someone tweet them the article) then it's meaningless. There have been several articles about the melbourne model and the postgraduate medicine course that have been factually wrong and terribly inaccurate.

[Eriny]

I find this really odd. One of the main sell points of the Melbourne Model was an equity scheme. Alongside the large numbers of students getting into and getting scholarships to UniMelb through Access, the other thing that UniMelb was trying to get across was that getting into graduate professional degrees should be a "level playing field" and therefore based on university results which require independent effort rather than high school results which can tend to favour the richer students. It is understandable that they would want to attract and retain high achievers by offering them guaranteed pathways, but in doing this it is perverse to the idea of equity insofar as the people who did well in high school because of their extra resources or whatever, would also be the people being admitted into these professional degrees. These new proposals are not vastly removed from admitting people to professional degrees at an undergraduate level based on their high school results.

I suppose at least there is still the H2A requirement in order to be guaranteed entry, but I would hazard a bet that many students who get a H2A average but do not qualify for the guaranteed entry would be rejected for admission, otherwise the whole guaranteed entrance scheme would be pointless.

I think this is one of those things where it is difficult to get the balance right. Obviously, UniMelb would want to attract people who scored really high (like 99.9+). But it is also hard to figure out who the best and brightest actually are under a high school system which does have equity issues.

[stonecold]

Sorry to drag this on...but can someone please explain this paragraph to me:

"From next year it[UniMelb] will lower academic hurdles within undergraduate degrees for guaranteed postgraduate places made available for school-leavers with high Year 12 scores. And in the case of the few ultra-high-performing, usually privately educated, school-leavers, the hurdles will be scrapped altogether. But the university won't lower guaranteed entry thresholds for undergraduate courses at the same time."

I know this could well be crap, but assuming it is true, doesn't this hint that the H2A requirement will be lowered, and the for "ultra-high-performing"  (assuming 99.90+) students, they will gain unconditional entry requiring no certain average at all?  Because this is something that I find very disturbing and poor educational practice.

[EvangelionZeta]

I suppose at least there is still the H2A requirement in order to be guaranteed entry, but I would hazard a bet that many students who get a H2A average but do not qualify for the guaranteed entry would be rejected for admission, otherwise the whole guaranteed entrance scheme would be pointless.

Just saying, apparently the general requirements for getting a JD CSP this year (the first ever cohort which went through the new system) involved getting a 75+ average (and remember, this is CSP, as opposed to full fee).  If anything, it seems more as if the guaranteed entrance scheme is just a nice looking gesture which doesn't really matter at all realistically, kind of like the "guarantee into any undergraduate Melbourne course if you get 95+" thing you get with being a KLD scholar.

[stonecold]

I suppose at least there is still the H2A requirement in order to be guaranteed entry, but I would hazard a bet that many students who get a H2A average but do not qualify for the guaranteed entry would be rejected for admission, otherwise the whole guaranteed entrance scheme would be pointless.

Just saying, apparently the general requirements for getting a JD CSP this year (the first ever cohort which went through the new system) involved getting a 75+ average (and remember, this is CSP, as opposed to full fee).  If anything, it seems more as if the guaranteed entrance scheme is just a nice looking gesture which doesn't really matter at all realistically, kind of like the "guarantee into any undergraduate Melbourne course if you get 95+" thing you get with being a KLD scholar.

With all due respect EZ, the LSAT is the main hurdle to gaining entry into the JD, and the guaranteed entry students are not required to sit this.

[EvangelionZeta]

I suppose at least there is still the H2A requirement in order to be guaranteed entry, but I would hazard a bet that many students who get a H2A average but do not qualify for the guaranteed entry would be rejected for admission, otherwise the whole guaranteed entrance scheme would be pointless.

Just saying, apparently the general requirements for getting a JD CSP this year (the first ever cohort which went through the new system) involved getting a 75+ average (and remember, this is CSP, as opposed to full fee).  If anything, it seems more as if the guaranteed entrance scheme is just a nice looking gesture which doesn't really matter at all realistically, kind of like the "guarantee into any undergraduate Melbourne course if you get 95+" thing you get with being a KLD scholar.

With all due respect EZ, the LSAT is the main hurdle to gaining entry into the JD, and the guaranteed entry students are not required to sit this.

Or so they say.  I don't know, this is just hearsay coming from the JD kids...

[Eriny]

I suppose at least there is still the H2A requirement in order to be guaranteed entry, but I would hazard a bet that many students who get a H2A average but do not qualify for the guaranteed entry would be rejected for admission, otherwise the whole guaranteed entrance scheme would be pointless.

Just saying, apparently the general requirements for getting a JD CSP this year (the first ever cohort which went through the new system) involved getting a 75+ average (and remember, this is CSP, as opposed to full fee).  If anything, it seems more as if the guaranteed entrance scheme is just a nice looking gesture which doesn't really matter at all realistically, kind of like the "guarantee into any undergraduate Melbourne course if you get 95+" thing you get with being a KLD scholar.

That surprises me, but it is still possible (even probable) that some people with a 75 average did not get in, so if you have that guarantee behind you, you may still be in a better position than someone who doesn't. This is all speculation, of course.

[Mao]

Why exactly does it matter whether or not it applies to current students? If the new rules don't apply to you, you would not be at a disadvantage, as the number of places aren't changing, and the advantaged kids are in 1st or 2nd year.

[Russ]

These new proposals are not vastly removed from admitting people to professional degrees at an undergraduate level based on their high school results.

Not exactly, only the highest achievers will be admitted. Everybody else still applies normally (ie high school results are irrelevant).

@stonecold, I'll make a call today and find out what I can

[fady_22]

What I get from the article is this: in order to attract high achieving students to Melbourne, they aim to reduce the "risk" of not attaining the required average for the postgraduate places by either lowering the average (for FFP) or removing the average altogether (for CSP). At the same time, the ATAR requirements will stay the same for the guarantees (e.g. for med, FFP will remain at 99.00+ and CSP at 99.90+).

[stonecold]

These new proposals are not vastly removed from admitting people to professional degrees at an undergraduate level based on their high school results.

Not exactly, only the highest achievers will be admitted. Everybody else still applies normally (ie high school results are irrelevant).

@stonecold, I'll make a call today and find out what I can

Cheers Russ.  Will be interesting to see what is going on. 

[Russ]

He's out of office for a week, be patient

[Gloamglozer]

I'm sorry, but I feel obliged to include this.  I feel that this thread will be incomplete if this isn't here.

I BLAME THE MELBOURNE MODEL.

[LOVEPHYSICS]

Check this out: http://www.futurestudents.unimelb.edu.au/atar

If you get a 96, you will get a guaranteed CSP place in postgraduate courses such as Architecture, Engineering and so on. I m pretty sure Medicine and Law(JD) still require high 99s...unless they change it next year.

[Russ]

There was a followup story in yesterday's supplement: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/conflict-at-deals-for-top-year-12s/story-e6frgcjx-1226097787947

tldr; they scrapped the 75% requirement for 99.9 students and lowered it to 65% for others

He's out of office for a week, be patient

Paraphrasing what I got because it was rather candid compared to a press release, but it wasn't anything groundbreaking. It's just a rebalancing to make sure more high achievers aren't scared away from the university.