L
LaraB
Guest
you don't need to be so formal on an informal board - it doesn't make what you are saying more correct...ManlyChief said:Again, the assumption here is that 40 percent of students can't be 'the best'. The university has decided that the very best are those who can maintain a D average across 144 credit points of law. Some years, those who manage to do this might constitute 10 percent of the cohort; other years it may be 40 percent. I see no fatal contradiction there..
i didn't say that 40% can't be the 'best'... i am simply saying that it doesn't necessarily inidicate the abilities of those who are at the very top if so many qualify for honours who haven't achieved as highly marks wise...
all i am pointing out is that having more students achieving honours is likely to have the reverse effect of what i suppose the whole idea of honours is meant to represent - ie te very best of the cohort... if nearly half the students are getting honours, it is likely to undermine what honours is meant to stand for... eg perhaps if so many are doing so well it doesn't necessarily indicate high quality students rather easier assessments or more scaling, things like that
probably the numbers are different at different unis coz the 'selection' for honours is more stringent at some... i know some unis consider law units as well as non law units while some only consider law units, the former seeming a little odd since its a "law" honours... some place equal/greater/lesser weight on core units, some use GPA and WAM etc... but 40% just sounds a little high since when you ask someone who are considered the 'best' in any kind of academic situation, you'd probably expect them to refer to something like, top 15%-ish...