Search results

http://www.news.com.au/national/bad-grades-prompt-surge-in-university-death-threats/story-e6frfkvr-1226239011113 All these students should be immediately expelled from their univeristy and deported to whence they came. Cash cows or not, how could universities be reluctant to act against this...

It's not automatic. You have to inform the university you are withdrawing from the course.

Only enrol in a part time load of units of study. Usually half the number of units of a full time load. If you have already enrolled in 4 units, drop 2 of them.

The maturity of this thread (and I suspect bosers generally) has plummeted off a cliff in the last year.

So that's 3 cases already so far and within a very small sample. Statistically very unlikely then to have been an error. If it was a freak error, they would have picked it up in at least one of the cases. So those doing the recheck didn't consider it an error. I think we can conclude it is...

You don't seem to have Lazarus's raw marks in your database: http://community.boredofstudies.org/showthread.php?t=29297 They were the first marks released.

Um, it says they 'verified' it. i.e It was correct.

You only get ONE offer per round. This will be for the highest preference which is above the cut-off.

See the ad at the top of the page for Insearch. Transferring from another degree/uni is also an option.

assessments marks depend on your internal ranks and the size of the mark gaps between them. The raw marks you got for your internal assessments are irrelevant.

Might do a Master of Business Law if I don't get into LLB.

Which is false. It's already well established that the raw marks are in their electronic database. Absolutely no need to require a results check with it. (If it's not already in their database, how could they pass the raw marks on to UAC for the ATAR calculation?) Markers enter marks...

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/tatts-life-why-tears-are-wasted-on-hsc-results-20111213-1ostk.html Some good words of advice in the comments section too. The HSC is really quite insignificant. There are other paths to get where you want to go.

Are you sure you were first? Not just equal first?

There are about 20000 people on the DA list. They don't bother. All you get it your name in the paper.

Yes, $5.25 is reasonable and reflects the real cost of providing raw marks. This perhaps reinforces my point that the actual cost we have to pay is excessive. If we want raw marks under no circumstances do we only pay just $5.25. Thus to say they are 'available at at a reasonable cost of $5.25'...

In any case we can still do a FOI request for the band cut-off mark documents. The ombudsman confirmed these existed and are created every year as part of the marking process. It'll be on file and easy to obtain. It was one of the documents that the ombudsman told the Board to give to Parsonage...

The point is that it shouldn't cost 'a lot'. Reasonable cost recovery is fine, but it certainly should not cost this much for mere access to raw marks. Read the ombudsman's report. You'll see why freedom of information and transparency of government processes is so essential. This is why it is...

Clearly not in the spirit of the ombudsman's recommendations. Now they are trying to obstruct students obtaining raw marks through an undue financial burden. There is no reason why a request for raw marks needs to be linked to a results check. The raw marks can easily be accessed...

Sorry but Illness and misadventure appeals closed weeks ago. There is no longer any possibility of appeal. If you wanted special provisions for handwriting you should have applied back in Term 1 which was when applications closed. (You would have gotten a scribe or permission to do the exam...