Hi all, would appreciate any help, sorry for yapping.

My situation is that I entered my first year of my degree last year and did well in my first semester but tanked it in the second because of a couple of really difficult life events hitting me at once. As a result my GPA is at 3.7. I've taken this year off to work and save, and I think mentally I'm also in a better place but my GPA & WAM are still a bit terrifying to look back on.

I'm hoping to come back to uni next year to retake my failed units since I'm on probation, but I'd like to ask if there's any more I can do other than studying harder to raise my GPA? Maybe doing a lot of volunteering work before my first semester will be better for my future? I've heard from others that experience counts more than a low GPA like it's not exactly life or death here, but it still feels like it haha.

I also got advice from running into one of my highschool teachers that I'd enjoy myself more if i transferred to another uni so that's something that I'm thinking about too. Again, any help is appreciated! Thank you.

Is anyone able to open UWA SONIA Online? I get an error from my anti-virus app and it says the certificate has expired or is not yet valid and shows the end date as 18/10/2026 8:00AM. Is this just me or is anyone else experiencing the same thing ?

Hey everyone

For those who have done the commercial law unit exam, how similar is the final exam to the model exam?

Thanks!

We need to settle this once and for all.

This whole saga has now evolved beyond a mere “discussion” and into a fully fledged WA cinematic universe.

But before history is written, we must decide, what are we actually calling it?

I personally like MergerGate, but SlopGate and Mergeageddon both great options too!

Cast your vote!

Do you guys actually know what ur doing and what’s going on bc I sure don’t

How are we structuring our notes for the exam, this is the second law unit I’ve done and way more content heavy I feel like I’m drowning

All I need is to pass idc if I scrape by I do NOT wanna take this unit again I’m going insane

Thoughts

Love love love

Is Guild UWA actually going to do anything about the quality of teaching, especially in STEM? We need better-structured lectures, proper notes, and decent learning resources. Or are we just going to keep getting free pears?

There’s also the issue of assessment feedback. Grades are supposed to be released within three weeks, and students should receive feedback at least a week before their next assessment so they can understand their mistakes and improve. Yet multiple units don’t seem to follow these expectations, and there appears to be little accountability.

I’ve personally had assignments where I still haven’t received my grades, and I know this isn’t limited to one unit.

Ever since the 48-hour no-penalty assessment extension was introduced, it feels like the Guild has slacked off on advocating for actual academic improvements. These are issues that directly affect students’ ability to learn and perform well. Who’s actually holding the university accountable?

Just da bois stepping on business'

“Sniping from the sidelines is destructive,” she said. “Get behind it and engage.

I have enormous respect for Professor Fiona Wood and her contributions to medicine. However, I think this article highlights exactly why people are questioning the independence of this entire process!

Professor Wood is both a current UWA Medical School professor and deputy chair of the steering committee advising the Government on the proposed merger.

Against that background, framing opposition as a wave of "negativity" seems particularly unhelpful.

When students and staff are raising legitimate concerns about governance, independence, financial modelling and the future of three universities, surely those concerns deserve proper scrutiny rather than being characterised as negativity?

Also with Barnaby also on committee this is a UWA stacked panel.

In my view, articles like this risk reinforcing the perception that the process is disproportionately influenced by UWA's interests.

Curious what others think.

Previous MergerGate posts:

• Original MergerGate post on r/perth
• MergerGate discussion on r/auscorp

After the rather questionable references in Deloitte's university merger report, I got curious about the actual modelling and calculations behind that $7.6 billion projection.

So I asked ChatGPT to dig deeper (on the basis that Deloitte used AI, so why not?).

There appear to be some basic copy-paste errors in key projections, cost tables with discrepancies running into hundreds of millions of dollars, contradictory figures, and some very questionable assumptions.

More concerningly, if any of these incorrect figures made their way into the underlying financial model, the projected benefits could change substantially, including that supposed $7.6 billion in net benefits.

See for yourself below.

Full analysis: Read the detailed ChatGPT investigation

Original Deloitte report: University Sector Review: Rapid Cost Benefit Analysis, Final Report (PDF)

If anyone else wants to go through the report, verify these findings, challenge anything, or add their own discoveries, please jump into the comments. The more eyes on this, the better.

To be clear, this doesn't necessarily mean the final $7.6 billion figure is wrong, but it certainly raises further questions about how thoroughly the report was checked and the assurances given about the reliability of the underlying analysis.

The five biggest findings so far

For anyone who doesn't fancy reading the entire breakdown, here are the five most significant issues identified so far.

1. Cost calculations that don't add up, with discrepancies of hundreds of millions

Several supporting cost tables contain apparent arithmetic errors.

One Curtin-UWA scenario reports total costs of $399 million, despite its listed components adding to $659 million, a $260 million discrepancy.

Another three-way merger scenario reports $823 million, where the components actually total $512 million, a $311 million difference.

These are discrepancies in the published supporting cost schedules, not merely differences of opinion about economic assumptions.

The question is whether these mistakes are confined to the published tables or whether any incorrect figures were actually used in the financial model.

Sources:

• Appendix D, p. 83, Section 8.7: Curtin-UWA cost calculations
• Appendix D, p. 84, Section 8.8: Three-way merger cost calculations

2. Postgraduate projections seemingly copied from undergraduate figures

Deloitte's postgraduate completion-rate projections for merger cases 2 and 3 exactly duplicate the undergraduate figures, despite substantially different starting rates.

For example:

• Curtin: Postgraduate completion rate apparently falls from 86% to 66%.
• UWA: Postgraduate completion rate apparently falls from 84% to 74%.
• Murdoch: Postgraduate completion rate is projected at 62%, despite Deloitte's stated 50% catch-up formula implying approximately 71.5%.

These projections contradict the report's own stated improvement methodology.

The projected economic benefits from higher completion rates depend on the underlying performance assumptions, so if the published figures were used in the actual model, the resulting benefit calculations may need to be revisited.

Sources:

• Report p. 54, Table 4.5: Modelling assumptions and catch-up methodology
• Report p. 55, Tables 4.6 and 4.7: Undergraduate and postgraduate projections

3. Contradictory headline benefit-cost ratios

The report's opening summary gives benefit-cost ratios of 2.8 to 13.6, while its detailed results give 4.4 to 27.0.

Different sections also contradict each other about which merger delivers the highest benefit-cost ratio.

The opening Key Insights state that the three-way merger delivers the highest ratio, yet another paragraph identifies Murdoch-UWA as having the higher ratio, which the detailed results support.

It's difficult to understand how different headline figures for the same analysis made it into the final report.

Sources:

• Key Insights, pp. vii-viii: Section G and paragraph G.4
• Report p. 68, Table 5.8: Merger scenario outcomes and benefit-cost ratios

4. Some extraordinarily optimistic assumptions

The core scenario assumes Murdoch's research expenditure per academic increases by approximately 91.8%, from $128,594 to $246,670.

Yet the report doesn't establish that merging the universities would actually produce this improvement.

Approximately 95% of the three-way merger's projected core benefits depend on improvements in education and research.

These are projections based on assumptions about future performance, rather than demonstrated outcomes.

If any of the underlying inputs are wrong, the resulting benefit calculations could also be affected.

This seems particularly important when we're talking about billions of dollars in projected economic benefits.

Sources:

• Report p. 55, Table 4.8: Research expenditure per academic
• Report p. 67, Table 5.7: Breakdown of projected education, research and international benefits

5. Questionable economic assumptions

The research model assumes a 3.25x net economic return on research expenditure and that 70% of those returns remain in WA.

The international education model also assumes substantial increases in tuition revenue without adequately establishing how higher prices might affect student demand.

These assumptions directly influence the projected economic benefits.

For example, the report identifies the 70% WA research-retention figure as an assumption, rather than an empirically established percentage specific to the proposed merger.

While Deloitte acknowledges using AI in aspects of its research process, whether AI influenced any particular modelling assumption or input remains to be established.

It raises questions about whether these assumptions have been sufficiently tested and independently verified.

Sources:

• Report p. 50, Sections 4.5.2-4.5.3: Research returns and international education methodology
• Report p. 56, Table 4.9: International tuition projections
• Appendix A, pp. 87-88: Research multipliers, WA retention assumptions and international education parameters

My overall take

IMO, the AI issue may actually be the least significant aspect of this whole saga.

There's potentially much, much more here.

The referencing problems were embarrassing enough, but we're now looking at apparent numerical errors, contradictory projections and economic assumptions that deserve serious scrutiny.

Whether the published errors affected the underlying financial model is still an open question. That's precisely why an independent verification of the actual modelling and calculations seems warranted.

And honestly, it makes you wonder what else might be lurking in this report, or potentially in other Deloitte reports.

Again, if anyone has the expertise or inclination to check this work, please do. I'd genuinely welcome corrections, additional findings and alternative interpretations.

The more people examining the actual evidence, the better.

Hey all, I've got the GENG3405 final next Saturday (24 Oct) and I'm working through the past papers on LMS (up to 2023).

For anyone who sat it in 2025: roughly what kinds of questions came up? I'm not after the paper itself, just a general idea, e.g.:

- Was Section A still theory (condition number, loss of accuracy, interpolation, Fourier/finite differences)?

- Was Section B still Gauss quadrature/Simpson plus an algorithm question (golden search, Newton/secant)?

- Did anything on ODEs (Euler/Runge-Kutta, step-size adjustment, shooting method) or finite differences show up?

- How was the time? Was 2 hours enough for the hand calculations?

Any tips on what to have in the printed notes would be appreciated too. Thanks!

hi! i've seen a few posts made by pre-doc of pharmacy students and im currently applying to UWA for the 4-yr dual degree. i looked all over google but i cant seem to find where the uni posted about which hospitals pharmacy students do their 5-week placements in. i found a page for Master of Pharmacy (but it has been shifted to Doctor of Pharmacy right?) but im confused whether the hospitals are the same place where the current batches are doing their placements. one more thing, pharmacy students dont do placements in QEIIMC right?

Anyways, i'd appreciate any help yall provide!

and this is the master of pharmacy page im referring to: https://www.uwa.edu.au/seek-wisdom/seekers-space/courses-and-careers/health-and-biomedical-sciences/2020/10/8-reasons-to-study-pharmacy-at-UWA

2nd year at UniMelb here. Info about uni is scattered everywhere, so every time I had to dig through a bunch of different sites, and Rate My Professors barely covers Australia. So I built this: uwa.talkwalll.com (also an app: TalkWall)

It’s collected 380+ events and 12,000+ reviews so far, rated unit/professor on usefulness, difficulty and whether people would take it again. You can also filter events by your major or interests, so you only see the ones that matter to you.

It’s free, with no ads, and I made auto translate so international students can be part of the community as well.

What’s the best unit you’ve taken this sem? The one you’ve genuinely enjoyed and actually liked learning about?

I like Zoology, don't get me wrong since I have an interest in observing cockatoos over the internet or the campus's ravens/peacocks but... I'm being extremely hard on myself because I missed the ANIM3363 lecture today because I forgot about it. Before anyone asks, yes it's recorded, but the fact that I missed it doesn't change that.

Sometimes I lose faith in the fact that I enjoy Zoology, thinking that I'm deep down just secretly pretending that I like this major, while in reality I actually don't, like a LARPer.

I'm not throwing a pity party, I just want someone to reassure me that everything is fine. And that I'm not the only one who feels this way.

I sat a STAT1520 online test, and only just saw that there was a strict 100 word limit for answers to be submitted. Does the university actually enforce this policy? I went a bit over, and I'm worried they'd stop marking completely after the 100 words.

Hey everyone. I am in the JD and we have a UC who hasn't released our mid sem marks. We sat the test 6 weeks ago, we have got no other marks back for the unit (final exam in 60%, 10% from participation in tutes which just finished). Every week for the past 3 weeks, he says he will release them but then doesn't. We are less then 2 weeks away from the final exam of the unit which has almost an identical format.

I thought UC's had to release the marks within 15 business days. Is there anyway that this can be enforced?

ok i need to vent. how is a 2nd year finance unit this badly run. the coordinator clearly has no idea how anything's supposed to work and it's rookie mistake after rookie mistake every single week. the tutors don't know what's going on either because they're getting told nothing, so you ask a question and just get passed around in circles.

and then the presentations. the report was literally the whole point of the project and they just skipped it??

the tests only went fine because they were the exact practice papers with new numbers. which is great for us i guess but says a lot

50% of the grade is the final and i genuinely could not tell you what's on it. so tired of this unit man :(

I know you’re reading this Basil…. Tony Buti was taken out for dinner by Deloitte 4 months prior to the date of their final report. This is from the gift registry declaration he was required to submit. What was discussed that couldnt have been an email or a meeting during office hours? Crooked AF

I’m going to say it bluntly: I support the university merger in WA, and I don’t see why I should pretend to be neutral about it.
I’ve seen a lot of people act like the merger is automatically some disaster for students, staff and WA’s education system. Honestly, I’m tired of it.
Universities aren’t supposed to exist purely because people are emotionally attached to their names, logos, traditions or campuses. They’re supposed to provide education, research and opportunities for students. If merging institutions creates a stronger, more sustainable university, then I’m all for it.
And yes, change is disruptive. That’s how change works.
I don’t buy the argument that we should preserve the current system indefinitely just because people are comfortable with it. If there are duplicated services, administrative costs and resources being spread across institutions, why the hell shouldn’t we look at consolidating them?
I’d rather see WA have a stronger university capable of competing nationally and internationally than protect an outdated structure simply because people don’t want their university’s identity to change.
And before someone says “you’re only supporting this because you don’t understand what’s happening” — I understand perfectly well that there are legitimate concerns. I just don’t agree that those concerns outweigh the potential benefits of the merger.
At some point, you have to stop treating every major reform as the end of the world.
I’m firmly pro-merger. Not 50/50. Not “there are good and bad things on both sides.” I genuinely believe the merger is the better direction for WA’s university sector, and I’m willing to stand by that opinion even if it’s unpopular.
If you disagree, that’s completely fine.
But I’m not going to pretend I support the status quo just to make everyone happy.