I am interested to know how is the teaching & learning environment like, specifically for the architecture programs in LUCT; such as the quality of the facilities, lecturers, & course outlines.

Would any seniors like to share your experience?

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jun 27 2011, 04:35 AM

Firstly, your implication that the institution will earn more by passing the students regardless of their performance; doesn't make sense, and it also doesn't mean that once the students have failed, they will all "automatically" be changing institutions as you have implied;

Think of it this way; if a student fails a subject, he/she WILL naturally/definitely have to repeat it in order to complete the full program...; unless he or she should decide to quit the entire course altogether; which is certainly very unlikely due to the fact that the student had specifically chosen that course in the first place, which is certainly what he/she wants to be in the future.

Just take a look around; at the institution & course I'm currently in for example, students who have failed specific subject(s) had "systematically" proceeded to repeat those subjects in their new semester once again. (Only one of two had decided to quit the entire course altogether, and that is usually because they have already came to the firm conclusion that this particular course is not for them, or that they had been accepted into another better institution for the same course.)

Other than that; what other choices does the student has than to repeat the failed subjects once again in order to get to pass & complete the program?

Looking at the vast amount of students coming in every semester, the institution will certainly still earn regardless; even if all the students start quitting their courses halfway through...

Just look at the additional amount of charges that the failed students would have to undergo just for re-submission of projects or re-sitting of exams (provided the failed students are being given such a chance to begin with - as this certainly cost less); not to forget the cost of appealing as well, which the failed students will certainly be making.

Obviously students would have to pay the institution even much more to REPEAT the particular subject(s) once again next semester.

Obviously if money is such a concern, the institutions would certainly love to fail the students at maximum opportunity. (It is certainly very hard for the students to decide to quit the entire course at the point of time, unless they are the type that just love throwing money away to such institutions.) (The institution would be earning no matter what; regardless of the students quitting or not.) (Most students would just decide to repeat instead of changing institutions for just the same course once again.)


Secondly, having a "fail-safe" option or "security-boundary/check" in place; to prevent lecturers from simply failing students is a very good practice in my opinion; as lecturers simply failing students out of emotional stress/reasons tend to be characteristically commonplace among institutions.

Indeed, the lecturers who have failed students should be answerable to the higher authorities as to the rational for doing so; objectively according to the outlines, briefs, criteria(s), & such.

Obviously a student should "logically" FAIL if he/she did NOT do work, did not submit assignments ( ), did not attend the presentations, or did not attend the exams/tests as such ( ). (What an understatement to say that such students would fail...)


Finally, it is good that lecturers should be having responsibility; like you have mentioned LUCT has in your post above.


Because if it is indeed free of charge (FOC) or fees heavily subsidized; then by all means be driven to be "hard" or even "brutal" to the students to your heart's content! (Because after all, the students don't have to pay; and they are having free education in a world class institution of renowned standard; that WILL get them employed once they are out.)

But in this case, in expensive private institutions such as LUCT or Taylors; "Students are paying "A LOT" of money" for degrees that are not even accredited and can guarantee the student's bright future for example... As such, do such institutions need to be so arrogant & egoistic (and start failing students acting like they are the best-elite institution out there)?


BTW, there is really nothing wrong with LUCT as far as I can see, other than the higher fees than usual (where Taylors is no different), and the rowdy/distracting African-American students in there (?). (The Malaysian students over here in Taylors are certainly very rowdy & distracting to the study environment as well.)


P.S., having an "exclusive" topic/thread in this forum just for complaining & attacking this particular institution (LUCT) is way too "premium" & "exclusive" in my opinion. (I guess there should also be such a topic/thread for some of the other institutions as well.)


Anyway, enjoy your life at LUCT, there is really nothing bad about it from what I can see. (If you are not so strong financially and have the desire to be around only with Malaysian students; then there are certainly plenty of other choices around.)


Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jun 30 2011, 01:45 AM

Does anyone have a list of the "fees" for the Design programs? (I'm specifically interested in the Architecture program.)


As an aside, I have also decided to read through this entire thread just now and came across specific figures of the high fees mentioned by some of the members in here, and I got to say that;

Taylors is suddenly made to be even much more expensive than ever then...; when comparing to LUCT...


For example, RM 30K & 50K for the diploma & 4 year degree programs at LUCT is certainly very reasonable indeed..., at Taylors, the diploma programs = RM 60K (the old rate), and the new 3 year degree programs are close to about RM 200K...


As for the accommodation here at Taylors; I am paying about RM 1000 a month for just a tiny space... (I was also informed that the shared rooms cost exactly the same...) Then, would you also like to pay RM 10 for each meals?

"But never mind, because Taylors students are very rich and drive expensive sport cars; they can afford it." - Said by the staffs.


Hence, LUCT is not that expensive after all... (As I have been given the impression of...)


I'll really appreciate it if someone could provide me with a list of fees for LUCT's design related programs (or just for the architecture programs alone).

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jul 2 2011, 02:21 AM

That you very much.


My e-mail address is:

alpine1000a@yahoo.com


Regards.

---

Added on July 2, 2011, 10:47 pmNah..., even at Taylors, we are all required to pay the extra RM 2K+ each semester for all of those administrative & miscellaneous charges...

Heck, I am even required to pay for my own electricity & water bills at the hostel. (As if the rental is already not that costly enough... ) - no pantry area, no kitchen, no refrigerator, no microwave oven; but just a tiny room that's all.

Seriously, LUCT can never be as costly as Taylors mann...

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jul 2 2011, 10:48 PM

I meant to have wrote RM 100K, and not RM 200K.


Taylor's fees is really darn costly & overpriced anyway; comparing to LUCT's (which was already claimed by all to be exuberant...).

Regards.

---

Added on July 4, 2011, 2:29 amWow, the student's rights/protection & reputation really seems to be THAT strong in LUCT huh?

Regards.

This post has been edited by Benjamin911: Jul 4 2011, 02:31 AM

The last I saw (recently); they are already having a brand new hostel building with big single en-suite rooms + attached single bathrooms; for about RM 1K per month (if I'm not mistaken).

It looks really good & nice compared to the other hostels in the other institutions...

Regards.