There could be a simpler explanation for that, for business courses at least. If I'm not mistaken, Nottingham Malaysia's entry requirements are typically BBB for A-levels or an ATAR of 86 for SAM. Meanwhile Monash Sunway's entry requirements are CDD for A-levels or an ATAR of 70 for SAM.

This is a huge difference and I would assume that the students marginally meeting the entry requirements for Monash would account for the majority of these subject failures. But it is true, failure rates are high although the papers may not be the hardest ever written. I would not know how Nottingham compares based on depth or difficulty though.

Haha, being a university from the UK does not automatically mean it has a higher standard of education.

I feel that the failure rate is not the drawback but rather, the consequence of the low entry requirements set by Monash, possible to attract more students. However, it does mean that there is still a sort of quality control within the course where students who under-perform will still be failed; the low entry requirements simply offer an opportunity to prove yourself. Then again, only the toughest subjects would have such failure rates.

Those are comparisons between SAM, a 1-year pre-u course and A-levels, a 2-year pre-u course (which is usually taken at an accelerated 1.5 years in colleges here). Inevitably, the A-level syllabus beats SAM in depth, they are simply different courses. Does that translate to a higher standard of undergraduate degrees? Not necessarily. However, I did realise that those who previously sat for A-levels appeared to have an easier transition to the basic first year subjects.

Some subjects are naturally tougher so they have failure rates of 30+%. My point was that the lax entry requirements would make these failure rates seem unnaturally high. As you have an ATAR of 90+, this should not be a major concern...