Programs Undergraduate Degree in Perth Western Australia

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around choosing between the University of Western Australia (UWA) and Curtin University for an undergraduate degree in Physics. UWA is noted for its theoretical focus and prestige, while Curtin emphasizes practical laboratory experience and offers more flexibility with optional units. Participants highlight that UWA's curriculum includes a required "Experimental Physics" unit, whereas Curtin integrates lab work throughout its courses. The consensus suggests that if a deeper theoretical understanding is desired, UWA may be the better option, while those interested in hands-on experience might prefer Curtin. There's also mention of the Australian National University (A.N.U) as a potential alternative, questioning if its reputation justifies relocating. Ultimately, both universities provide solid education in Physics, and personal convenience and career goals should guide the decision.
Mr Cheese
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi guys!

I was thinking of pursuing a degree in Physics and was thinking of doing my undergraduate where I live (Perth). I was just wondering which would be a better university to attend, U.W.A or Curtin. Any help would be much appreciated :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The UWA course seems to be more mathematically oriented, but the Curtin course seems to leave more room for optional units, which could be dedicated to achieving a similar level of mathematical education, anyway. UWA also has a required unit, "Experimental physics," as part of the course, while Curtin appears to place a greater emphasis on laboratory experience throughout the rest of the course. As the UWA website isn't cooperating, I'm not currently able to look deeper into the particulars of the units offered, but I'm sure similar topics are covered by each university.

Both are great universities from my understanding. UWA is possibly somewhat more "prestigious," however, if you're looking for a university with a prestigious name, you're probably in the wrong country. From what I've heard from students in the Engineering department, UWA places a far higher value on theory, whereas Curtin increases the emphasis on lab, and technical experience. I am not certain whether this carries over to the other faculties, but I imagine it would be a similar situation. If you're interested in a deeper understanding of the theoretical side of the subject, I'd probably be slightly more inclined to recommend UWA. Both of these uni's are great, however, and I'd personally just pick whichever would be more convenient for me (in terms of travel, networks with older students in times of need - don't worry so much about this though, this will develop regardless). Both will provide you with a degree, and extensive knowledge in the field of in Physics, which is ultimately what you're aiming for.

Edit: I'm looking to transfer to Curtin for a double in Engineering/Physics, so if you choose Curtin, you'll know a PF'er, lol.
 
Last edited:
As a non-Australian, non-engineer, I'd just add to the following two comments.
Cynix said:
Both are great universities from my understanding. UWA is possibly somewhat more "prestigious," however, if you're looking for a university with a prestigious name, you're probably in the wrong country.
Like Cynix mentioned, you shouldn't be really looking for prestige, but as an observation, I've heard of UWA, but not of Curtin. But, again, this might mean nothing.
Cynix said:
From what I've heard from students in the Engineering department, UWA places a far higher value on theory, whereas Curtin increases the emphasis on lab, and technical experience.
If that's true, I'd go with UWA, because I think it's better to err on the side of theory in your undergrad. You can namely remedy the lack of practical knowledge in your first months on the job, but it's much harder doing it the other way around. On one hand, more labs and technical experience might get you a job faster, but the options of someone better-versed in theory are much broader later on. That's what I found thus far, at least.
 
I find the greater emphasis on laboratory and practical experiments keeps me more enthused about future prospects. Getting a taste of what the future holds is very exciting for me. Also, I suspect it would be far easier to learn some theory out of a book than it would be to gain access to labs, etc, to practice your technical skills. Though, if you were guaranteed a job straight out of uni, this wouldn't be a problem.
 
I think theoretical might be better for me. It also looks like I'll be doing a second major in maths probably. Do you think this would change anything?

Would A.N.U be worth considering? In other words is it good enough to warrant the move?
 
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...
Back
Top