JCU "Current Topics"?!?

[Vampires_Don't_Sparkle]

What are some possible topics the interviewers could ask us about this year? All I can think of is Schoolies...

 

[Ash5]

There's the Victorian Nurse strike started about a month ago.

Also, Matt has created threads on medical news, doctors in the news etc. Worth looking into that.

here: https://www.medstudentsonline.com.au/f4/.
I'm not sure what they might ask apart from medical news. Maybe something controversial, or isn't easily resolved where both sides have good reasons.

 

[godoftoast]

I doubt itd be a topic like schoolies. Its more likely to be a topical social dilemma related to health/medicine in general. I reckon something like nurses strikes would be right up their alley. You should spend some time reading through the past JCU threads. Plenty of people have divulged previous topics - its up to you to dig them out.

 

[Matt]

I doubt itd be a topic like schoolies. Its more likely to be a topical social dilemma related to health/medicine in general. I reckon something like nurses strikes would be right up their alley. You should spend some time reading through the past JCU threads. Plenty of people have divulged previous topics - its up to you to dig them out.

Although, vampiresdon'tsparkle wanted to make a post collecting together all the previous topics mentioned that would be handy.

 

[godoftoast]

Although, vampiresdon'tsparkle wanted to make a post collecting together all the previous topics mentioned that would be handy.

Yeah very handy indeed. I'll be here to sticky it up once the members have collected all those threads.

 

[DrSim123]

Perhaps the Carbon Tax issue or the Mining Tax? Or the future of politics? The Republican debate?

 

[seoi-nage]

Last year, I was given a choice of:

- Whether to legalise abortion (QLD currently does not)
- Whether to legalise euthanasia
- Wikileaks and whether people had the right to know the information released

I also know some other people who had Obesity and Asylum Seekers. I've noticed that they also bring up rather current non-health related issues, so maybe the Qantas fiasco might appear?

Just my 2 cents worth

 

[aznmagic]

thanks seoi-nage so this year, it could even be things like asylum seekers, carbon tax, war on terror etc?

 

[seoi-nage]

Yes, but I can't guarantee that you'll get a non-health topic in the interview room as different people can get a different combination of topics. The non-health topics tend to be fairly recent though so you probably would have heard about it on the news at one time or another.

 

[Benjamin]

It generally seems to be that of the three topics there is at least one that you could argue without knowing anything specific about, i.e. I got a specific abortion case from Cairns that you couldn't debate without knowing the case details, a specific thing about coal mining and then gay marriage. Friends of mine got euthanasia, abortion, wikileaks, nuclear power, immigration/migrants/asylum seekers/refugees... On top of that the panel probably won't let the debate grind to a halt, so if you choose a topic and then run out of things to say they'll most likely spur you along..

Anyway, I wouldn't be surprised if there was stuff about the spate of disasters/big world events we've had recently: oil spills, nuclear power, coal seam gas mining, uprising in Libya and Egypt etc. murder of Osama Bin Laden or Gadaffi, financial crisis/occupy movement, floods across the world, US army pulling out of Iraq, Euro crisis/Greece.... so forth. Just google "top news stories of 2011" or things like that and you'll probably find a few that could be done. Most of it is pretty interesting to read as well

 

[Vampires_Don't_Sparkle]

It generally seems to be that of the three topics there is at least one that you could argue without knowing anything specific about, i.e. I got a specific abortion case from Cairns that you couldn't debate without knowing the case details, a specific thing about coal mining and then gay marriage. Friends of mine got euthanasia, abortion, wikileaks, nuclear power, immigration/migrants/asylum seekers/refugees... On top of that the panel probably won't let the debate grind to a halt, so if you choose a topic and then run out of things to say they'll most likely spur you along..

Anyway, I wouldn't be surprised if there was stuff about the spate of disasters/big world events we've had recently: oil spills, nuclear power, coal seam gas mining, uprising in Libya and Egypt etc. murder of Osama Bin Laden or Gadaffi, financial crisis/occupy movement, floods across the world, US army pulling out of Iraq, Euro crisis/Greece.... so forth. Just google "top news stories of 2011" or things like that and you'll probably find a few that could be done. Most of it is pretty interesting to read as well

Thankyou so much!

Can you tell me what the debate is like? Do they simply ask you your opinion, i.e. "Do you think gay marriage should be legalised?". I suppose you'd then go on to list pros and cons of either side, then jusify your own stance. How long, approximately, should this go on for? (4-5 min?)

 

[Benjamin]

Thankyou so much!

Can you tell me what the debate is like? Do they simply ask you your opinion, i.e. "Do you think gay marriage should be legalised?". I suppose you'd then go on to list pros and cons of either side, then jusify your own stance. How long, approximately, should this go on for? (4-5 min?)

It's going back a bit now but from memory I believe they asked essentially what you said: Do you feel gay marriage should be legalised? It's very much upto you to define what you want to argue about - e.g. you could say "No because I feel that marriage is not a civil right but rather a religious one and therefore it's upto the religion to sanction it and not the government" or you could say "Yes because the idea of marriage as a religious ceremony has decayed and marriage now largely represents the civil union of two people - without it we are blantantly denying acknowledgement of gay relationships".... hence it's pretty easy for it to go both ways, or any way, really. It's upto you to define it. If the interviewer doesn't like where it's going they'll probably guide you a bit with their responses, but really it's in your hands.

When you're defining what you're talking about keep in mind that this is the time to shut down any future arguments - if you can forsee an argument then it looks a lot better to shut it down before it can come up than to wait for it to come around. I couldn't tell you how long it goes on for, but I will tell you that it's very unlikely you'll immediately think of all the pros and cons. It's much more literally like an argument (imagine trying to convince your parents or teachers of something) where the person who gave you the topic will be against you, regardless of what you choose to say - that way they can see how you defend your argument and so forth.

They will directly attack any statements you make, but I guess the thing you all have to remember is that these people have a huge list of topics they can ask from and from what I could tell weren't going off of pre-thought out arguments. What I'm trying to say is that it's not like the interviewer has a huge advantage over you and so exact details of things don't really have to be known - it's a concepts argument, not a specifics one. So! For all the PM's I've gotten about whether they should be learning about all this stuff - yes, but just read through some summaries and make up your mind about things. Reading opinion articles on stuff is good because you can recycle the journalists thoughts and look really smart. Anyway, go and google "top news stories of 2011" and read about some stuff. It's all pretty interesting anyway, since they're the 'top' news stories.

Not sure how helpful that post is... but hey.

 

[Vampires_Don't_Sparkle]

snip

I'm so nervous... My interview is in two days, and I really don't think I have any time left to research new topics. I can debate euthanasia, refugees/immigrants status, abortion and same-sex marriage confidently... but that's about it. Do you think I should be okay?

 

[mighty]

I'm so nervous... My interview is in two days, and I really don't think I have any time left to research new topics. I can debate euthanasia, refugees/immigrants status, abortion and same-sex marriage confidently... but that's about it. Do you think I should be okay?

Err, just going to throw my 2 cents in here. There is absolutely no guarantee that you'll get the topics that you've prepared for - so to rely on your knowledge of them alone is not ideal. Just watch the news, see what's going on in the world - current events, etc. I don't think the interviewers are trying to test your "knowledge" of the topic itself, but rather your ability to put forth a balanced argument, pros/cons, your point of view, and how well you can defend your argument. Just practice forming opinions on "controversial" topics and justifying them.

 

[Benjamin]

Err, just going to throw my 2 cents in here. There is absolutely no guarantee that you'll get the topics that you've prepared for - so to rely on your knowledge of them alone is not ideal. Just watch the news, see what's going on in the world - current events, etc. I don't think the interviewers are trying to test your "knowledge" of the topic itself, but rather your ability to put forth a balanced argument, pros/cons, your point of view, and how well you can defend your argument. Just practice forming opinions on "controversial" topics and justifying them.

Agreed. It might help you slightly to know about stuff but realistically if you go through one or two topics thoroughly and understand the process of forming an argument then it'll be pretty easy to apply that to whatever they ask you. Once you know how to debate things and how to argue things through it's really not very hard to adjust it to suit.

Don't freak out about it and don't have memorised arguments - it'll just look scripted and they'll know - just remember your process and stick by it.

 

[Flavell2010]

Agreed. It might help you slightly to know about stuff but realistically if you go through one or two topics thoroughly and understand the process of forming an argument then it'll be pretty easy to apply that to whatever they ask you. Once you know how to debate things and how to argue things through it's really not very hard to adjust it to suit.

Don't freak out about it and don't have memorised arguments - it'll just look scripted and they'll know - just remember your process and stick by it.

Hey Ben I had my interview a few days ago, I think it went well except for the debatable question. I chose a topic which specifically affects me in my everyday life. So though I knew a lot about the topic and had clear answers to back up my opinion, do you think the interviewers would have appreciated my enthusiasm/slight emotional attachment? I'm kinda worried I've ruined my chances now :l

 

[Benjamin]

Hey Ben I had my interview a few days ago, I think it went well except for the debatable question. I chose a topic which specifically affects me in my everyday life. So though I knew a lot about the topic and had clear answers to back up my opinion, do you think the interviewers would have appreciated my enthusiasm/slight emotional attachment? I'm kinda worried I've ruined my chances now :l

It depends more on how well you argued it than how emotionally attached/enthusiastic you are.. but I'd wager that if you're enthusiastic and actually believe in the topic you argued about then you've probably thought into it before which means your argument was probably pretty good. There's not much point me answering these kind of questions though because realistically... how much more do you think I know than you know yourself?

 

[Flavell2010]

It depends more on how well you argued it than how emotionally attached/enthusiastic you are.. but I'd wager that if you're enthusiastic and actually believe in the topic you argued about then you've probably thought into it before which means your argument was probably pretty good. There's not much point me answering these kind of questions though because realistically... how much more do you think I know than you know yourself?

That's fair enough, I'm just getting nervous now :l

 

[pi]

I had the options of (for intake for 2012 entry):
"Childhood obesity"
"Refugee entrance into Australia" (or something along those lines)
"Performance enhancing drugs in sport" (I chose this one)


The biggest tip I can give for these interviews and for this section (and I was lucky to get a place ) is to speak your mind and really try and be yourself. Why? Firstly, you'll be more confident in your arguments as it will be what you believe in. Secondly, you'll be less likely to contradict yourself, which is very important for this section of the interview.

JCU takes people with all sorts of ATARs (from the elite high-99s to the 95s and 96s) so the interview really makes a difference here, just be yourself and it should be fine.

 

[qwerty12321]

I have a quick question... When you say the topic is for example "childhood obesity", is this all the info you will be given? Or will you be given a particular statement/question to debate?