Mutant Kitty
Member
BOS can be my medium for me to vent this problem that I have with the HSC.
I'll keep it short, with this small example.
I have a friend who got band 6's in both visual arts and music, achieving 95 in both. She is a good singer, and has always been good at painting... She isn't intelligent, but has good knowledge of both courses.
I have another friend who did Chemistry and MX1, as well as mostly other logic based subjects. He achieved in the 80's for most subjects.
The first friend I mentioned, the artistic one achieved a higher ATAR and will use said ATAR (decent, largely due to her artistic subjects, with maths and physics pulling her down a bit) to take a place at UNSW for Engineering, whilst my second friend is likely going to UWS unless bonus points save him.
I am all for diversity in students, and I'm not an art Nazi that claims that it is useless, but the system is broken.
I was just wondering whether other people agree that a system closer to the SAT testing or at least a form of testing that measures intelligence as opposed to knowledge in many circumstances would be better. Perhaps a mandatory UMAT of sorts...
BTW, I've got into the course that I want, and did perfectly fine, so this isn't a cop out of mine, merely an observation of how the system misrepresents students through this universal metric that covers basically every course.
I'll keep it short, with this small example.
I have a friend who got band 6's in both visual arts and music, achieving 95 in both. She is a good singer, and has always been good at painting... She isn't intelligent, but has good knowledge of both courses.
I have another friend who did Chemistry and MX1, as well as mostly other logic based subjects. He achieved in the 80's for most subjects.
The first friend I mentioned, the artistic one achieved a higher ATAR and will use said ATAR (decent, largely due to her artistic subjects, with maths and physics pulling her down a bit) to take a place at UNSW for Engineering, whilst my second friend is likely going to UWS unless bonus points save him.
I am all for diversity in students, and I'm not an art Nazi that claims that it is useless, but the system is broken.
I was just wondering whether other people agree that a system closer to the SAT testing or at least a form of testing that measures intelligence as opposed to knowledge in many circumstances would be better. Perhaps a mandatory UMAT of sorts...
BTW, I've got into the course that I want, and did perfectly fine, so this isn't a cop out of mine, merely an observation of how the system misrepresents students through this universal metric that covers basically every course.