How much do the gaps in ranks matter when averaging out assessment and exam marks. (1 Viewer)

[O01x]

Do they even matter at all? Does NESA factor them in or not.

Hypothetically lets say there's 2 people in a class. Person A and Person B.
Person A comes 1st internally and Person B is ranked 2nd but only by 1 mark less.

When they both sit HSC, Person B gets 95 Externally and Person A gets 70. Would person's B's mark just be the average of 95 and 70 since his assessment mark would be 70 according to NESA (Since he came internally 2nd). Or will NESA factor in the fact that the gap was 1 mark and not drag down the overall mark as harshly.

 

[idkkdi]

Do they even matter at all? Does NESA factor them in or not.

Hypothetically lets say there's 2 people in a class. Person A and Person B.
Person A comes 1st internally and Person B is ranked 2nd but only by 1 mark less.

When they both sit HSC, Person B gets 95 Externally and Person A gets 70. Would person's B's mark just be the average of 95 and 70 since his assessment mark would be 70 according to NESA (Since he came internally 2nd). Or will NESA factor in the fact that the gap was 1 mark and not drag down the overall mark as harshly.

rank 1 is always placed on the highest external iirc. Starting from rank 2 gaps matter more.

 

[idkkdi]

Do they even matter at all? Does NESA factor them in or not.

Hypothetically lets say there's 2 people in a class. Person A and Person B.
Person A comes 1st internally and Person B is ranked 2nd but only by 1 mark less.

When they both sit HSC, Person B gets 95 Externally and Person A gets 70. Would person's B's mark just be the average of 95 and 70 since his assessment mark would be 70 according to NESA (Since he came internally 2nd). Or will NESA factor in the fact that the gap was 1 mark and not drag down the overall mark as harshly.

two person cohort is a bad example. iirc, they try making a bell curve and then giving people marks. a two person bell curve is just the two ends, so gaps wouldn't really matter much.

 

[O01x]

two person cohort is a bad example. iirc, they try making a bell curve and then giving people marks. a two person bell curve is just the two ends, so gaps wouldn't really matter much.

Ok what if it were a three person cohort in this situation. Person A, B, C. Person A is first, B is 2nd and C is 3rd.

Person B and C have a very small mark difference internally. Person A is way ahead of them and is virtually unaffected.

Person A ranks 1st in with a externals and internals, he keeps his mark which is 98.

Person B gets 70 externally.

Person C gets 95 externally.

How much would Person C get dragged down, would they just average the two internal and external scores or will they not drag down as harsh due to a small gap internally?

 

[Life'sHard]

Ok what if it were a three person cohort in this situation. Person A, B, C. Person A is first, B is 2nd and C is 3rd.

Person B and C have a very small mark difference internally. Person A is way ahead of them and is virtually unaffected.

Person A ranks 1st in with a externals and internals, he keeps his mark which is 98.

Person B gets 70 externally.

Person C gets 95 externally.

How much would Person C get dragged down, would they just average the two internal and external scores or will they not drag down as harsh due to a small gap internally?

I believe person B gets 70 externally but gets whoever got the closest mark to C from the HSC as his own mark internally. Idk how to properly explain it, feels like ive butchered it lmao.

 

[yanujw]

B gets 70 externally but 95 internally. Their internal rank is 2nd, so their internal mark assumes the 2nd highest external mark.
C gets 70 internally and 95 externally. Realistically this would never happen because what are the chances the highest external marks are 98, 95... and then 70?

TLDR If you are rank n internally, your internal mark is the external mark of the nth highest scored external mark in your cohort.

Hopefully this gives a better definition, but life's hard wasn't wrong, it is really hard to explain.

 

[Life'sHard]

B gets 70 externally but 95 internally. Their internal rank is 2nd, so their internal mark assumes the 2nd highest external mark.
C gets 70 internally and 95 externally. Realistically this would never happen because what are the chances the highest external marks are 98, 95... and then 70?

TLDR If you are rank n internally, your internal mark is the external mark of the nth highest scored external mark in your cohort.

Hopefully this gives a better definition, but life's hard wasn't wrong, it is really hard to explain.

No no, B gets 70 externally but 95 internally. Whilst C gets 95 externally and 95 internally I think. And then moderation and alignment happens. From what I know so far, you keep your external mark but for internal mark, that depends on rank. C shouldn't get 70 internally because B got it externally.

 

[011235]

My understanding is the same as @yanujw 's, how can B and C get the same internal mark if they are ranked differently?

 

[idkkdi]

Ok what if it were a three person cohort in this situation. Person A, B, C. Person A is first, B is 2nd and C is 3rd.

Person B and C have a very small mark difference internally. Person A is way ahead of them and is virtually unaffected.

Person A ranks 1st in with a externals and internals, he keeps his mark which is 98.

Person B gets 70 externally.

Person C gets 95 externally.

How much would Person C get dragged down, would they just average the two internal and external scores or will they not drag down as harsh due to a small gap internally?

Person C gets screwed over in internals if this was in a 3 person cohort lol.

Both 1st and last get the nth external regardless of bell curving, because you need two points to determine the start and end of a bell curve.
3 person example also isn't very good.

Anyways in most cases where dragging down applies, you would only be dragged down from the nth score by like maybe 1 mark.

 

[Trebla]

Moderating only occurs on the internal marks. The gaps between the ranks are largely preserved in that step and it’s just a matter of shifting the position of the cohort relative to the state (which is informed by the external marks of the cohort).

In your example, person B and C must have very close internal marks after moderation. Without knowing the internal mark gap between person A and the rest, it is hard to say exactly what will happen.

However, for illustrative purposes let’s assume person C gets 70 moderated internal mark (equal to the lowest external mark) then person B must get say 72 because the raw internal marks are close. Person A will get an internal mark of 98 as he/she remains first. Therefore, the (internal,external,final) marks are:
- Person A (98,98,98)
- Person B (72,70,71)
- Person C (70,95,83)

Caution - These are NOT the actual values that will arise (in fact this is considered an unusual outlier case which has a different treatment to the usual algorithm i.e. Person C would likely get 80 and Person B would likely get 85 to preserve the external average) but should be seen as an illustration of the concept of how it works generally for more “typical” cohorts.

See the link below for details with a better illustrative example:

https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/11-12/hsc/about-HSC/moderation