Accelerated subjects (1 Viewer)

[flashyGoldFish]

So some weird things I noted in the rankings

James Ruse #of year 12: 173 # of distinguished students: 232
Baulkham Hill. # of year 12: 195 # of distinguished students: 200
North Sydney Boys # of year 12: 160 #of distinguished students: 181

Im sure that there are others.

I assume this is all form accelerated subjects. Sort of a form of cheating by getting kids from the year below to boost the ranks. These probably the best of examples because these three schools would still be top top schools without the boost.

So should accelerated subjects count to school rankings for when the student wrote the paper, or in the year that the student finishes year 12?

 

[iJimmy]

So should accelerated subjects count to school rankings for when the student wrote the paper, or in the year that the student finishes year 12?

no

 

[D94]

I wouldn't call that cheating. Anyway you have those in the current year contributing to the ranks for the year above so it tends to balance out.
The school rankings are unofficial so this hardly is a pressing issue.

Also I don't think you can distinguish those who are accelerated and those who aren't.

 

[anomalousdecay]

It's not exactly cheating.

The students still have to study the same amount of time, or sometimes more than other students in the state with the same mark.

As D94 said, the school rankings are unofficial.

An accelerated student for maths, bear in mind usual ends up doing 12+ units for HSC, so its still fair.

Its just that it is much harder to get into that top 5% of the state for a 95+ ATAR than getting a lower 80+ ATAR, due to competition.

There are some students who genuinely need to get into courses that require very high ATARs and for them, the most securing way to do this is by doing accelerated subjects.

 

[michaeljennings]

So some weird things I noted in the rankings

James Ruse #of year 12: 173 # of distinguished students: 232
Baulkham Hill. # of year 12: 195 # of distinguished students: 200
North Sydney Boys # of year 12: 160 #of distinguished students: 181

Im sure that there are others.

I assume this is all form accelerated subjects. Sort of a form of cheating by getting kids from the year below to boost the ranks. These probably the best of examples because these three schools would still be top top schools without the boost.

So should accelerated subjects count to school rankings for when the student wrote the paper, or in the year that the student finishes year 12?

HAHAHAH you do know other schools allow their students to accelerate as well right?

 

[anomalousdecay]

HAHAHAH you do know other schools allow their students to accelerate as well right?

Yeah this.

Any student can accelerate a subject at any school.

If the school itself does not offer the class, then the student may do accelerated courses at a different school or in their own time.

 

[rumbleroar]

accelerated shouldn't count as part of the final % of b6 for a year 12 cohort
I reckon they should have like two lists: total b6 (inc. accel.) and then y12 b6 sans accel. (it makes several fair comparisons without disregarding the efforts of the accel classes completely)

 

[D94]

accelerated shouldn't count as part of the final % of b6 for a year 12 cohort
I reckon they should have like two lists: total b6 (inc. accel.) and then y12 b6 sans accel. (it makes several fair comparisons without disregarding the efforts of the accel classes completely)

But how would you know who accelerated and who didn't? I don't think schools should disclose to the press, such as the Sydney Morning Herald, of which students were accelerated.

Also, the numbers will be very similar - that is, a list containing accelerated and a list not containing accelerated. The year above will most likely have accelerated students from the current year; and the current year will have accelerated students from the year below. You would be shifting the numbers down, but it would be unlikely there would be a huge different in numbers especially for the higher ranked schools.

 

[rumbleroar]

But how would you know who accelerated and who didn't? I don't think schools should disclose to the press, such as the Sydney Morning Herald, of which students were accelerated.

Also, the numbers will be very similar - that is, a list containing accelerated and a list not containing accelerated. The year above will most likely have accelerated students from the current year; and the current year will have accelerated students from the year below. You would be shifting the numbers down, but it would be unlikely there would be a huge different in numbers especially for the higher ranked schools.

I guess that point is also true, it would be difficult to differentiate
but still, I don't really like how accel. students are factored into the B6 %'s for the school rankings
idk

 

[LoveHateSchool]

I guess that point is also true, it would be difficult to differentiate
but still, I don't really like how accel. students are factored into the B6 %'s for the school rankings
idk

I don't think there's enough schools that accelerate for it to factor that much tbh. Mainly just the selective that accelerate people to in particular get gen/2U/3U maffs done early. Some private schools as well. But compared to 700 odd in the state, I think acceleration is a minor percentage of the HSC cohort each year.

 

[Leffife]

I don't think there's enough schools that accelerate for it to factor that much tbh. Mainly just the selective that accelerate people to in particular get gen/2U/3U maffs done early. Some private schools as well. But compared to 700 odd in the state, I think acceleration is a minor percentage of the HSC cohort each year.

Damn straight. This is the answer.

 

[Erinaceous]

I don't think there's enough schools that accelerate for it to factor that much tbh. Mainly just the selective that accelerate people to in particular get gen/2U/3U maffs done early. Some private schools as well. But compared to 700 odd in the state, I think acceleration is a minor percentage of the HSC cohort each year.

This. Also (this is just for my school) apparently our 2u maths accelerated class - the majority do more badly than if they'd taken 2u in year 12.

I think there's really no point in separating accelerated and non-accelerated if only for the fact that most accelerated kids will probably view their accelerated course as a trial - something to do so they can get the feel of the HSC. I don't think high scaling courses are normally offered for acceleration either so meh.

^ Just my opinion

 

[highschoollife]

Accelerating in one subject, does not actually give that particular person an advantage over another. In fact, it kind of disadvantages the one who accelerates in a subject. I mean you get less time to learn stuff. Unless your the type of person who gets 100% no matter what test you do.

 

[simplyinsanity]

Accelerating in one subject, does not actually give that particular person an advantage over another. In fact, it kind of disadvantages the one who accelerates in a subject. I mean you get less time to learn stuff. Unless your the type of person who gets 100% no matter what test you do.

That's why usually only the top students are given the opportunity to be accelerated. Also, the main advantage of accelerating is that you can get one subject out of the way. It means you can spend more time on other (possibly weaker) subjects the following year.