First in course (2 Viewers)

[someth1ng]

they didn't teach us the content effectively. Because of this, added with confusing and sometimes overly convoluted questions mixed with simple yet badly worded questions, students were really forced to answer in what they thought the question was asking.

Yeah, I went to school before this one and I can tell when I see poor teaching methods...

I also lost a mark because of significant figures...i have my answer as 0.1 mol/L and the question had 500mL and 2.000 grams of NaOH...the only accepted 3 and 4 sig.

 

[someth1ng]

Here's a link to the assessment: https://www.dropbox.com/s/mbtox0o1s4zxlli/chem assessment.pdf

For question 2d, as a labelled diagram, I used a structural one of the chemicals - urgh.

 

[D94]

Well, with that sig figures question, it should be 3 s.f. and the second one as 4 s.f.

Funny how they attempt to justify such a question (define the verb) with the rubrics/outcomes component.

 

[deswa1]

Wow- just looked at the paper. The entire first question was just retarded. Some of the questions were decent- the one on converting ethanol to ethyl propanoate comes to mind (that was a solid question). Overall though, WTF. What did everyone else think?

 

[The Matrix]

wtf, that paper is just retarded, what school is that?

 

[someth1ng]

Yeah, most students thought it was stupid exam - some of the guys that were in the top 5 thought it was a rubbish assessment...lol.

For the ethanol one where you need to draw a structural formula, you must draw either it hydrogen bonding to water or another ethanol and also, you need to write alpha/delta - and alpha/delta + or equivalent...

 

[someth1ng]

Well, with that sig figures question, it should be 3 s.f. and the second one as 4 s.f.

Funny how they attempt to justify such a question (define the verb) with the rubrics/outcomes component.

Yeah, it should be 3sf but they accepted 4sf aswell and that's what heap of people did which is bs...

fuark for the flow chart esterification question - i lost a mark since my flow chart was missing the work "esterification" but I had all the steps - =/

 

[iSplicer]

Here's a link to the assessment: https://www.dropbox.com/s/mbtox0o1s4zxlli/chem assessment.pdf

For question 2d, as a labelled diagram, I used a structural one of the chemicals - urgh.

Slightly unconventional, but it seems like a fair assessment to me.

 

[someth1ng]

Slightly unconventional, but it seems like a fair assessment to me.

Are you serious...? Don't you expect most students to prepare for the content of a chemistry exam, not definitions of a verb - and note that it's a HSC assessment weighing 30%.

 

[iBibah]

Are you serious...? Don't you expect most students to prepare for the content of a chemistry exam, not definitions of a verb - and note that it's a HSC assessment weighing 30%.

Not saying this should be assessed, but don't you have to know the verbs to answer the question accordingly?

 

[someth1ng]

Not saying this should be assessed, but don't you have to know the verbs to answer the question accordingly?

Yes, but what you need to know is what to do with a verb.

Example:
verb: discuss
Definition: give reasons for or against an argument (I think)

In a response you're supposed to identify, describe and explain as well.

 

[someth1ng]

Here's a copy of the marking scheme: https://www.dropbox.com/s/cgp5a7fjqwflfu3/Marking_Schedule_T2_2012_Assess.doc

 

[Alkanes]

Yep i agree what others have said. First question was absolutely bs lol. I woulda flipped during the exam. It's like english how you gotta highlight the key words and deconstruct them to answer the question. But other than that, rest of the question were fairly doable theory and content based.

 

[medicore]

What happens to people ranked in the ~ top 10?
Not 1st.

 

[barbernator]

What happens to people ranked in the ~ top 10?
Not 1st.

top ten in school? or in state?

 

[medicore]

school.

 

[barbernator]

well that depends on the strength of your cohort, the ranking of your school and your class size and overall ability. impossible to tell

if you want an atar estimate though, post up your ranks, class sizes and school ranking and give it a whirl

 

[iSplicer]

Are you serious...? Don't you expect most students to prepare for the content of a chemistry exam, not definitions of a verb - and note that it's a HSC assessment weighing 30%.

Yep. Just trying to help out here.

The test is a bit weird, no doubt about it. But when it does test the content (which is most of the exam anyway) it does it reasonably well. Only a small bunch of marks are the 'weird' questions, and then too it's not asking anything that you shouldn't know. I particularly liked the question where it asked you to come up with the marking scheme, I thought that was a neat idea.

And you're definitely out of place if you whine about not being able to define 'justify'. It's a crucial HSC verb you need to be aware of!

 

[Focus is Key]

This can easily happen in school where the teachers don't set assessments and exams in any way similar to the HSC.

Example: my school has very strange assessmnets and marking schemes.
Assessment 1, although I didn't quite get to the top (~6th)
The half yearly exam gave us 20 questions and asked us 10 in the exam.

The third assessment, asked questions like "Deconstruct the question" for 3 marks and "Define the verb" for 2 marks requiring to identify the verb again and give the definition.
They took a past HSC question, instead of giving it 3 marks (original value) and keeping the marking scheme, they made it worth 6 marks and told us to produce our own marking scheme for 3 marks or so then asked us to answer the question for the 6 marks.
When I actually got my results back, they expected much more than the HSC would've - they expected all these strange things on top of the HSC marking scheme and my response had clearly satisfied all criteria of the HSC question.
Yeah, all that shit was worth around half the assessment which was weighing at 30%...

What a joke, now I'm not even in the top 10...great.

Wow, that's completely weird! I hate it when teachers try to justify putting in some of those 'deconstruction' questions and such. It should be about knowledge of the content and application!

Our Maths Teacher pulled something like this in our Assessment 1 for 2U and Ext 1 Maths. He seperated the exam into a Mark for Category A which was out of like 26. (Normal solving maths questions and typical exam questions) and Category B which was out of like 12. (which asked questions like: Explain the difference of two squares, why or why not , what two things does rationalization aim to achieve, analyse this formula ......, Questions say why and asking for only written answers etc.). Then he made both worth 50% of the exam and since I did really well in Category A (enough to place me 1st) but did quite bad in Category B (which didn't even have that many questions in the first place lol) it really made my ranks low. Also the fact he made both equal WEIGHTING but not equal amount of marks was really weird and annoying (made my mark drop 15%)

 

[someth1ng]

My definition of justify was "To give reasons for/against" - clearly, that's enough to answer a justify question but still got 0 for it because I didn't say "Justify: give reason for/against an argument".

Also note that this "Justify" question was taken directly from the HSC without alterations. It was worth 3 marks in the HSC. Also note that AFAIK, most if not all questions were taken from past HSC question and marking schemes changes to whatever they wanted.

Note that school-based assessment marks submitted to the Board must NOT include:
• measures of objectives and outcomes that address values and attitudes. (However, as these objectives are important elements of any course, schools may decide to report on them separately to students and parents, perhaps using some form of descriptive statements.)
• measures that reflect student conduct.