NESA is pushing an aboriginal agenda - apparently aboriginals did mathematical and physical analysis to design a mudhut before the stolen generations (2 Viewers)

[thicckoolkid]

NESA themselves said they removed "peripheral content".

I'm willing to bet peripheral content meant content they deemed to technical

If you're willing to bet, then why don't you go look into it? Either way, I seriously doubt that you'd be more informed about what truly needs to be included over the professionals/teachers that are consulted.

 

[coolcat6778]

If you're willing to bet, then why don't you go look into it? Either way, I seriously doubt that you'd be more informed about what truly needs to be included over the professionals/teachers that are consulted.

The only time they mention "dynamic" in the new syllabus , let's make that 11 points (5500 words) on indigenous stuff


old syllabus "hydrostatic and dynamic pressure"


Yup, evidence suggests that the peripheral content they removed is useful technical stuff

 

[coolcat6778]

1995 data (notice higher candidature (almost 10000 people) and higher female percentage):


2024 data (male | female) :

Its funny how one of the main reasons for dumbing down the physics and engo syllabus was to get more girls in the course (clearly it's done the opposite, as the smart girls didn't want to do a half assed "physics" course) Only 22% of girls do hsc physics in its current form.

 

[coolcat6778]

If you really want to learn about aboriginal people, just do Aboriginal studies

 

[thicckoolkid]

The only time they mention "dynamic" in the new syllabus , let's make that 11 points (5500 words) on indigenous stuff
View attachment 50628

old syllabus "hydrostatic and dynamic pressure"
View attachment 50627

Yup, evidence suggests that the peripheral content they removed is useful technical stuff

Not to defend NESA or anything, but I lowkey don't think they would remove "useful" stuff for stuff that isn't. Let's just see how the new syllabus fares.

 

[coolcat6778]

Not to defend NESA or anything, but I lowkey don't think they would remove "useful" stuff for stuff that isn't. Let's just see how the new syllabus fares.

NESA just released the new science syllabus for 2027. Here are the notable changes for Physics.

- Getting rid of thermodynamics completely, a topic which would've been used again in engineering physics in uni
- Getting rid of angular velocity ω
- Removed multiple formulas from the formula sheet, including angular velocity and specific heat capacity.

+ Adding useless aboriginal crap (are you serious, leftists?)
++ Explain why Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander Peoples used inclined planes to move heavy objects
++ Describe how Aboriginal Peoples use the wave velocity and wavelength of water waves to approximate water depth
++ Analyse the motion of projectiles used by Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander Peoples
+ Adding more useless qualitative stuff to rote learn for mod 7 and 8
+ Added no new formulas at all, while removing atleast two.

 

[coolcat6778]

No mechanics topics is useless, and thermodynamics definitely isn't useless (stuff relating to changes in energy). Yet NESA still removed them for the 2027 syllabus

 

[thicckoolkid]

1995 data (notice higher candidature (almost 10000 people) and higher female percentage):
View attachment 50629

2024 data (male | female) :
View attachment 50630
Its funny how one of the main reasons for dumbing down the physics and engo syllabus was to get more girls in the course (clearly it's done the opposite, as the smart girls didn't want to do a half assed "physics" course) Only 22% of girls do hsc physics in its current form.

So, which syllabus are you criticising? The current one or the new one that's still being drafted? Also the subject wasn't "dumbed down", according to this new study (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6156605/) "girls outperform boys in these (STEM) subjects at school"

 

[coolcat6778]

So, which syllabus are you criticising? The current one or the new one that's still being drafted? Also the subject wasn't "dumbed down", according to this new study (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6156605/) "girls outperform boys in these (STEM) subjects at school"

Both of them deserve condemnation, however the drafted 2027 syllabus deserves even more.

 

[thicckoolkid]

NESA is constantly removing and adding topics that are used in Uni. And why would they include the formula for angular velocity on the formula sheet if it isn't in the syllabus anymore?

 

[coolcat6778]

NESA is constantly removing and adding topics that are used in Uni. And why would they include the formula for angular velocity on the formula sheet if it isn't in the syllabus anymore?

It isn't in the 2027 syllabus anymore. There's NO mentions of angular velocity, and they completely removed thermodynamics in the 2027 syllabus. I've had a look at the 2027 syllabus (which is final, not a draft).

And seriously, aboriginal stuff like "analyse how aboriginal people used inclined planes to move stuff easily" could've been generalised to "analyse why inclined planes make stuff easier to move up"

 

[thicckoolkid]

Both of them deserve condemnation, however the drafted 2027 syllabus deserves even more.

You seem to expect a lot from the syllabus of a high school subject. I don't think there's anything that would actually make you happy.

 

[thicckoolkid]

It isn't in the 2027 syllabus anymore. There's NO mentions of angular velocity, and they completely removed thermodynamics in the 2027 syllabus. I've had a look at the 2027 syllabus (which is final, not a draft)

Yeah, if there's no mention of angular velocity in the syllabus, why would the formula for it be on the sheet?

 

[coolcat6778]

You seem to expect a lot from the syllabus of a high school subject. I don't think there's anything that would actually make you happy.

Clearly the VCE syllabus and the 1990s HSC physics and engo syllabus do. These physics examination aren't making you write 19 marks (100 lines) worth of useless essay regurgitation

 

[thicckoolkid]

It isn't in the 2027 syllabus anymore. There's NO mentions of angular velocity, and they completely removed thermodynamics in the 2027 syllabus. I've had a look at the 2027 syllabus (which is final, not a draft).

And seriously, aboriginal stuff like "analyse how aboriginal people used inclined planes to move stuff easily" could've been generalised to "analyse why inclined planes make stuff easier to move up"

It's still under consultation, according to NESA. They just post it online so teachers can email in complaints or critiques.

 

[coolcat6778]

Yeah, if there's no mention of angular velocity in the syllabus, why would the formula for it be on the sheet?

bro what are u tryna say
this formula is present on the current formula sheet for the current physics syllabus as it is mentioned in the current syllabus (2017). However, it's removed from the new syllabus (2027) since they removed all mentions of angular velocity

 

[thicckoolkid]

Clearly the VCE syllabus and the 1990s HSC physics and engo syllabus do. These physics examination aren't making you write 19 marks (100 lines) worth of useless essay regurgitation

Honestly, since you're complaining so much, email your teacher your complaints (or NESA) and ask them to pass them on to NESA. This is what syllabus consultation is for, don't just sit around and complain, if you have a problem, try and fix it.

 

[coolcat6778]

Honestly, since you're complaining so much, email your teacher your complaints (or NESA) and ask them to pass them on to NESA. This is what syllabus consultation is for, don't just sit around and complain, if you have a problem, try and fix it.

they clearly do NOT listen to people lmao (I wasn't here to complain about the 2000 syllabus introduction, but you can find MANY old boredofstudies posts complaining about the physics syllabus from like 2003)

 

[thicckoolkid]

bro what are u tryna say
this formula is present on the current formula sheet for the current physics syllabus as it is mentioned in the current syllabus (2017). However, it's removed from the new syllabus (2027) since they removed all mentions of angular velocity
View attachment 50636

So why were you complaining that they removed the formula from the formula sheet? Isn't that obviously what would happen?

 

[coolcat6778]

So why were you complaining that they removed the formula from the formula sheet? Isn't that obviously what would happen? View attachment 50637

I meant that they will stop teaching the concept of angular velocity and specific heat capacity in the 2027 syllabus (aka dumb down)