• We have a few events lined up for the October school holidays!
    Watch this space...

Official HSC Results Thread: So how did u go? (1 Viewer)

Lazarus

Retired
Joined
Jul 6, 2002
Messages
5,968
Location
CBD
Gender
Male
HSC
2001
ih8exams said:
My main reason for writing this message is to find out how many people disagree with the system or fell low on uai due to the system and have realised that the system benefits those who do easier subjects.
The system doesn't unfairly advantage those who take 'easier' subjects - the difficulty of the content of a course is not, at any stage of the scaling process, taken into account.

You should familiarise yourself with the system before condemning it. (Direct any queries to the Technical Arcana forum.)
 

fashionista

Tastes like chicken
Joined
Nov 29, 2003
Messages
901
Location
iN ur PaNTs
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
they haven't taken the marks down have they? i tried to check them again this morning to print them and it wont sign in...it keeps telling me this page is currently unavailable
 

dont_b_simple

New Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2004
Messages
26
i think the uac way of determining uais is unfair and sucks.we should just all sit an over all exam/ the same one exam and they could rank us according to that then u'd have ur TRUE rank because everyone would have done the same exam...they way they do it now is shit
 
Last edited:

ih8exams

New Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
3
Exactly

Lazarus said:
The system doesn't unfairly advantage those who take 'easier' subjects - the difficulty of the content of a course is not, at any stage of the scaling process, taken into account.

You should familiarise yourself with the system before condemning it. (Direct any queries to the Technical Arcana forum.)
Hello again,

You just answered my comment pretty much. And i quote, "the difficulty of the content of a course is not, at any stage of the scaling process, taken into account".

This is what im talking about. The new system is wrong. I understand the new system which was designed to create all courses equal but as i was saying it is unfair to those who push themselves to do the harder subjects. In other words if i sat easier subjects for my hsc and passed with all 90 i end up in the 90's which to me dissadvantages those who sit harder subjects and get average marks.

Cheers.

I feel the system needs to be revised.
 

Lazarus

Retired
Joined
Jul 6, 2002
Messages
5,968
Location
CBD
Gender
Male
HSC
2001
ih8exams said:
Hello again,

You just answered my comment pretty much. And i quote, "the difficulty of the content of a course is not, at any stage of the scaling process, taken into account".

This is what im talking about. The new system is wrong. I understand the new system which was designed to create all courses equal but as i was saying it is unfair to those who push themselves to do the harder subjects. In other words if i sat easier subjects for my hsc and passed with all 90 i end up in the 90's which to me dissadvantages those who sit harder subjects and get average marks.

Cheers.

I feel the system needs to be revised.
The scaling system is not new - it is the same one that has been used since 1986.

Variations in difficulty between courses are removed when marks are standardised.

If you took all of the raw marks from Mathematics Extension 2 and subtracted 20 from them (to simulate a 'harder' exam), it would still be scaled exactly the same. If you took all of the raw marks from Textiles and Design and added 20 to them (to simulate an 'easier' exam), it would still be scaled exactly the same.

This is because scaling has nothing to do with how easy or hard a given course is, or even how students perform in a particular course. The scaling for a course is determined by the propensity for the students taking that course to do well in all the courses they took. This is determined mathematically by examining all student ranks simultaneously.

Nearly all complaints regarding scaling arise from a misunderstanding of the system.


dont_b_simple said:
i think the uac way of determining uais is unfair and sucks.we should just all sit an over all exam/ the same one exam and they could rank us according to that then u'd have ur TRUE rank because everyone would have done the same exam...they way they do it now is shit
The aim of scaling is to determine what your marks would have been if all students had sat all exams - it's the same thing. :)
 

ih8exams

New Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
3
Why would you subtract 20 from a harder course and add 20 for an easier course. Wouldnt this just makes the subjects equal pretty much which is once again unfair to those who took the harder subjects???

As for it being a new system, it is, as the changes in scaling has changed since then. Harder subjects were always scaled higher(either this or we have been misled by many media and school articles)

To me, it doesnt matter too much anyway cause i am proud and did get a good mark(still slightly jipped by the system) but i still find the system unfair but for those out there who were,i feel sorry for you. Like a friend of mine who pushed himself to do the hard subjects did quite well, all in 70s and one in the 80s but ends up with a uai in the 60s.

Also i know that if you want to go to uni anyway the unis still look at your hsc marks and subject selection to determine if you could undertake and complete the course.
 

~ ReNcH ~

!<-- ?(°«°)? -->!
Joined
Sep 12, 2004
Messages
2,502
Location
/**North Shore**\
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
I would say that the system is fair - except for capping. There are two sides to this coin i.e.
1. That smarter people will exploit subjects with a less able candidature
2. That smarter people who actually want to do the subject (because they enjoy it) are being disadvantaged.

I'm of the belief that capping should be eliminated. More able students aren't necessarily going to flock to Business Studies or PD/H/PE because the candidature is less able - I believe that such students will still stick to the traditional Physics/Chemistry/Economics/4U Maths combo because of the "prestige" of such subjects.
Ask five hundred bright Yr 12 students whether they would do General Maths because it's "easier" to do well. I'd be inclined to believe that 99.9% of them would choose not to because it prevents uni opportunities and doesn't sound "as good" as 4U Maths.

In all, I believe the HSC is fair. But to introduce capping disadvantages smarter students (who want to do capped subjects) to a greater degree than it does the less able students who would hypothetically "do worse" because of an inundation of smarter students... (which wouldn't happen)
 

Lazarus

Retired
Joined
Jul 6, 2002
Messages
5,968
Location
CBD
Gender
Male
HSC
2001
ih8exams said:
Why would you subtract 20 from a harder course and add 20 for an easier course. Wouldnt this just makes the subjects equal pretty much which is once again unfair to those who took the harder subjects???
You can add and subtract whatever marks you want from whatever courses you like, and it will make no difference to how everything is scaled - it was just an example.


ih8exams said:
As for it being a new system, it is, as the changes in scaling has changed since then. Harder subjects were always scaled higher(either this or we have been misled by many media and school articles)
Harder courses aren't scaled higher because they are harder. They're scaled higher because they're taken by better students. If a course is taken by better students, it makes it harder for an average student to obtain a good rank in the course (because they're competing against above average students). The UAI is all about ranking students.

If you convinced all the Mathematics Extension 2 students to take Food Technology, and all the Food Technology students to take Mathematics Extension 2 (i.e. swapping the candidatures), the scaling parameters for each course would be swapped as well - even if they all had really low raw marks!


ih8exams said:
Like a friend of mine who pushed himself to do the hard subjects did quite well, all in 70s and one in the 80s but ends up with a uai in the 60s.
The marks themselves are completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter whether he gets all 70s, all 80s, or all 90s. What matters is how many other students he beat in each course. If you take a 'hard' course and get 90, but everyone else gets 95, you actually haven't done that well - unless everyone else was just really smart, which would justify some positive scaling (tough competition makes it hard to get a high rank).

If you take an 'easy' course and only get 50, but everyone else only gets 40, you actually haven't done that poorly - unless everyone else was just 'less smart', which would justify some negative scaling (it was too easy for an average student to get a high rank).

And this is how the system works. Aside from the issue mentioned by Rench, it isn't flawed in any of the ways you have pointed out.
 

stace212

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2004
Messages
73
Location
East Kurrajong
I have to say one thing.... although I dont need my UAI as I'm not going to uni, the difference between my marks and UAI was pathetic, I was sittin here thinkin yeh I did better than I thought I would. Then I looked up my UAI. Not Happy Jan!!!
 

ay_caramba

Crazily Sane.
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
298
Gender
Female
HSC
2004
i did a LOT better than i expected, i was ready to settle for an *anything over 90* uai..
economics- 94
ancient history- 98
english adv- 94
chemistry- 91
maths adv- 91

UAI- 99.1
im still shocked!!!! :O
 
Last edited:

cuivienen

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2004
Messages
120
Gender
Female
HSC
2004
HSC Marks:

2 Ancient History: 89/100
2 English (Advanced): 86/100
1 English Extension 1: 46/50
1 English Extension 2: 48/50
2 Senior Science: 88/100
2 Visual Arts: 97/100

UAI: 94.90

:)
 

Iron

Ecclesiastical Die-Hard
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
7,765
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
cuivienen said:
HSC Marks:

2 Ancient History: 89/100
2 English (Advanced): 86/100
1 English Extension 1: 46/50
1 English Extension 2: 48/50
2 Senior Science: 88/100
2 Visual Arts: 97/100

UAI: 94.90

:)
Strange...My top mark was a 92 for gen. math (of all things), and my lowest mark was an 86 for english standard. I got a fat 95.35...But someone like you...i mean...a 97 for art etc. - I cant help thinking the marking's a little unfair to people who go bloody excellent in one subject and excellent in the rest. (not that i'm complaining...and not that you're far off me)
 

tensai

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2004
Messages
44
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
ay_caramba said:
i did a LOT better than i expected, i was ready to settle for an *anything over 90* uai..
economics- 94
ancient history- 98
english adv- 94
chemistry- 91
maths adv- 91

UAI- 99.1
im still shocked!!!! :O
WOW! u seriously lack self-believe mate! u only did 10 units and ancient history scales like crap. U could've got even higher UAI
 

tensai

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2004
Messages
44
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
cuivienen said:
HSC Marks:

2 Ancient History: 89/100
2 English (Advanced): 86/100
1 English Extension 1: 46/50
1 English Extension 2: 48/50
2 Senior Science: 88/100
2 Visual Arts: 97/100

UAI: 94.90

:)
Wo! ur UAI is unexpectedly low for the results u got. Does senior science and VA scale crap?
 

lauraisadora

New Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
17
Location
North Coast NSW
Gender
Female
HSC
2004
hey.. a little late but anyway... i got 97.9 UAI and came 2nd in the state for italian beginners and 3rd for french continuers :)
 

ay_caramba

Crazily Sane.
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
298
Gender
Female
HSC
2004
tensai said:
WOW! u seriously lack self-believe mate! u only did 10 units and ancient history scales like crap. U could've got even higher UAI
lol aww thanx mate :) it honestly was a heart attack moment for me, its just that i never really worked *that* hard this year, always been a bit of a slacker (never been to tuition in my life, never made study notes due to laziness.. hell, i even went to a wedding the weekend before the hsc).. so yeah, i still expect someone to come and tell me that they made a mistake with my uai lol.. anyways, im grateful and v. happy obviously
oh yeah, and i knew ancient had crap scaling, but it was my absolute FAVOURITE subject ! i couldnt have lived without it!!
 

CraoPosaune

New Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
15
Location
depths of insanity...
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
i did better than i expected on most fronts:

ancient: 93
physics: 87 (!!!!!)
maths: 77
english: 83
english extn1: 43/50
music: 84 (!!!!!)
music extn: 40/50 (!!!!)

UAI: 90.70 (!!!!!!!!!!)

How i got into the 90's ill never know!!!
 

Pangit_pangit

New Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
1
All the fuss over a silly number!!

I know im heaps late to reply......but im ecstatic bout my results..even tho i wont get into my first pref (Bcom @ UNSW- actuary- bloody everyone wants to do it!!).

adv eng- 81/100 (i hate king lear, silly, silly topic.....oh and english all together)
adv mathematics- 93/100
ext math- 46/50 (wtf happened there...difficult exam...but i love maths)
physics -88/100 (cant complain)
modern history- 89/100 (argh.....one off a band 6...daym....yep...spent too much time on Germany...but that was the first time i nearly finished a modern exam....so im over the moon)
studes of religion- 43/50 (man i ripped it in the trial)

Overall im pleased wit my result.... it may seem like nuffin for others but...but it GOOD for me. UAI..94.25!! happy happy camper!!

Well...cyall next yr at Uni...enjoy the freedom....its bullshit time now!!!!!
 

caramelheaven

serial coconut.
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
22
Location
upper north shore
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2004
In Deep Regret!

This is for all 2005 HSCers.. STUDY AND WORK DAMNIT! im sooooo kicking myself right now for putting no effort into this thing they call the HSC. seriously.. its just one year to work ur bum off.. get to it! :mad: :mad: :mad:

biology - 80/100
business - 81 /100
adv english - 84/100
ext english 1 - 42/50
ext english 2 - 43/50 :D
drama - 78/100 :confused:
italian - 82/100
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top