School Not Letting Certain Students Into Advanced. (1 Viewer)

[idkkdi]

I'm pretty sure students can attend the USYD Bridging Course every January, regardless whether they're going to uni next year or not. Pretty sure you have to pay for the course, if they don't get into advanced and still want to learn extension on their own?

Faculty of Science - The University of Sydney

I doubt coaching colleges have specialised services for this since it seems really niche but I'm pretty sure private tutors can address this and get them up to speed.

" it seems really niche " -> the normal class. ye no point specialising when it's pretty obvious what covers it.

 

[Eagle Mum]

I doubt coaching colleges have specialised services for this since it seems really niche.

In this forum & IRL, it seems to be very common that students are turned away from the Advanced maths course because they have only completed 5.2 and not 5.3. Someone should develop an efficient bridging course with the 5.3 content that is not covered in 5.2.

 

[CM_Tutor]

In this forum & IRL, it seems to be very common that students are turned away from the Advanced maths course because they have only completed 5.2 and not 5.3. Someone should develop an efficient bridging course with the 5.3 content that is not covered in 5.2.

Suppose this was done... how would the school react to requests to be admitted to Advanced based on this coaching college course?

 

[TheGoingGetsTough]

This problem (of students being blocked from doing higher stage 6 maths levels based on stage 5 content) comes up frequently. It’s a travesty that keen students are blocked from learning. Are there bridging courses (eg. at coaching colleges) that can enable these students to take the Advanced course in Yr 11. Term 4 of Yr 10 and the long holidays between Yr 10 & 11 might be sufficient for very motivated students to cover the gap between 5.2 and 5.3. Someone really ought to offer it - if not, sounds like a potential business opportunity...

That honestly sounds pretty bad. I see where you are coming from but getting credentials from a privately run coaching college would be a bad for students with poor parents.

I think the schools should let you do whatever subject you want and let you suffer the consequnces if you fail to keep up.

 

[idkkdi]

That honestly sounds pretty bad. I see where you are coming from but getting credentials from a privately run coaching college would be a bad for students with poor parents.

I think the schools should let you do whatever subject you want and let you suffer the consequnces if you fail to keep up.

I suspect it's sometimes a bit tight on money for school to run enough classes.

 

[Eagle Mum]

Suppose this was done... how would the school react to requests to be admitted to Advanced based on this coaching college course?

You suggested upthread a term 1 test..

 

[Eagle Mum]

That honestly sounds pretty bad. I see where you are coming from but getting credentials from a privately run coaching college would be a bad for students with poor parents.

I think the schools should let you do whatever subject you want and let you suffer the consequnces if you fail to keep up.

I’m not suggesting external credentialling - schools can perform their own assessments. I’m just suggesting a bridging course. TBH, in this digital era, I would have thought a motivated student could cover most of the content on their own, but the number of times this presents as an issue (the gap between 5.2 and 5.3), a bridging course seems an obvious solution.

I’m far from a fan of coaching colleges, but many who frequent this forum attend them, so I think a bridging course which enables students to bridge a relatively small gap so that they can study a desired subject at school seems more worthwhile than the many other services I’ve heard of them offering.

I agree with your last suggestion and that’s saying something as a parent of a student who was in a MEx2 class of three students which, wrt pace, catered to the student who couldn’t score more than single digit marks as percentages in tests, because he thought he would need the subject to be an engineer. He was the group’s rate limiting step for two terms (when he finally dropped out) and my eldest ended up having to race through a third of the course the month before the HSC exam. I think teachers do need to pace their teaching to ensure all topics are covered in a timely manner, but within reason, classes ought to be as inclusive as possible, the elephant in the room being school rankings based on HSC performance.

 

[CM_Tutor]

You suggested upthread a term 1 test..

Yes, I did. My idea was for the student to demonstrate their ability to the school.

But, if a coaching college were involved / certifying the student's ability, I think the resistance from some schools would be extreme. There are teachers who reflexively reject anything that they know comes from a tutor and so tutoring being overtly involved would be a negative in some schools.

I was also thinking from the coaching college's perspective... suppose a student learns the content but the school refuses the change in enrolment - would the parents seek some extent of refund? My point is that there are potential problems from the coaching college's perspective, though there should be ways to support a student trying to bridge the 5.2 to 5.3 gap. The difficulty is that the school has the power to make the decision and some do not like attempts to influence them by students or their parents or by anyone perceived as an outsider.

 

[CM_Tutor]

I’m not suggesting external credentialling - schools can perform their own assessments. I’m just suggesting a bridging course. TBH, in this digital era, I would have thought a motivated student could cover most of the content on their own, but the number of times this presents as an issue (the gap between 5.2 and 5.3), a bridging course seems an obvious solution.

I’m far from a fan of coaching colleges, but many who frequent this forum attend them, so I think a bridging course which enables students to bridge a relatively small gap so that they can study a desired subject at school seems more worthwhile than the many other services I’ve heard of them offering.

I agree with your last suggestion and that’s saying something as a parent of a student who was in a MEx2 class of three students which, wrt pace, catered to the student who couldn’t score more than single digit marks as percentages in tests, because he thought he would need the subject to be an engineer. He was the group’s rate limiting step for two terms (when he finally dropped out) and my eldest ended up having to race through a third of the course the month before the HSC exam. I think teachers do need to pace their teaching to ensure all topics are covered in a timely manner, but within reason, classes ought to be as inclusive as possible, the elephant in the room being school rankings based on HSC performance.

Ok, a bridging course makes more sense to me, especially if the school will agree to testing at the start of the year and not waiting until then to decide if a test will be administered.

As for the "elephant in the room", I agree strongly that school rankings / ratings are distorting decision making. The best interest of the school and the best interests of each individual student are not necessarily aligned, and it is sad to see decisions that appear to reflect a greater focus on the school. With the MX2 case you mention, it appears that the wishes of one student were accommodated in a way that came at the expense of the needs of the other two students, and it sounds like the teacher needed to rebalance priorities.

There are difficult decisions to make here and the added pressure of rankings-based comparisons is unhelpful but also unavoidable. I do not envy the challenge facing any parent in advocating for their child when faced with the current system.

 

[TheGoingGetsTough]

I’m not suggesting external credentialling - schools can perform their own assessments. I’m just suggesting a bridging course. TBH, in this digital era, I would have thought a motivated student could cover most of the content on their own, but the number of times this presents as an issue (the gap between 5.2 and 5.3), a bridging course seems an obvious solution.

I’m far from a fan of coaching colleges, but many who frequent this forum attend them, so I think a bridging course which enables students to bridge a relatively small gap so that they can study a desired subject at school seems more worthwhile than the many other services I’ve heard of them offering.

I agree with your last suggestion and that’s saying something as a parent of a student who was in a MEx2 class of three students which, wrt pace, catered to the student who couldn’t score more than single digit marks as percentages in tests, because he thought he would need the subject to be an engineer. He was the group’s rate limiting step for two terms (when he finally dropped out) and my eldest ended up having to race through a third of the course the month before the HSC exam. I think teachers do need to pace their teaching to ensure all topics are covered in a timely manner, but within reason, classes ought to be as inclusive as possible, the elephant in the room being school rankings based on HSC performance.

Mathsonline is an excellent resource. Coupled with the 5.3 textbook a well motivated student(myself) could catch up. The difference between 5.2 and 5.3(advance) is not too much. The real challenge and difference between a 5.3 and 5.2 student in my opinion is study and attitude

A tutor is not required to catch up with other students. Online resources and a textbook should be sufficient