I think they were refering to the OP : )Fuck james ruse.
I think they were refering to the OP : )Fuck james ruse.
learn the system before you talk shit you douchebag fuckhead.I say it is unfair, all the douche-bag fuck-heads drag you down, sounds unfair to me...
No you can't. For 3 reasons:You can definitely make PDHPE and 4 unit maths of equal difficulty... you could take any number of complex things from medicine/physiotherapy
So anyone who disagrees with you is petty? That's some real solid logic you've got going thereThere you go! Happy? (Don't bother posting 'no', LOL ... it won't annoy me and it will just make you look petty ha, ha, ah, ha ha).
Ciao!
ATAR and HSC are more or less the same system. SAME scaling, only difference is ATAR has no 100UAIDon't be so quick to criticise. Have any of you read the article about the UAI being dumped for HSC students from the 2010 HSC year (I doubt it will get through this year despite speculation to the contrary)? The new system will be similar, it is called the ATAR (Australian Tertiary Admission Ranking) and all senior high school students in Australia will be eligible to receive one, with the scaling done by UAC (Universities Admissions Commission) the same for each state and territory. Queensland will keep their OP (Overall Position) system until 2012, or perhaps even later. So ... the highest rank will be 99.95, the lowest is likely to be 'Below 30' ... in other words, 'available upon request'.
My system is not the same as the ATAR. However, for the sake of education speak, let me adopt ATAR as the new name for my proposed system for iniversities admission rankings.
First of all you just scaled marks. Yes you do have scaling, only difference is that yours is linear. Second how are you going to get the school based assessment mark without aligning? I spose you'll just let easy schools have their 100 assessment marks, etc.School-based Assessment Mark
98/100*91/1 = 89.18, which becomes 89 (nearest whole number).
External Assessment Mark
95/100*91 = 86.45, which becomes 86.
HSC Mark
89+86 = 87.5, which of course, becomes 88 (nearest whole number).
Ciao!
Calm down, my friend. If you wish to complain, go complain to Board of Studies and yes I agree with you. It is quite unfair but what can we do about it?Learn to read. Posting 'no I don't agree' and not justifying your point of view is petty as I have gone to a lot of trouble to post arguments supporting my own point of view, and therefore students or lay people shouldn't spam and write a simple 'no' without justification. However, you may wish to type 'no' you can, but I won't reply...
NO, it is NOT scaling. Call it 'linear scaling' if you like but it is completely different to the current scaling system (albeit, I admit there are some accidental similarities which need not be rectified... ask me about it if you like) because students are aware of a CAP. Their mark will not effectively be scaled... it will simply be changed, e.g. currently I believe the General Maths external HSC examination to be marked out of 80 in the HSC... what happens is final exam marks from all students of the course in NSW Australia are multiplied by 100, aligned and then reported.ATAR and HSC are more or less the same system. SAME scaling, only difference is ATAR has no 100UAI
First of all you just scaled marks. Yes you do have scaling, only difference is that yours is linear. Second how are you going to get the school based assessment mark without aligning? I spose you'll just let easy schools have their 100 assessment marks, etc.
People doing D&T are still going to complain that there marks are capped. You haven't done anything to solve anything.
Your main problem as far as I can tell, is you want to get RID of scaling so that people doing d&t won't be disadvantaged.
People doing d&t are still going to complain that under your system they get scaled down. Yes it is still scaling. The only problem now is that even if they get 100% in the exam they will get scaled down to like a 90. Your system is still scaling.
NO, you just don't get 100/100. It does NOT work that way for capped subject under my system. You KNOW beforehand, in YEAR 10 that you are choosing a capped subject. It would be information provided to all continuing student, additional and contained in the booklet currently entitled: Studying for the NSW Higher School Certificate: An Information Booklet for Year 10 Students 2009 (a new booklet comes out every year and schools are supposed to give it to students, although this is obviously not a strict policy of the Board of Studies NSW).
I did NOT make a point of normalising the difficult of every NSW HSC subject. That was a different person and you have me confused with another BoS user. I do not agree with this user on this issue and I believe subjects SHOULD be of varying degrees of difficulty.Now your point about normalising the difficulty for every subject. Not only is that impossible, we need to choose a standard. General math difficulty? Too easy for most. 4u math difficulty? Too hard for most. 2u Math difficulty? Might as well just cull 3u and 4u from the subject pool.
You're right we should have no aligning. I'm sure plenty of schools will make VERY VERY hard assessments to differentiate their students. In fact I think with the introduction of no aligning most schools won't just put incredibly easy assessments so their students can get the highest UAI (/ATAR) possible. /sarcasm.NO, it is NOT scaling. Call it 'linear scaling' if you like but it is completely different to the current scaling system (albeit, I admit there are some accidental similarities which need not be rectified... ask me about it if you like) because students are aware of a CAP. Their mark will not effectively be scaled... it will simply be changed, e.g. currently I believe the General Maths external HSC examination to be marked out of 80 in the HSC... what happens is final exam marks from all students of the course in NSW Australia are multiplied by 100, aligned and then reported.
Again, with aligning, students' marks would NOT be aligned, at all, under my new system. Okay? Maybe not to you, but it is to me. Don't try to argue that just because you go to some fancy selective school which extends you to university-level in High School subjects that your marks should be pushed up more. (I think this was what you were getting at, but to be honest I am not entirely sure what your last point was... however I understood the rest.)
Link, quote, or excerpt please.marks contributed to the ATAR ... with the maximum rank being 99.95, only raw marks would be contirbuted to the Australian Tertiary Admissions Ranking under my proposed system.
I want to know specifically and in detail why you dislike the scaling system.With no aligning or moderating, the simple solution to the problem of schools potentially creating easy assessment tasks is to set 5 assessment tasks per subject per year for the HSC (from Term 4 of Prelim - Term 3 of HSC). Simple, easy, why did you not realise that? The trial would be and already is, part of the School-based Assessment Mark and therefore it is a school assessment task. Trials should be the same across the state, in my opinion. I believe they already are the same. However, if this is not the case please let me know! I really do think scaling is unfair and I do actually believe that Australian students can stand up to the Boards of Studies throughout Australia and to UAC. It has gone on long enough that students marks be unfairly treated. Sure, it's hardly a social justice issue, but hey, why not make things more simple... not to simple like back in the day of the x/500 TER with NO SCALING whatsoever and NO CAPPING... that would be ridiculous.
Let's just have caps that everyone should be aware of, provided they pay attention at subject choices night and read the reminder notices they would receive in Years 11 and 12... "your subject is capped at 91" or "this subject is capped at 95, please be aware of this, the maximum mark you may achieve is 95, which represents first place in the state if anyone achieves this high raw mark" etc.
Any more qualms?
Feel free to PM me on BoS or just continue to post here (which is preferable to me, LOL). Bye for now!
Yes, I did know that.OP, I can see you've put effort into your policy proposals, but you are sadly and greatly misinformed.
Do you understand the different concepts of moderation, alignment and scaling? It doesn't appear like you do.
Did you know that the way the Board of Studies reports the aligned marks to you has no bearing at all on UAC's calculation of the UAI (ATAR)?
Mathematics is not always objective. It can be manipulated to achieve certain results, naturally. You do not know how the UAC scales subjects. You know they use an algorithm but you don't know what the algorithm is or what is looks like, unless you work or have worked from the UAC post-2001 you actually don't know for sure what you're advocating.At present, the method of scaling used to compare different courses in the calculation of the aggregate is 100% fair - because there is no human intervention at all, and there are no assumptions made about the difficulty of each course. Scaling of each course is carried out afresh each year, using a complex mathematical algorithm - looking at the relative performance of candidates in each course, compared to their performance in other courses.
Flawed system? Wow, I'm cut dude. [/sarcasm] It's just a proposal and as I have said before, it is not meant to be a perfect system, but I do believe involving students in marking processes for the NSW HSC and other nation-wide Certificates of Education in Australia is a good idea. Students should have access to raw marks in all Australian states, just like they used to, pre-2001 (actually, UAI was introduced before 2001, but the new Standards-based HSC was introduced for examination in 2001, which brought with it the ills of aligning, moderating and a misinterpretation of scaling (due to some students believing aligned marks, reported marks that is, have a bearing on your overall UAI rank... which they don't).Unlike your flawed system, there are no arbitrarily defined "caps" on subjects. How can you assume one subject is "easier" than another? It's all subjective. This is why the current system, which objectively determines "caps" using a mathematical formula, is fair.
Don't bash "scaling" before you know the facts.
So you're saying that even if they fuck up assessments, they don't deserve to get a lower rank?Yes, but moderation is still unfair CEM. Tell me how it isn't. The School-based Assessment mark a student receives in any NSW HSC subject is equal to the mark achieved in the HSC external assessment or exam that matches their rank.
E.g.
Student A achieves a School-based Assessment Mark of 75 in Biology.
Student A achieves 94 in the exam.
Because Student A achieved only an average School-based Assessment Mark, and was ranked twentieth from thirty-four students, they receive th twentieth best HSC exam mark achieved by a member of one of the two Biology classes at their educational institution (or school/TAFE).
Therefore, twentieth best HSC exam mark was 61. Student A achieves the following NSW HSC Biology marks at the end of a school year:
School-based Assessment Mark: 61
HSC Examination Mark: 95
HSC Mark = (61+94)/2 = 155/2 = 77.5, which becomes 78.
So Student A is disadvantaged for slipping up in say, two assessments, being ranked near the top in all other Biology assessments for their school, acing the exam and then... disadvantaged. She gets a mark of 78% rather than a mark = (75+94)/2 = 169/2 = 89.5 = 90.
So she drops from a Band 6 final HSC mark to an average Band 4 mark. Yes, so what? But this would have an adverse impact on her ATAR, forcing her to take the long road to get to her chosen career path or to work in odd jobs, which may leave her unsatisfied and unhappy throughout her life (unlikely yes, but at the very least, having missed out on admission to university courses, she might struggle financially to care for herself or burden her parents for some years).