-
Looking for HSC notes and resources? Check out our Notes & Resources page
<<<<<<tell Me Just One Thing>>>>>> (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter instinct
- Start date
lazychic
** hOnEy_mELdeW **
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2002
- Messages
- 677
yeh std english people cant get band 6.. highest is band 5/6..
this is becos the outcomes set fo std eng is not to let people achieve higher marks than people in adv eng..
get what i'm sayin?
its kinda like they dont want people in std to beat the adv people.
this is becos the outcomes set fo std eng is not to let people achieve higher marks than people in adv eng..
get what i'm sayin?
its kinda like they dont want people in std to beat the adv people.
.
i dont know if its true but i think thats quite logical really.. i mean those who do a higher degree of english are obviously better at it. Thats not to say that the people in standard are all deadshits but because the UAI is a RANK, they have to compare you right across the state and we start off with change together and the way to separate us would be through the difficulty of the subject....
thats fucked. maybe i should have done adv english then. im coning first in std english, but now i cant get band 6. oh thats so fucked. are you sure thats right? i know no one got in band 6 last year, so i thought this year the marking would be slightly easier and more leniant for std english because lots of people complained about it before...
can someone confirm this please?
my teacher always says that it is not capped, its just damn hard to get band 6... but he keeps saying it is possible...
i dont understand why it would be capped at band 5... when it comes down to MATHEMATICS and GENERAL maths.. its a similar story, however why is general maths not capped and people can get in band 6 for general maths.. its like, general maths is like the std maths compared to adv english?
why is std english supposedly capped where general maths isnt? cause obovisouly the mathematics studetns are capable, thus, they dont want general maths people to beat mathematics..
hmmmm
am i making sense?
oh well
can someone confirm this please?
my teacher always says that it is not capped, its just damn hard to get band 6... but he keeps saying it is possible...
i dont understand why it would be capped at band 5... when it comes down to MATHEMATICS and GENERAL maths.. its a similar story, however why is general maths not capped and people can get in band 6 for general maths.. its like, general maths is like the std maths compared to adv english?
why is std english supposedly capped where general maths isnt? cause obovisouly the mathematics studetns are capable, thus, they dont want general maths people to beat mathematics..
hmmmm
am i making sense?
oh well
lazychic
** hOnEy_mELdeW **
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2002
- Messages
- 677
hey! jus cos ur doin std eng.. ur still capable of gettin a UAI of like 90+ or sumthing.. jus cos u do adv doesn't mean ur more advantaged..
if ur like rite the bottom of adv..and rank no1 like u r now.. its betta off ur doin std.. of course!!
english and maths is 2 totally different subjects!
but its becos general maths and maths dont do the same course/topics thats y.. and different syllabus (i think).. and different outcomes. so its like general maths and maths learn different things.. eg (general maths wouldn't hav logs and exp. stuff..possibly not differientin and integration etc..
if ur like rite the bottom of adv..and rank no1 like u r now.. its betta off ur doin std.. of course!!
english and maths is 2 totally different subjects!
but its becos general maths and maths dont do the same course/topics thats y.. and different syllabus (i think).. and different outcomes. so its like general maths and maths learn different things.. eg (general maths wouldn't hav logs and exp. stuff..possibly not differientin and integration etc..
You are all wrong!
No courses are capped in that manner!
It is possible to achieve Band 6 in English (Std), but as instinct's teacher said, it is difficult! This difficulty is not intentionally imposed by the Board to disadvantage Standard students but rather stems from the fact that the Standard course examines different outcomes to the Advanced course, and most students (or all, as in the case of last year) are simply not proficient enough to perform at that level!
There is nothing that prevents Standard students from gaining higher marks than Advanced students! That's just blatantly wrong, and shows a complete misunderstanding of how the system works.
Even in the Advanced course, only 4.35% of the students were in Band 6.
You need to also remember that bands have nothing to do with your UAI! HSC marks in different courses cannot be compared and the percentages of students in each performance band will differ across all courses.
UAIs are not based on the reported HSC marks that have been aligned to the performance bands, but are instead calculated from raw HSC marks (a raw HSC mark is the average of the raw mark gained in the examination and a school assessment that has been statistically moderated by raw examination marks).
Changes in the way that the Board reports HSC marks has no effect on UAIs.
There is no difference in scaling between the Standard and Advanced courses.
You may suddenly cry out and say, "Hey! But what about the data from that percentile table? What about LazSeeker results? And that list of scaled courses??". The data in the UAC percentile table compares aligned HSC marks to scaled HSC marks. The aligned HSC marks for the Standard and Advanced courses are different - they have different outcomes. Advanced students on a raw mark received a higher aligned mark than Standard students on the same raw mark. Consequently an aligned HSC mark corresponds to different scaled marks for
Standard and Advanced students. However, the UAI is based on raw HSC marks, and sidesteps the Board's alignment procedure, which ultimately gives Standard and Advanced students the same scaled mark if they had the same raw mark. Both the Standard and Advanced are scaled together as if it was a single course.
LazSeeker converts aligned HSC marks to scaled HSC marks, and so there appears to be an apparent discrepancy - but there is not.
The list of scaled courses is taken from the data in the UAC percentile table, and even though the Standard and Advanced courses were scaled together, students who undertook Standard ended up with a lower scaled mean than those who did Advanced. This was not predetermined. It is merely a reflection of the poor performance of Standard students in 2001.
The lack of Standard students in Band 6 and the small proportion of Standard students in Band 5 were entirely consistent with the performance of Standard students on the common 'Area of Study' paper. Few Standard students received high marks on the common paper and, as markers were unaware of which scripts were from Standard students and which were from Advanced students, there was no bias in the marking of this paper that disadvantaged Standard students.
Please banish the myth from your mind.
No courses are capped in that manner!
It is possible to achieve Band 6 in English (Std), but as instinct's teacher said, it is difficult! This difficulty is not intentionally imposed by the Board to disadvantage Standard students but rather stems from the fact that the Standard course examines different outcomes to the Advanced course, and most students (or all, as in the case of last year) are simply not proficient enough to perform at that level!
There is nothing that prevents Standard students from gaining higher marks than Advanced students! That's just blatantly wrong, and shows a complete misunderstanding of how the system works.
Even in the Advanced course, only 4.35% of the students were in Band 6.
You need to also remember that bands have nothing to do with your UAI! HSC marks in different courses cannot be compared and the percentages of students in each performance band will differ across all courses.
UAIs are not based on the reported HSC marks that have been aligned to the performance bands, but are instead calculated from raw HSC marks (a raw HSC mark is the average of the raw mark gained in the examination and a school assessment that has been statistically moderated by raw examination marks).
Changes in the way that the Board reports HSC marks has no effect on UAIs.
There is no difference in scaling between the Standard and Advanced courses.
You may suddenly cry out and say, "Hey! But what about the data from that percentile table? What about LazSeeker results? And that list of scaled courses??". The data in the UAC percentile table compares aligned HSC marks to scaled HSC marks. The aligned HSC marks for the Standard and Advanced courses are different - they have different outcomes. Advanced students on a raw mark received a higher aligned mark than Standard students on the same raw mark. Consequently an aligned HSC mark corresponds to different scaled marks for
Standard and Advanced students. However, the UAI is based on raw HSC marks, and sidesteps the Board's alignment procedure, which ultimately gives Standard and Advanced students the same scaled mark if they had the same raw mark. Both the Standard and Advanced are scaled together as if it was a single course.
LazSeeker converts aligned HSC marks to scaled HSC marks, and so there appears to be an apparent discrepancy - but there is not.
The list of scaled courses is taken from the data in the UAC percentile table, and even though the Standard and Advanced courses were scaled together, students who undertook Standard ended up with a lower scaled mean than those who did Advanced. This was not predetermined. It is merely a reflection of the poor performance of Standard students in 2001.
The lack of Standard students in Band 6 and the small proportion of Standard students in Band 5 were entirely consistent with the performance of Standard students on the common 'Area of Study' paper. Few Standard students received high marks on the common paper and, as markers were unaware of which scripts were from Standard students and which were from Advanced students, there was no bias in the marking of this paper that disadvantaged Standard students.
Please banish the myth from your mind.
lazychic
** hOnEy_mELdeW **
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2002
- Messages
- 677
oh btw..
sowweeez instinct... fo tellin u myths
but thats what i purely got told by my friend...and my friend got told by this hsc dude..that explains abt the scaling etc.. so yehh..
anyways its cool..hmmm...good luck wit da aimin of band 6! hehe..
sowweeez instinct... fo tellin u myths
but thats what i purely got told by my friend...and my friend got told by this hsc dude..that explains abt the scaling etc.. so yehh..anyways its cool..hmmm...good luck wit da aimin of band 6! hehe..
lazarus always comes n pwns wat any1 says bout hsc
haha
so yaeh
dun mess around wi fhim =P
http://www.sports.det.nsw.edu.au/results/chs/athletics/day2.htm#106
OMG
we came 4th
im so sad
at least we beat westfield sports high
sorry...this is irrelevant
but im pissed off
GO JAMES RUSE!!!
haha
so yaeh
dun mess around wi fhim =P
http://www.sports.det.nsw.edu.au/results/chs/athletics/day2.htm#106
OMG
we came 4th
im so sad
at least we beat westfield sports high
sorry...this is irrelevant
but im pissed off
GO JAMES RUSE!!!
saladsurgery
kicking the cack
damn! you know too much.
it also seems you are perhaps a little too passionate about the whole scaling thing.
It depends how 'top' you are.
Near the top of the state is always going to be better than around the middle regardless of what course you're referring to.
Last year, being at the 93rd percentile of Standard students meant you would have been fairly close to the average (~50th percentile) if you had been an Advanced student (the scaled marks are the same). If you consider "top in standard" to be higher than the 93rd percentile, then yes it would be better, judging by last year's results.
Near the top of the state is always going to be better than around the middle regardless of what course you're referring to.
Last year, being at the 93rd percentile of Standard students meant you would have been fairly close to the average (~50th percentile) if you had been an Advanced student (the scaled marks are the same). If you consider "top in standard" to be higher than the 93rd percentile, then yes it would be better, judging by last year's results.
Big Willy
Cabra Junkie RULES
i doubt it, it was just a rumour wasnt it?
Its prob because no one got 90+ this year
Its prob because no one got 90+ this year