Time for the Sciences (2 Viewers)

[Pwnage101]

Is Ancient History just memorising text books?

I reckon it would be easier for a physics student+chemistry student to do an AH exam than for AH student to do a physics/chemistry exam. But I'm bias.

QFT

 

[BackCountrySnow]

QFT

+1

 

[Katieeee]

+1

+ 1

 

[kevinx2]

+1


+1


+1

= 3

 

[xeuyrawp]

You are statistically wrong.

As opposed to theologically wrong? Fucking lol at retards who put 'statistically' in bullshit to pretend that it's correct.

Since HSC 1999, every single student who placed in the overall top 100 of the state, had at least two units in science counting towards their UAI.

No, that's incorrect.

Moreover, there has never been a student who has recieved a UAI of 100.00, who did not take a science as part of their HSC.

That's also incorrect.

Anything else?

 

[dolbinau]

As opposed to theologically wrong? Fucking lol at retards who put 'statistically' in bullshit to pretend that it's correct.



No, that's incorrect.



That's also incorrect.

Anything else?

I thought we already established this a few pages ago?

 

[jasonml]

As opposed to theologically wrong? Fucking lol at retards who put 'statistically' in bullshit to pretend that it's correct.

The use of "statistically" is entirely valid in that context. it is describing that regardless of the semantics, raw data does not support his argument.

LeArn gRaMmAr pl0x???11/

 

[Kujah]

Is Ancient History just memorising text books?

I reckon it would be easier for a physics student+chemistry student to do an AH exam than for AH student to do a physics/chemistry exam. But I'm bias.

lol, I wouldn't think so. If I were to ask any of my friends that do Physics, they would not even bother with History at all. All they can think of is just massive content and essays after essays after essays.

But thats whats so good about History

 

[BackCountrySnow]

No, that's incorrect.



That's also incorrect.

Anything else?

that is statistically correct.

 

[obimoshman1234]

my god this is a spam thread where are the mods to lock it

 

[Pwnage101]

just like i rekon id do MUCH better in eNGLISH EXTENSION 1 AND 2 than someone who doe sthos subjects would do in MX1 AND MX2

plus dont take OUR words for it, the Board of Studies and uac BOTH acknowledge physics and chemistry as 'hard' subjects, through the scaling/moderating they give

like, getting a state ranking in business studies (whihc has about 30 000 students or whatever) wont get u above 97 aligned, but coming 200th in the MX1 paper (approx 9 000 ) makes u top 2% of teh canditure, so ud probs get 99/100 aligned

Type marks into JUAIseek or SAM -

this is what i just did, using JUAI SEEK

i put in these subjects and ALIGNED marks:

English (adv) - 94
business studies - 94
EE1-47
EE2-47
Ancient History - 94
Modern History - 94

pretty gun u say, yeh, it predicted a UAI of 99.05

now i put in these results:

chem-92
phys-92
english adv-92
MX1-92
MX2-92

and guess what, even with a lower english mark and all of them being 2 marks lower, THE UAI predicted was 99.35

this is a whole 0.30 more, even though in every course the aligned mark was 2 ;less than teh other


PLUS this doesnt take into account the 'moderation' of the Board, ie a 90% raw in MX1 wopuld align to a 98, whiel a 90% raw in business would align to 95 - i have not taken this into account, which would lead to even more dramatic changes

use JUAISEEK cause its better than SAM - ita ctually tells u what an aligned mark means u came in the stae, ie it shows that a 94 aligned in Business meant u r in the top 0.7 %, ie u needed to get in the toip 0.7% to get that mark, while in MX1 to get a 94 aligned, u only needed to be in top 10% of state, in fact if u were in the top 0.7% as in business, u would get a 99

so when u add that to it all, u can see someone who chose the scineces and maths and achieves less (much less, cause remember teh moderation, they get elss rasw marks to get a higehr aligned mark) still comes out on top

im sorry to say it, but thats just the way it is - u think it aint fair, go complain to the Board or UAC

MX1 nad MX2 are deemed 'harder' by them than EE1 and EE2

thats just the way the cookie crumbles

/.

 

[obimoshman1234]

MY god spam thread can we just lock drop this plzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

truly its just troll thread some people are taking to seriously

 

[BackCountrySnow]

just like i rekon id do MUCH better in eNGLISH EXTENSION 1 AND 2 than someone who doe sthos subjects would do in MX1 AND MX2

plus dont take OUR words for it, the Board of Studies and uac BOTH acknowledge physics and chemistry as 'hard' subjects, through the scaling/moderating they give

like, getting a state ranking in business studies (whihc has about 30 000 students or whatever) wont get u above 97 aligned, but coming 200th in the MX1 paper (approx 9 000 ) makes u top 2% of teh canditure, so ud probs get 99/100 aligned

Type marks into JUAIseek or SAM -

this is what i just did, using JUAI SEEK

i put in these subjects and ALIGNED marks:

English (adv) - 94
business studies - 94
EE1-47
EE2-47
Ancient History - 94
Modern History - 94

pretty gun u say, yeh, it predicted a UAI of 99.05

now i put in these results:

chem-92
phys-92
english adv-92
MX1-92
MX2-92

and guess what, even with a lower english mark and all of them being 2 marks lower, THE UAI predicted was 99.35

this is a whole 0.30 more, even though in every course the aligned mark was 2 ;less than teh other


PLUS this doesnt take into account the 'moderation' of the Board, ie a 90% raw in MX1 wopuld align to a 98, whiel a 90% raw in business would align to 95 - i have not taken this into account, which would lead to even more dramatic changes

use JUAISEEK cause its better than SAM - ita ctually tells u what an aligned mark means u came in the stae, ie it shows that a 94 aligned in Business meant u r in the top 0.7 %, ie u needed to get in the toip 0.7% to get that mark, while in MX1 to get a 94 aligned, u only needed to be in top 10% of state, in fact if u were in the top 0.7% as in business, u would get a 99

so when u add that to it all, u can see someone who chose the scineces and maths and achieves less (much less, cause remember teh moderation, they get elss rasw marks to get a higehr aligned mark) still comes out on top

im sorry to say it, but thats just the way it is - u think it aint fair, go complain to the Board or UAC

MX1 nad MX2 are deemed 'harder' by them than EE1 and EE2

thats just the way the cookie crumbles

/.

k.

 

[lyounamu]

just like i rekon id do MUCH better in eNGLISH EXTENSION 1 AND 2 than someone who doe sthos subjects would do in MX1 AND MX2

plus dont take OUR words for it, the Board of Studies and uac BOTH acknowledge physics and chemistry as 'hard' subjects, through the scaling/moderating they give

like, getting a state ranking in business studies (whihc has about 30 000 students or whatever) wont get u above 97 aligned, but coming 200th in the MX1 paper (approx 9 000 ) makes u top 2% of teh canditure, so ud probs get 99/100 aligned

Type marks into JUAIseek or SAM -

this is what i just did, using JUAI SEEK

i put in these subjects and ALIGNED marks:

English (adv) - 94
business studies - 94
EE1-47
EE2-47
Ancient History - 94
Modern History - 94

pretty gun u say, yeh, it predicted a UAI of 99.05

now i put in these results:

chem-92
phys-92
english adv-92
MX1-92
MX2-92

and guess what, even with a lower english mark and all of them being 2 marks lower, THE UAI predicted was 99.35

this is a whole 0.30 more, even though in every course the aligned mark was 2 ;less than teh other


PLUS this doesnt take into account the 'moderation' of the Board, ie a 90% raw in MX1 wopuld align to a 98, whiel a 90% raw in business would align to 95 - i have not taken this into account, which would lead to even more dramatic changes

use JUAISEEK cause its better than SAM - ita ctually tells u what an aligned mark means u came in the stae, ie it shows that a 94 aligned in Business meant u r in the top 0.7 %, ie u needed to get in the toip 0.7% to get that mark, while in MX1 to get a 94 aligned, u only needed to be in top 10% of state, in fact if u were in the top 0.7% as in business, u would get a 99

so when u add that to it all, u can see someone who chose the scineces and maths and achieves less (much less, cause remember teh moderation, they get elss rasw marks to get a higehr aligned mark) still comes out on top

im sorry to say it, but thats just the way it is - u think it aint fair, go complain to the Board or UAC

MX1 nad MX2 are deemed 'harder' by them than EE1 and EE2

thats just the way the cookie crumbles

/.

Scaling reflects the calibre of the students attending the course, not the difficulty of that course.

Therefore, by scaling, it is impossible to accurately compare the difficulty of one course opposed to another even though scaling can be a good indicator.

 

[2S1D3]

k.

+1

 

[Pwnage101]

Scaling reflects the calibre of the students attending the course, not the difficulty of that course.

Therefore, by scaling, it is impossible to accurately compare the difficulty of one course opposed to another even though scaling can be a good indicator.

you're right, BUT How do they compare this ' calibre of the students ' - its almost certain that the average mark for, say, MX2 is MUCH LESS THAN the average mark of chemistry (i'm talking RAW marks here in the externals)

so according to u, chem should scale better cause obvioiusly the candidates are of a higher 'calibre', as seen by their marks, cause u said the higerh teh calibre of students, the better its cales - which is a fair statement - but my point is this does nto match the facts

as i said above, if the chem marks are higer than the 4U raw marks, shouldnt chem scale higerh than 4u, cause students are of a 'higher calibre'????

u see my point, the board KNOWS some subjects are harder than others, and scales accordingly, they deem a 60% in MX2 as a much higher achievement than 60% in chem, yet wat u r saying is that courses are scaled based on how well ppl go

ie. they do judge the calibre of students as u said, but HOW they judge it is not based purely on performance in the exams and the avge raw marks, the board understands the fact that some subjects are harder than others and use this as part of their determination of scaling

 

[kevinx2]

PLUS this doesnt take into account the 'moderation' of the Board, ie a 90% raw in MX1 wopuld align to a 98, whiel a 90% raw in business would align to 95 - i have not taken this into account, which would lead to even more dramatic changes

SAM/JUAI do take into account this, aligning has already been done when you put marks into the calculators.

 

[Pwnage101]

SAM/JUAI do take into account this, aligning has already been done when you put marks into the calculators.

yeh i know that, my point was with my example how i pu business studies in aligned as 94 and chemistry aligned at 92, u would need a MUCH higher Raw mark in business to get the 94 than in chem to get the 92 (5-8 marks more), so if in reality i was to compare ppl doin different courses with same RAW marks, my example would be wronmg cause the business/histories would ahve resulted in a lower aligned mark than i assumed for them

so my point was EVEN IF u break the abrrier in these subjects and manage to get mid 90's aligned, it still gets trumped by somoeone who got lower aligned marks in maths/sciences, not to mention the fact that the non-sciene ppl would have had to get a much higher raw mark to get their aligned mark in the first place

u get me?

 

[jasonml]

yeh i know that, my point was with my example how i pu business studies in aligned as 94 and chemistry aligned at 92, u would need a MUCH higher Raw mark in business to get the 94 than in chem to get the 92 (5-8 marks more), so if in reality i was to compare ppl doin different courses with same RAW marks, my example would be wronmg cause the business/histories would ahve resulted in a lower aligned mark than i assumed for them

so my point was EVEN IF u break the abrrier in these subjects and manage to get mid 90's aligned, it still gets trumped by somoeone who got lower aligned marks in maths/sciences, not to mention the fact that the non-sciene ppl would have had to get a much higher raw mark to get their aligned mark in the first place

u get me?

+1

 

[karnage]

I for one am not looking forward to science week