wat mark is considered good? in MX2 (2 Viewers)

[ishq]

Ahhh to be the primary source of that information.
*sigh*

 

[haboozin]

How do you (or others) know this? Please reference.

the x-head teacher at our school marks hsc's and he was just scaring people from doing it and he said top mark for 2003 hsc was 103 (or 104 i forgot) /120

86-7%

 

[~ ReNcH ~]

He didn't answer more than ~90% of the external exam, and he came first.

The highest aligned mark for 2003 was 99, suggesting that it could very well have ranged between 98.5 and 99.49. If Keypad's maximum raw mark was 108/120, then that would suggest that the highest that the Band E4 cut-off could have been is 40/120, which surely can't be right. If 40/120 aligned to 90, then 108/120 would have aligned to 98.5. Either 108/120 is a significant underestimate or the raw Band E4 cut-off was extremely low.

 

[Slidey]

Rench, care to justify your 40/120 figure?

 

[~ ReNcH ~]

Rench, care to justify your 40/120 figure?

Well, suppose the Band E4 cut-off was 40/120 and 120/120 automatically aligns to 100. Then in order to determine the mark to which all raw marks in between 40/120 and 120/120 align, we must linearly interpolate the marks.

Therefore:
40/120 --> 90
120/120 --> 100
If we plot the points A(40, 90) and B(120, 100) on a cartesian plane (with the x-axis being the raw mark and the y-axis being the corresponding aligned mark) then the line AB has equation y = 1/8x + 85 from which we can now deduce the aligned mark corresponding to each raw mark.

Suppose Keypad got 108/120, then x = 108 --> y = 98.5 and that's the lowest mark that could have been attained to be reported as a rounded aligned mark of 99.

Had the raw Band E4 cut-off been any higher than 40/120, then 108/120 would obviously yield y < 98.5 which would not round to 99. However, given that Keypad's aligned mark was 99, then the raw band cut-off must have been 40/120 or less. Either that or Keypad has underestimated his raw mark.

 

[flower_farie]

i remember my teacher telling me that if you get a band 6, it's not all that great. you should be aiming for around ~93-94. i scrapped in the 90s (with a 90), and i was terrible at ext 2.

How terrible is terrible?

 

[tempco]

How terrible is terrible?

well "terrible" is a bit too harsh. more like "decent" - by the time the hsc exam came anyway. i slept too much in 4u class during the year.

 

[Slidey]

Well, suppose the Band E4 cut-off was 40/120 and 120/120 automatically aligns to 100. Then in order to determine the mark to which all raw marks in between 40/120 and 120/120 align, we must linearly interpolate the marks.

Therefore:
40/120 --> 90
120/120 --> 100
If we plot the points A(40, 90) and B(120, 100) on a cartesian plane (with the x-axis being the raw mark and the y-axis being the corresponding aligned mark) then the line AB has equation y = 1/8x + 85 from which we can now deduce the aligned mark corresponding to each raw mark.

Suppose Keypad got 108/120, then x = 108 --> y = 98.5 and that's the lowest mark that could have been attained to be reported as a rounded aligned mark of 99.

Had the raw Band E4 cut-off been any higher than 40/120, then 108/120 would obviously yield y < 98.5 which would not round to 99. However, given that Keypad's aligned mark was 99, then the raw band cut-off must have been 40/120 or less. Either that or Keypad has underestimated his raw mark.

But how do you know you should interpolate linearly? I didn't think the scaling procedure would produce a one-one corrspondence?

 

[~ ReNcH ~]

But how do you know you should interpolate linearly? I didn't think the scaling procedure would produce a one-one corrspondence?

I asked Lazarus a while back and if my memory serves me correctly, the aligning process does use linear interpolation. I can ask him again for verification though.

 

[sikeveo]

Tempco, what pulled you up to mid 99s then?

 

[~ ReNcH ~]

well "terrible" is a bit too harsh. more like "decent" - by the time the hsc exam came anyway. i slept too much in 4u class during the year.

What mark did you get in the trials? Do you think you would have got 70+/120 raw in the HSC exam. I'm still trying to extrapolate the raw Band E4 cut-off for MX2 and seeing as you hit the mark exactly (90) you'd be the best candidate to ask.

 

[sikeveo]

The papers vary in difficulty from year to year, so its not that handy. You'll get Band 6 so don't worry.

 

[tempco]

Tempco, what pulled you up to mid 99s then?

my bio mark. got in the top 10.

What mark did you get in the trials? Do you think you would have got 70+/120 raw in the HSC exam. I'm still trying to extrapolate the raw Band E4 cut-off for MX2 and seeing as you hit the mark exactly (90) you'd be the best candidate to ask.

well, my trial mark would have been in around 75~80/120. and i would have probably got around the same mark for the hsc exam.

 

[~ ReNcH ~]

The papers vary in difficulty from year to year, so its not that handy. You'll get Band 6 so don't worry.

I guess it would give a rough guide nonetheless, particularly given the general consensus that the 2004 paper was "fair". I hope I get a Band E4, but my real target would be ~94. When I practise past trial papers, my marks tend to be quite random ranging anywhere from about 66/120 to 111/120 (so far anyway)...so I have no idea how well (or badly) I might do in the exam.

 

[blackfriday]

well consider that only 3000-odd people do 4u maths, and how many of those will get more than your estimate 40/120 raw, and there you have your band e4 cut offs. im way out of your league in maths, but doesnt it sound odd that roughly only 900 people will get over 40/120 raw in a hsc exam?

 

[pLuvia]

40/120?? isn't that low...... for a band E4?

 

[~ ReNcH ~]

Yea. I'm beginning to doubt my calculations actually, though at present there doesn't seem to be anything wrong with them - but that's most likely coz I did them . I PMed Laz about it and his calculations produced a maximum Band E4 cut-off of 82/120 which sounds more correct, but I'm not sure how he got that so I'm still awaiting a second PM from him.

 

[Slidey]

82/120 (about 70%) sounds more like it. None of this 60/120 people have been toting.

 

[~ ReNcH ~]

82/120 (about 70%) sounds more like it. None of this 60/120 people have been toting.

I'm still unsure as to how Laz got that result. He verified that the marks are linearly interpolated, but looking at my working, do you think there's anything glaringly wrong with my calculations? If anything I've probably assumed an incorrect pair of endpoints.

 

[underthebridge]

well consider that only 3000-odd people do 4u maths, and how many of those will get more than your estimate 40/120 raw, and there you have your band e4 cut offs. im way out of your league in maths, but doesnt it sound odd that roughly only 900 people will get over 40/120 raw in a hsc exam?

44% got a band E4 in mx2 last year so that would equate to 1320 ppl getting 40/120 or above (assuming 3000 ppl did it) which is still a bit dicey in my opinion - surely the cut off is way higher.

I have doubts about this linear interpolation too, i remember trying it out for mx1 and it didnt seem to work out.