Who didn't study after today's exam ? (1 Viewer)

[apollo1]

Chemistry.

oh yeah chem as well.

 

[Some Vunt]

Yes it does. To get a band six in ancient history, you not only need to memorise a lot of notes, but they also need to write with logic.
I don't think 'smart' will get anyone a band six. It is motivation and their eagar to strive that gets them there.

Memorise, and know how to write. This isn't out of reach of the average intelligent person, whereas a lot of the stuff in MX1+2 is and Physics and Chem have odd questions in there sometimes, and Mathematics Q9+10 can even do this. Tbqh, I know someone that will get a band 6 in Modern that I beat in every common subject we do. (SoR2, English, etc.) So no, you don't have to be smart.
And your second statement lends itself to saying that you said modern history for no reason at all...

 

[Some Vunt]

For at least Physics, you just need to remember information. The current course is dumbed down and is almost all about rote learning. Your point about beating someone in common subjects is an isolated situation and isn't a good example. Whilst knowledge is essential, aptitude is key. Having the aptitude over smarts is needed to do well in any subject. The skill set in Modern and the skill set in Maths are very different and can't be fairly compared in a way so there is no bias towards already bad misconceptions. Anyway, I can advocate and vouch for either side.

Physics, I honestly have no idea, but I know that Chemistry definitely has a few questions thrown in every year that like <1% will get. So, it doesn't matter whether the course is dumbed down, they can always throw something in that will surprise you in the sciences.
Every common subject I have with someone that is coming top 5 in any HSIE subject, I am beating them. Apart from one beating me in SoR2 (a HSIE subject).
Also, through the scaling system it can be seen that Modern scales worse than these subjects because the students in Chem, MX2, Physics, etc. do well overall compared to the cohort of students doing Modern, and this is usually the case because they are smarter.

 

[Midnight_Lotus]

I tried studying maths but every time I opened the book I'd just stare at it blankly for 30min or so before falling asleep. Eventually I gave up and watched some movies

 

[pinkiipromise]

Memorise, and know how to write. This isn't out of reach of the average intelligent person, whereas a lot of the stuff in MX1+2 is and Physics and Chem have odd questions in there sometimes, and Mathematics Q9+10 can even do this. Tbqh, I know someone that will get a band 6 in Modern that I beat in every common subject we do. (SoR2, English, etc.) So no, you don't have to be smart.
And your second statement lends itself to saying that you said modern history for no reason at all...

What are you talking about? I didn't even mention modern history

 

[Some Vunt]

What are you talking about? I didn't even mention modern history

I saw Modern in their signature, and when they said "I can advocate and vouch for either side" I assumed they were lending their argument for modern.
And I can advocate and vouch for either side just as much as I do SoR2.

 

[D94]

Physics, I honestly have no idea, but I know that Chemistry definitely has a few questions thrown in every year that like <1% will get. So, it doesn't matter whether the course is dumbed down, they can always throw something in that will surprise you in the sciences.
Every common subject I have with someone that is coming top 5 in any HSIE subject, I am beating them. Apart from one beating me in SoR2 (a HSIE subject).
Also, through the scaling system it can be seen that Modern scales worse than these subjects because the students in Chem, MX2, Physics, etc. do well overall compared to the cohort of students doing Modern, and this is usually the case because they are smarter.

Yeah, was gonna edit what I said, then I was like, stuff it, delete. But since you managed to reply...

Like I said, aptitude is key. You're seriously using scaling as a measure of how smart a person is in a course? If you look at the diverse nature of the Physics course, it's no wonder why it requires scaling in order for it to "appear" like a good course or a tough course or a course which will get you the marks. For those who are good at Modern OR Physics or any of the listed above, they will get a top band. I do both Maths and Humanities, and doing fairly well in them. Do I care that Modern doesn't scale as well? No, because I have the aptitude for both. If you don't have the aptitude for a subject, no matter how well it scales or how great of a course it seems, you're not going to do well in it.

To put it into perspective, for MX2, Physics, you may need to think a bit left field in order to get the marks. For Modern and Ancient, you need to know as much as world renowned historians in order to get the marks. The skill sets are different but at the same time dependent on aptitude and convey their own requirement of smartness.

And when I say "I can advocate and vouch for either side", I mean that there's no point trying to glorify a subject over another, based on misconceptions. I'm not lending an argument for Modern or MX2, I'm saying you can't discredit a subject based on a perceived level of required smartness. You're not really vouching for either side since you're clearly trying to show Maths/Science is > than Humanities.

 

[Some Vunt]

Like I said, aptitude is key. You're seriously using scaling as a measure of how smart a person is in a course? If you look at the diverse nature of the Physics course, it's no wonder why it requires scaling in order for it to "appear" like a good course or a tough course or a course which will get you the marks. For those who are good at Modern OR Physics or any of the listed above, they will get a top band.

This tells me you don't know what scaling is.
Scaling places the cohorts of different subjects against each other so that a fair rank can be worked out between the students. Overall, Physics student rank higher because the course is deemed more difficult than History and the students in Physics do better in their other subject than the students in History.
Aligning, is the procedure that makes raw marks appear as band 6s and makes physics appear like a good course.

I do both Maths and Humanities, and doing fairly well in them. Do I care that Modern doesn't scale as well? No, because I have the aptitude for both. If you don't have the aptitude for a subject, no matter how well it scales or how great of a course it seems, you're not going to do well in it.

I said nothing in contrary to this, there was no point for you to say this at all.

And when I say "I can advocate and vouch for either side", I mean that there's no point trying to glorify a subject over another, based on misconceptions. I'm not lending an argument for Modern or MX2, I'm saying you can't discredit a subject based on a perceived level of required smartness. You're not really vouching for either side since you're clearly trying to show Maths/Science is > than Humanities.

How am I glorifying one over the other through "misconceptions"? My perception is quite clear through evidence that the students in one course (Physics) out shine the students in the other (History).
I'm not discrediting it, I'm just stating the obvious; that MX2, Physics, Chemistry and the like need brains AND a hafty amount of hard work, whereas you can get away with doing a lot of hard work in History.
Ummm, I'm clearly expressing an opinion and at the same time vouching for the Maths/Science side. So, I'm CLEARLY vouching for at least one side... Do you even know what you're talking about?

 

[pinkiipromise]

This tells me you don't know what scaling is.
Scaling places the cohorts of different subjects against each other so that a fair rank can be worked out between the students. Overall, Physics student rank higher because the course is deemed more difficult than History and the students in Physics do better in their other subject than the students in History.
Aligning, is the procedure that makes raw marks appear as band 6s and makes physics appear like a good course.

I said nothing in contrary to this, there was no point for you to say this at all.

How am I glorifying one over the other through "misconceptions"? My perception is quite clear through evidence that the students in one course (Physics) out shine the students in the other (History).
I'm not discrediting it, I'm just stating the obvious; that MX2, Physics, Chemistry and the like need brains AND a hafty amount of hard work, whereas you can get away with doing a lot of hard work in History.
Ummm, I'm clearly expressing an opinion and at the same time vouching for the Maths/Science side. So, I'm CLEARLY vouching for at least one side... Do you even know what you're talking about?

I believe you can get band 5/6 for any subject if you 'do a lot of hard work'. The HSC syllabuses are designed so that the top band is within reach of ALL students, not just the so called students with 'brains'.

Ancient History doesn't scale that well is because students who choose the subject genuinely enjoy the subject, hence they do well. For subjects like chemistry, physics etc, majority of the students choose it simply because it 'scales' well.

Please don't speak on behalf of people that has done the subject. You barely know of the subject, why pretend you do?

 

[K4M1N3]

cbf quoting but i think it was D94 that said Physics is a 'dumbed down course'...blah blah...scales well...blah blah....

The thing about Physics is that unlike the other sciences, many questions require you to apply knowledge learned from the syllabus in unfamiliar situations not mentioned in the syllabus. THAT is why it is considered difficult and hence scales well.

 

[RookieLaw]

Re: You didn't study after today's exam ?

I've got a headache/ cold developing :'(

I feel yah man. got a sore throat and runny nose f rom being up late.

Bludged yesterday, back to hitting the books today

 

[jamesfirst]

I feel extremely guilty that I have not done enough past papers for math...

 

[slyhunter]

I did one yesterday, relax.

 

[D94]

This tells me you don't know what scaling is.
Scaling places the cohorts of different subjects against each other so that a fair rank can be worked out between the students. Overall, Physics student rank higher because the course is deemed more difficult than History and the students in Physics do better in their other subject than the students in History.
Aligning, is the procedure that makes raw marks appear as band 6s and makes physics appear like a good course.

I know very well the difference between scaling and aligning. Scaling is not purely because a subject is deemed harder or required most effort. Scaling, being determined by UAC, presents a perceived difficulty of the course. Because people to naturally well in history/humanity subjects, it doesn't require UAC to scale it as high, and so there is indeed an illusion of difficulty.

You also do MX2, and I think you will agree with me that gaining marks for half the exam is pretty easy, but it gets aligned to 80+, and scaled to about 98. I reckon that's probably the biggest flaw in the system when people with the aptitude get that boost over other subjects. Or what about Languages. There's always that one or two language that out scales MX2 in the odd year; but people with a background in that language can almost certainly get 95+, which gets scaled to what, 99. Is that without flaw?

Anyway, point being, you do the subjects that are going to get you the ATAR needed to get into Uni. There's no point doing high scaling subjects if you don't like them; you won't get a good mark.

How am I glorifying one over the other through "misconceptions"? My perception is quite clear through evidence that the students in one course (Physics) out shine the students in the other (History).
I'm not discrediting it, I'm just stating the obvious; that MX2, Physics, Chemistry and the like need brains AND a hafty amount of hard work, whereas you can get away with doing a lot of hard work in History.

What evidence? It's all been hearsay or unverifiable anecdotes. You don't even do Physics or History, I'm not sure how you can judge the level of difficulty required in each course. To get maximum marks in Physics, you need to know the syllabus inside out and apply it in left field type questions, although sometimes in very straightforward questions. To get maximum marks in History, you need to know as much as world renowned historians, and apply it effectively in a short amount of time. Neither I would are easy, and both do require brains and hard work.

Ummm, I'm clearly expressing an opinion and at the same time vouching for the Maths/Science side. So, I'm CLEARLY vouching for at least one side... Do you even know what you're talking about?

When I said vouch for either side, I meant to provide an equal argument for both sides. Not to dictatorially vouch for one side only.

Anyway, I think I've made my point, and you've made yours. I don't believe this is going to be settled, but good luck in the examinations!

 

[D94]

cbf quoting but i think it was D94 that said Physics is a 'dumbed down course'...blah blah...scales well...blah blah....

The thing about Physics is that unlike the other sciences, many questions require you to apply knowledge learned from the syllabus in unfamiliar situations not mentioned in the syllabus. THAT is why it is considered difficult and hence scales well.

No, it scales well because the examiners have told the scaling committee on the perceived hardness of the exam. That is why it has been dumbed down; they reckon we don't have the ability to answer the questions to a great extent, and to make it balanced, they just scale it well. If they thought we had the ability to do well, then it wouldn't be scaled as well and we'd all get pretty shit marks. You need to remember that it's a bunch of people determining scaling, not some universal notion that the HSC Physics course is hard. They could write an easy exam and we'd all do well in it, and it wouldn't be scaled as much. If they made an easy Physics exam, it wouldn't be considered a hard course. We'd just be regurgitating information in the exam, and that doesn't test anything at all. Hence why an obscure test is required to avoid such regurgitation. I'm not saying Physics is an easy course, by all means it's a challenging course, but it has been dumbed down in a way so that there has been a mindset created over the many years.

 

[s2 SEductive]

I chillaxed, It felt like HSC was over as soon as English was over. But now No..