Who got 99UAI+ & didn't 'accelerate' in any subject? (1 Viewer)

[tempco]

In my year, there are 3 year 11 boys doing ext 2 and 1 maths and one year 9 boy doing year 12 maths. Now, I do not object to the latter one, simply because his freakish ability should be fostered as much as possible, but the other 3 did nothing to deserve being accelerated except topping their year 8 maths involving Pythagoras and algebra.

so, why didn't you top year 8 maths, so you could be the one who would be accelerated?

Now, by their own admission all they do is do maths at home. We all know that maths is a subject which you can master with practice, even more so with 4u maths. How can a school endorse such total bull? It totally disadvantages the other year 12 students who have 12 units to juggle, not to mention the pressure. I lose faith in myself anyway when I do 4u maths at home, knowing that the year 11 boys have done more and will beat me anyway, so why bother trying?

Can I appeal? There seems no point even trying.

they don't have any preliminary subjects to deal with?

yes, it disadvantages you - but they put in the hard yards in their earlier years, didn't they?

with that mentality, you're going to be beaten anyway.

 

[withoutaface]

*Digs up thread as it becomes apparent as to how unfair acceleration is*

In my year, there are 3 year 11 boys doing ext 2 and 1 maths and one year 9 boy doing year 12 maths. Now, I do not object to the latter one, simply because his freakish ability should be fostered as much as possible, but the other 3 did nothing to deserve being accelerated except topping their year 8 maths involving Pythagoras and algebra.

Now, by their own admission all they do is do maths at home. We all know that maths is a subject which you can master with practice, even more so with 4u maths. How can a school endorse such total bull? It totally disadvantages the other year 12 students who have 12 units to juggle, not to mention the pressure. I lose faith in myself anyway when I do 4u maths at home, knowing that the year 11 boys have done more and will beat me anyway, so why bother trying?

Can I appeal? There seems no point even trying.

They'll beat you internally, and externally as well, meaning the net effect on you will be no different to if they didn't accelerate at all.

 

[Meldrum]

I'm backing you on this one.

The only people who do accel. students are the children of teachers or staff. I duxxxed 7,8,10,11 and was forbidden from accel.ing. You know why?

"It's really too much of a hassel."

 

[gorgo31]

I'm backing you on this one.

The only people who do accel. students are the children of teachers or staff. I duxxxed 7,8,10,11 and was forbidden from accel.ing. You know why?

"It's really too much of a hassel."

Nah. More likely they didn't cause everyone knows Year 9 is the most important year

 

[Sphyx]

so, why didn't you top year 8 maths, so you could be the one who would be accelerated?

they don't have any preliminary subjects to deal with?

yes, it disadvantages you - but they put in the hard yards in their earlier years, didn't they?

with that mentality, you're going to be beaten anyway.

I came to the school halfway through year 9 (having come first in my other school), and these guys were already accelerated into year 9. I myself am accelerated, but im accelerated in EVERY subject.... meaning that im in the same situation as every other person in my grade, without any undue advantage.

and to answer your question, they are enrolled in year 11, but they don't go to their classes, they get free periods from 2 of their lines to "study for year 12 subject".

and you must be joking about putting in the hard yards in year 7-9

with the situation, I AM being beaten.

 

[velox]

So stop complaining.

 

[ninipop]

I know this guy who accelerated in a subject last year and did pretty badly, around high 60's. So there is a fine line between doing well in a subject and accelerating.

 

[volition]

Well what happened at my school at the end of year 10, was they just took the top maths class at the time and said, "yeah you guys are gonna accelerate", so that's what we did(we weren't forced to, it was just kind of 'talk to us if you DONT want to do it, but otherwise you're in the class'). Our class actually went alright in comparison to the year 12 group last year, but some of them weren't really up to it. Our best mark was probably something like 94 from the accelerated class of 22 kids. I scored 82 doing 2 unit maths last year, and I'm doing it again this year, because I'm confident I'll get over 90 this year.

I guess it wasn't really for me, I tend to be a 'slow learner' who likes to learn things by practice rather than using 'brains' , and I could've done much better if I had done more study. At the end of the day, acceleration is only useful if you're good at it, and you're able to score a decent mark. I guess to some people 82 would be acceptable, but I wasn't really happy with that, because I know that I'm capable of something >90.

 

[Sphyx]

At the end of the day, acceleration is only useful if you're good at it.

yeh, duh. isnt that the point of accelerating - when you're good at something?

 

[xeuyrawp]

Who got over 99UAI and didn't take any 'accelerated' courses?

Me too!

 

[tempco]

I came to the school halfway through year 9 (having come first in my other school), and these guys were already accelerated into year 9. I myself am accelerated, but im accelerated in EVERY subject.... meaning that im in the same situation as every other person in my grade, without any undue advantage.

and to answer your question, they are enrolled in year 11, but they don't go to their classes, they get free periods from 2 of their lines to "study for year 12 subject".

and you must be joking about putting in the hard yards in year 7-9

with the situation, I AM being beaten.

undue advantage? haha, don't think so.

if you're so worked up about their advantage, drop some subjects this year, and do some next year. you're accelerated in everything, aren't you?

they still have to pass their preliminary subjects, just like you have to.

no, i'm not joking.

refer to velox.

 

[Carnivour]

undue advantage? haha, don't think so.

if you're so worked up about their advantage, drop some subjects this year, and do some next year. you're accelerated in everything, aren't you?

they still have to pass their preliminary subjects, just like you have to.

no, i'm not joking.

refer to velox.

dude, you're rude beyond belief. Sphix is obviously just stating a very valid opinion about accelerating. And plus, none of what you said has in any way justified the advantage of acceleration, especially for those that aim towards the higher UAIs. So, lay off, and refer to the topic and title of the thread.

 

[velox]

Who cares about acceleration. My sister didnt accelerate and only did 3u maths, phys, chem 3econ, 2u english and got 99.75.

 

[tempco]

dude, you're rude beyond belief. Sphix is obviously just stating a very valid opinion about accelerating. And plus, none of what you said has in any way justified the advantage of acceleration, especially for those that aim towards the higher UAIs. So, lay off, and refer to the topic and title of the thread.

and what would that be? accelerating isn't 'fair'?

i wasn't trying to justify acceleration. rather, complaints against acceleration itself aren't justified. there are smart people, and there are dumb people. there are people who have opportunities to take advantage of, and there are people who don't have opportunities to take advantage of. as for whether or not acceleration is beneficial, i think it is. i had a lot more time on my hands.

this whole thread reeks of anti-acceleration. just needed to balance it out.

 

[glycerine]

i accelerated 4 units in yr 11. wasn't satisfied with 2 of them so am redoing them. so i'm only really 2 units ahead of most people in my grade. anyway, one of my subjects i accelerated was ext 2 english which doesn't have any exams and the internal assessment is easy as to get full marks in... so when it comes to the hsc this year, i'm 1 exam down compared to the people doing 10u.

i think acceleration is good, but i'll tell you what, it's truly fucking awful to realise you HAVE to do a subject again... technically i had the option not to, but in reality if you fuck it up you're stupid not to do it again.

the thing with saying acceleration isn't 'fair' is the whole point is, it's not meant to include everyone. it's meant to single out the few people who are really really good.

 

[04er]

the thing with saying acceleration isn't 'fair' is the whole point is, it's not meant to include everyone. it's meant to single out the few people who are really really good.

but it doesn't 'single out the few people who are really really good'. Firstly, doing well in year 9 maths doesn't give a reasonable indication of how well that person can actually do in year 11 maths, and it especially doesn't show their dedication. I saw this clearly at my school. Out of 25 students that accelerated, only 3 got above 90 in ext 1 maths. The rest got marks between 50-80 and so decided to repeat. In the following year, none of those that were repeating managed to get a crack at the top 5 ranks, all taken by students that hadn't accelerated. It's really quite pathetic. How fair do you think it is, that some people who accelerated got the same mark as people who didn't accelerate? Imagine how much better those 'unaccelerated' students could have done. I say accelerate the person in EVERY subject or don't accelerate at all.

 

[glycerine]

but that's the thing, i think the fact that they even accelerated 25 people in a single subject is in itself ridiculous. acceleration is meant to be be about singling out those with the potential to reeeeally excel, not saying 'ok, well you've done pretty well so far, so let's push the lot of you ahead'.

basically you missed my point. i agree, situations like you described are stupid. i got 85 in advanced english last yr for a number of reasons and so i'm redoing it this year, because i can. however i also did really well in my other 2 units. i was the only person in my grade to accelerate in english, in fact i think i was the first person in my school to ever do it. in hindsight maybe i wasn't the best choice because i'm not overly dedicated and my life tends to be a constant soap opera (ie i wound up distracted by lots of things).

also as someone who HAS repeated a subject -- yes, there are a number of elements where you're 'advantaged', but it's also really tough, cos it's really easy to fall into the trap of 'oh, i've done it before, i can study less'... and at this point my marks are heaps better than last year but theoretically i should be topping the grade if i'm so advantaged by having done the course before right? not to mention it's hard to stay motivated and i tend to get really depressed cos i really could've just gotten the marks first time round if i hadn't been so lazy and made so many stupid mistakes.

this is kind of a ramble, but basically there's a lot of arguments for and against acceleration. but don't go assuming that repeating a subject means you've got every advantage in the world cos theres quite a few problems with it

 

[Carnivour]

and what would that be? accelerating isn't 'fair'?

i wasn't trying to justify acceleration. rather, complaints against acceleration itself aren't justified. there are smart people, and there are dumb people. there are people who have opportunities to take advantage of, and there are people who don't have opportunities to take advantage of. as for whether or not acceleration is beneficial, i think it is. i had a lot more time on my hands.

this whole thread reeks of anti-acceleration. just needed to balance it out.

and your point is that smart people deserve the opportunity of having more time?
what 04er said is exactly right - people who top subjects in year 8/9 are not the whole representation of the "smart people" that have potential, and thus by allowing acceleration, its disadvantaging the other portion of the "smart" people, the "late blossomers" if you like - and that isnt fair. thats my justification of why I think acceleration should not be allowed.
my argument isnt about the self-discipline and self-motivation of the accelerant. Honestly, I dont give a flying fuck about the way they approach this advantage- my quarrel is with the idea of allowing the advantage in the first place.
and so what if this thread reeks of anti-acceleration? its just part of an argument.

 

[tempco]

and your point is that smart people deserve the opportunity of having more time?
what 04er said is exactly right - people who top subjects in year 8/9 are not the whole representation of the "smart people" that have potential, and thus by allowing acceleration, its disadvantaging the other portion of the "smart" people, the "late blossomers" if you like - and that isnt fair. thats my justification of why I think acceleration should not be allowed.
my argument isnt about the self-discipline and self-motivation of the accelerant. Honestly, I dont give a flying fuck about the way they approach this advantage- my quarrel is with the idea of allowing the advantage in the first place.
and so what if this thread reeks of anti-acceleration? its just part of an argument.

the hsc isn't a representation of how "smart" a person is either. the high school examination system is largely based on the effort you put into your work. if someone topped year 9, they did more work than someone who didn't top year 9. them being chosen to accelerate is fair, since their marks are a testament to their ability to work. just how a uni degree is proof that you're able to work (generally speaking, you learn most of what you need to know on the job). unfortunately, we can't plug wires into our brains to determine how "smart" someone is, so till then, exams will be the only way to gauge a person.

why should they? one good reason is the distinction courses program. and what if a hard working student wants to do more than 10 units of subjects for interests sake? it wouldn't be practical for him to do 17 units in one year, so he spreads it out in 2 years. why should he/she have to be held back?

 

[Carnivour]

the hsc is a testament of both intelligence and other skills, specifically that of time management.
i agree with your point about the personal interests, im a big advocate of using this year beyond just cruising through, but i think to maintain the integrity of the system - which remember is a ranking system, and we have to compare the skills (and skills can be improved with more time and therefore practice), dont you think in the deepest of your hearts that it IS unfair? you are given a rank which is a combination of your skills in a variety (at least 3 or 4 different areas), and all candidates are on an equal, level playing field - its simply unfair to give such a huge opportunity to people who showed potential in year 8. its plain stupid to expect every single pupil to try their hardest in year 8/9, when nothing counts, and everyone knows that. the UAI is only a representation of year 12, and no wonder that the slate is wiped clean at the start. no advantage should be carried through from junior years, simply because no one is expected to perform at a high standard back then, when they are 12,13 so that it helps their chances of uni.

sure let them pursue their interests - but without jeopardising the interests of others, by claiming the top ranks or whatever because they have more time due to some obscure attempt at excellence when their true competition probably wasnt even trying! To win you have to beat your best competition in a fair environment!