What would you change about the HSC and why? (2 Viewers)

[onelife1chance]

1) Everyone should receive the same level of good quality education regardless of scores on standarised tests, socioeconomic backgrounds, location etc... this can be done by testing all teachers and making sure they they are well qualified for teaching and also intelligent. They must be passionate about their students, strict and mature. The government should ensured sustainable funding to ensure FREE education for all, i.e. take care of ALL costs of tuition, learning materials, text books, transportation, new equipment, new facilities, student counseling, etc. This way the teachers are able to focus on teaching and learning, and bringing new ideas and practices in schools.

Who is paying for that you troglodyte?

 

[Mathematica]

Who is paying for that you troglodyte?

Well, I am not into humanities or any of that shit, may be people should pull money out of their ass? Whether that violates economic principles is not something I would know.
I have a much better and more logical response to your boring question but you wouldn't understand anyway, Mr. onelife1chance.

 

[cem]

Sounds like 'back to the future' in that up until the early 90s, except for English, the HSC exam did examine two years work and had assessments over two years. Back in the 70s - no assessments, only the HSC which counted 100%.

 

[RivalryofTroll]

Both Year 11 and 12 count.

I did heaps well in year 11 and so far, not as great in year 12.

Feel like I worked so hard for 'useless' marks in year 11. Wasted effort.

 

[SpiralFlex]

First I will form the subjects then the structure of schooling.

Mathematics: I disagree that it solely should be divided into Pure and Applied Mathematics. I think everyone should have proper access to a good Mathematics education which is why at least 2 units of Mathematics in my view should be compulsory (I will expand upon later).
I think there should be:

- General Mathematics 1U (as is now, catered to suit all students, minimum mathematics education one must undertake)
- Mathematics 2U (calculus based course, similar to how it is now), contains the Volumes from current MX2.

An abolishment of Mathematics Extension 1. I would rather this to be combined with Extension 2 knowledge. To make

- Specialist Mathematics 4U
Which would contain: All topics within Maths X1 and X2, schooling starts from the beginning of y11, an emphasis on rigour, more of a problem solving based course.
2U Mathematics is assumed knowledge (to be taught in tandem with 4U, but does not count towards ATAR).
Differential Equations should be included, Volumes should be taught in 2U.

- Applied Mathematics 1U
This can only be attempted by students doing 4U Maths, would have a great emphasis on Applied Maths, Probability Theory, Statistics (proper).

Which would in total make a student capable of 5 Units of maths.

English:

- English Standard 2U (minimum level, compulsory, should be structured as it is now, less emphasis on specific areas such as Visual)
- English Advanced 2U (compulsory if not doing Standard, should be structured as is now, less emphasis on specific areas such as Visual)

AOS should remain, and be 2 hours, with only an essay and creative writing.
Paper 2 should be as it is, 3 hours for the 3 modules.

- Literature Studies 1U (similar to Extension 1 English now)
- General Studies 1U (very similar to the General Studies 1U course pre-2001 syllabus change)
- Extension English 1U (exactly the same as Extension 2 English now)

- Visual Literature 1U (film-making, like Drama, emphasis on speaking)

One cannot do Visual Literature with General Studies.

So a maximum total of English units one can do is 5 units (same as Maths).

Other subjects:

- All mainstream subjects that don't currently have an extension should have one.
So this means 3U: Physics, Economics, Chemistry, Biology, Legal Studies, Business Studies

Whereby in each 3U course a more advanced mindset should be applied, in order to do 3U Physics, Economics or Chemistry, Mathematics 2U is a pre-requisite.
Rote learners should be punished.
All elective modules should be abolished at 2U level, an elective module is present at 3U level. Any 3U subject with Calculus or other Maths concepts involved should include Calculus being used.

- SDD:

Someone can comment on this better than I, but I guess the computing, logic that would be in Applied Math should be here instead.

==================

- The 10 Units system should remain, it is very successful in my opinion.
- NO subjects are compulsory to the ATAR
- At least 1U of Maths and 2U of English must be done.

5U Maths should be comprised of 2 papers, each 3 hours.
Literature Studies and General Studies 2 hours each.

==================

I think all courses should also examine year 11 content, however assessment that counts should start at year 12. Schools should be able to do anything they want within appropriate bounds, aligning will take care of 'unfairness'.

Government books, are not that great of an idea in my opinion, most of the time the private sector will perform better than the public sector, no doubt that even though there is a government textbook someone will publish a better book.

The problem with the ideas, are that they take way too much money to implement, there are a shortage of teachers in some subjects, so putting all teachers through a rigorous quality test will just lower the supply of teachers we have, which is never a good idea.
Unless you can change society's views and show that teaching is an incredibly noble profession and maybe increase the pay a bit, the number of teachers will sadly not increase that much.


I think that's all I have to say.

They already did something about SDD. Well at least UNSW did, they let HS kids take 1st Year Computing.

 

[WeaselPowa]

I am not new here mate so fuck off and shut the fuck up.

~peace out homie~

Well then surely you would have known someone would have disagreed with your opinion. Especially since you asked for it.

Anyway let us end it here. I did not intend this little argument to escalate so far

 

[omgiloverice]

I would like to know your opinions on my second point.
I personally think it is very good as by making it so that 'assessments' are made by the government truly makes the system fair and also reduces competition which is very stressful and eliminates the effect of cohort performance on students.
It is also a way to make the system a level playing field, which is what university is.

That would work if Australia had only had 500 students doing each subject, but unfortunately that can't happen. To be honest we should feel lucky that the board of studies developed a complex system of evaluating our marks compared to other educational systems, such as Korea where their university entrance is judged College Scholastic Ability Test, which is an horrific system.

Having constant standardized assignments would cost crap loads of money, the board of studies already has to pay hsc markers $62.87 per hour on weekdays just so they can find enough teachers to mark. Imagine doing that 4 times a year...

As for your second point, "Increasing the difficulty of the courses will not affect any one!". I highly disagree, increasing the difficult of courses will affect alot of students, and will just tempt more students to drop out of high school which is something that we don't need more of. Not to mention other indirect circumstances that will arise from a hard course. Which is why I wish we have advanced and 'normal' science courses, that could facilitate both mediocre and talented students.

Ultimately, the hsc system is fine the way it just is, (except for chemistry and physics), designing a perfect system for 60,000 students will never possible, and exceptions have to be made. The board of studies has tried to make the system as fair as possible, given its limitations on money and resources, and I think they have done a pretty good job. (except for chemistry and physics)

 

[sethowar]

Personally I find the fact that english is compulsory past yr 10 (maybe 11) is quite unfair and unbalanced...
A person who is naturally talented in writing and creativity is able to chose a selection of subjects that are completely based on long essays (3/4 units english, 4 units history, then legal/CAFS/other subject). Whereas, a person gifted in science and maths can do 8 units of science/maths without an issue, 2 of the units that are counted towards their ATAR and HSC mark MUST be taken from an English course.

if you can pass a competency test then you're all set to drop english - although it should be a fairly challenging and comprehensive test

And I definitely agree that courses should be harder. At the moment the most marks that a high-end student can gain is from the elimination of small mistakes and all practice is geared into working out the errors and grinding from 85% > 95%. In my opinion it should be easier to get marks by learning more of the course and understanding more things that worrying about tiny mistakes in spelling and wording choice. imo this is particularly noticeable in math/science subjects.

 

[DancingAnz]

1. English should be compulsory. Too many illiterate people in this generation.
2. In saying that, they need to restructure the 7-10 syllabus so we actually learn literacy, grammar and punctuation before being thrust into the essay writing world of HSC english.
3. I suck balls at english and have to do it. So people who suck at maths should have to feel this pain as well by making maths compulsory
4. And yeah, make year 11 worth something, at least like, 30-40%.

 

[girlworld_club]

2 unit students should not be ranked against 3 unit students (for mathematics). There should be a seperate exam for each!

 

[omgiloverice]

2 unit students should not be ranked against 3 unit students (for mathematics). There should be a seperate exam for each!

*spoiler alert* 3 unit students are also ranked against 4 unit students.

 

[WeaselPowa]

2 unit students should not be ranked against 3 unit students (for mathematics). There should be a seperate exam for each!

True. This way it would benefit both the 3 unit students and the 2 unit students.

With the current system, 2 unit students actually have an advantage over 3 unit students since there is not too much in their course compared to the 3 unit course.

 

[falsenthusiasm]

They already did something about SDD. Well at least UNSW did, they let HS kids take 1st Year Computing.

HS1917. It's an optional first year uni course that counts absolutely nothing to HSC. If you end up studying in that field later, you can use it as credit though.

 

[ObnoxiousTeaCup]

Ok, so the only thing I would change would be the assessment tasks in english.
I understand that public speaking is an important part of english, but think of it this way:
If a student broke their leg, then they wouldn't be forced to do P.E. because it would just make things worse and prevent the bones from healing.
So, why would you force a student to do public speaking when they are suffering from anxiety, depression or any other mental illness?

This was an idea that was being discussed on tumblr, and I thought it was really relevant.

 

[Hypem]

Having both Year 11 and 12 content in the exams would be terrible. There's way too much content to be able to revise in both years (except maths) that you'd be able to remember. Then it'd come down to rote learning, and not testing any real intelligence, making the system ineffective.

 

[dilammy]

all suggestions on 5 hr exams, 5 unit maths and making yr 11 and 12 count towards final mark seem just too unrealistic
on the other hand 2u should be done in yr 10 and leave 3u/4u for yr 11 and 12

 

[Arcadian Empire]

You have to realise, this forum makes up the minority of students. Most people will do well...as who else would spend time on an educational forum unless they were interested in doing well?

The vast majority of the state, however, finds the current system difficult enough. Raising the bar to fit high and very high achieving students is pointless...it'll appease a minority at the expense of the majority. Enrolments would drop etc etc. Just wait until uni/later in life if you really want "the challenge".

 

[unforlornedhope]

I will standardized the language courses. Probably scrap away the background speakers and heritage courses in Asian languages. As I do not see the point in the Boardofstudies creating so many different levels in Asian languages but for European languages such as French, the background speakers in French can still do French continuers and French extension and ace it, since there isn't background speakers in French. We should also let people doing Asian languages especially the background or heritage speakers to do continuers and extension so that they can take advantage of the system.

 

[unforlornedhope]

Also what is wrong with competition? You will be competing for your WHOLE life. Get used to it. Competing for marks, partners, jobs, money, housing - EVERYTHING.

I agree with this. The HSC is already a minor competition on the whole scale of life, if you can't even cope with this, then how do you cope with even more vicious and fierce competition in the future such as fighting for positions to get into the top company, gaining HDs in top universities which have a bell curve system etc. Competition is inevitable EVERYWHERE in life, if you can't even cope with the competition to fight for an ATAR in the HSC, how do you expect to cope with more challenges in life?