Search results

If you start off as a fee-paying student (which is different to paying HECS upfront), you'll need to apply to transfer to a HECS position. This is essentially the same as transferring between degrees.

Well. I won't dispute that the thought has crossed my mind. :P Until some kind of evidence is available though, I'll stick by what the Board says. Be nice if those raw band cut-offs were released...

Yes, super katie is correct - though you can make a Freedom of Information application to the Board for your raw marks if you wish.

See Table A8 from the preliminary scaling report: http://www.uac.edu.au/admin/uai.html

Yes, you're correct - comparisons of aligned marks between courses are invalid. The same goes for percentiles. If only the Technical Committee and UAC were willing to publish scaled marks... the world would be a better place.

I think they also charge a lot more. :)

Yes, rounding does account for much of the error margin with SAM. :) Those errors are compounded by the fact that we're forced to estimate (via linear interpolation) the scaled marks corresponding to particular aligned HSC marks. And then there's a further estimation process when it comes...

Not a chance. :) Even if a clerical recheck indicates that an error was made in your favour, your mark is allowed to stand. You can certainly try - it won't harm the rest of your application, as each part of your request is considered separately and in turn. And if it succeeds, you'll have...

Not quite. Let's say you scored 84 in Biology. You'd find the pairs of marks for Biology in Table A3: aligned:  48.5  46.5  44.5  41.5  37.5  32.5                            ^...

98.25 is sufficient if you successfully obtain a distinction average. If you are a diligent student and put in the work, it shouldn't be too difficult to obtain that distinction average either.

The information is already available in Table A3 of the preliminary scaling report: http://www.uac.edu.au/admin/uai.html No information regarding raw marks is ever publicly disclosed. Some students are able to obtain certain pieces of data informally if they know a Supervisor of Marking etc...

The system doesn't unfairly advantage those who take 'easier' subjects - the difficulty of the content of a course is not, at any stage of the scaling process, taken into account. You should familiarise yourself with the system before condemning it. (Direct any queries to the Technical Arcana...

There is no logic, you're misunderstanding the whole thing. The percentages of students achieving in Band 6 have no effect on scaling. Post in the Technical Arcana forum if you have further questions.

It's wrong. :)

The Board would say that the students are simply getting better. They don't award Band 6 marks unless the work is of a Band 6 standard.

Italian Continuers was actually scaled up slightly (though not very much). The scaling for language courses is usually quite wild and unpredictable.

The columns represent marks at particular percentiles. The P99 column shows, for each course, the mark which corresponded to the top 1%. The P75 column shows, for each course, the mark which corresponded to the top 25%. And so on.

100.10 chars

They don't help us predict UAIs, but they do help students predict their own HSC marks.

It's available via the UAC website - http://www.uac.edu.au/pubs/pdf/2004-Table-A3.pdf You should look at the scaled mean for each course. Courses with scaled means above 25 had above average scaling, and courses with scaled means below 25 had below average scaling. We haven't yet had time to...