After 2011-13 Year 11-12 subjects will look like this: (3 Viewers)

[Existential]

Not a fan of the new names for the Maths, what we have now sounds better I think, glad this won't affect me.

NOW get this:

under this new proposed curriculum students can choose more than one maths ie.

general + essential
general + methods
methods + specialist

that is very strange compared to NSW. we have a system of units that works. this new curriculum doesn't.

 

[57o1i]

NOW get this:

under this new proposed curriculum students can choose more than one maths ie.

general + essential
general + methods
methods + specialist

that is very strange compared to NSW. we have a system of units that works. this new curriculum doesn't.

Yeah, good idea, I'm sure it will be popular. Because the only thing better than doing ONE badly designed mathematics course is to do TWO badly designed mathematics courses.

They're doing the same thing with English as well, eg you can do English + Literature. HSC extension courses > this crap.

 

[Existential]

Yeah, good idea, I'm sure it will be popular. Because the only thing better than doing ONE badly designed mathematics course is to do TWO badly designed mathematics courses.

They're doing the same thing with English as well, eg you can do English + Literature. HSC extension courses > this crap.

and where is the carefully designed systematic structure (ie. units) that define each course??!!!

it's just like their saying 'yeah you can do methods.... and we'll just shove some general here'. WTF!

 

[lychnobity]

I think Specialist is easier than 4U even though it has 4U content but other than that +1. There is an epic gap in the middle and it's going to create problems.

I'm concerned about that gap too; since the 'Specialist' course has a fair bit of very very basic content from Methods. Problem is that Specialist (I hate that name) throws the kids into the deep end of the topic, cutting out the intermediate skills; there's no clear development of the higher order thinking stuff.

This Specialist course doesn't have the potential to harness the same mathematical talent that 4u can - it's too numbers based.

I get the feeling that the NSW representatives on this national curriculum thing were either asleep or participating in some as-yet-undiscovered scandal (seems to be the way) when the frameworks were being drawn up because Victoria's fingerprints are all over it and we've got basically nothing. The English courses in particular look nothing like the HSC set up (goodbye 4U English, you will be sorely missed).

+1

*sigh* ... meanwhile teenagers in China must learn in year 8, what Australian ones have an OPTION to learn in year 11 and 12.

 

[ilikebeeef]

I am disappointed. They have already gradually 'dumbed down' the curriculum over the years. You can see this when you compare math exams from earlier years, say the 80s/90s, to now.

And now they just take it even further. I mean, what the hell, there's already GENERAL maths, some of which is easier than Year 10 maths, and now there's ESSENTIAL maths? My god we're literally going backwards.

They also removed, MX2, EX2 and EX1. Chuck in some multiple choice... and we get something disgusting.

*sigh* ... meanwhile teenagers in China must learn in year 8, what Australian ones have an OPTION to learn in year 11 and 12.

What's this that Year 8 in China must learn but not Australians?

 

[spacecadet]

No Senior Science?! Where can we protest??? I'll be done by then but senior science is an important subject!

E.g. I would be killing myself right now if I had to specialise in Chem, Bio, Physics, etc, but I need a science subject to do a B. of Science at Uni!! The subject has been excellent in that it gives a well-rounded (if general) knowledge of science, without specialising on one mind-numbing aspect.

You might just write me off from that, that I'm just a student picking easy subject to bludge my way through the HSC. I'm not, I just hate the other science focuses.

 

[ilikebeeef]

No Senior Science?! Where can we protest??? I'll be done by then but senior science is an important subject!

E.g. I would be killing myself right now if I had to specialise in Chem, Bio, Physics, etc, but I need a science subject to do a B. of Science at Uni!! The subject has been excellent in that it gives a well-rounded (if general) knowledge of science, without specialising on one mind-numbing aspect.

You might just write me off from that, that I'm just a student picking easy subject to bludge my way through the HSC. I'm not, I just hate the other science focuses.

Hang on... you're willing to focus on science in Uni, as in do a whole degree on it, but not in high school (which is a lot easier than uni) ...?

 

[Existential]

No Senior Science?! Where can we protest??? I'll be done by then but senior science is an important subject!

E.g. I would be killing myself right now if I had to specialise in Chem, Bio, Physics, etc, but I need a science subject to do a B. of Science at Uni!! The subject has been excellent in that it gives a well-rounded (if general) knowledge of science, without specialising on one mind-numbing aspect.

You might just write me off from that, that I'm just a student picking easy subject to bludge my way through the HSC. I'm not, I just hate the other science focuses.

the senior science course is intended for those who want to go to TAFE.

it has little relevance to uni nor is it similar ie. doing bio, chem or physics would help you more at uni level.

 

[ilikebeeef]

the senior science course is intended for those who want to go to TAFE.

From: http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/syllabus_hsc/pdf_doc/hsc-course-descriptions-09.pdf

"The Senior Science course caters for students requiring a broad over view across all disciplines of science and focuses on encouraging them to become scientifically literate citizens. The course emphasises skill development and is particularly suited to students who have achieved Elementary to Substantial Achievement in the School Certificate in Science."

I don't see TAFE mentioned anywhere...

 

[Existential]

From: http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/syllabus_hsc/pdf_doc/hsc-course-descriptions-09.pdf

"The Senior Science course caters for students requiring a broad over view across all disciplines of science and focuses on encouraging them to become scientifically literate citizens. The course emphasises skill development and is particularly suited to students who have achieved Elementary to Substantial Achievement in the School Certificate in Science."

I don't see TAFE mentioned anywhere...

really? well one can only deduce that because it is:

• scaled poorly, and
  generally designed for those of not excellent science abilities,

that it is not designed for those who want to pursue a science related uni course.

the only reason i said TAFE is because my year 10 science teacher advised our class not to choose senior science.

 

[Gmac_0]

lol, seriously, some of you NSW people, "I really hate this - they've changed the names". Don't know how you managed to get so attatched to the curriculum - its only high school.

I'll agree though, that the system looks a bit underdone. As far as I was concerned education was supposed to be a state power, though all of a sudden this national movement is being instituted all too soon.

 

[Existential]

lol, seriously, some of you NSW people, "I really hate this - they've changed the names". Don't know how you managed to get so attatched to the curriculum - its only high school.

I'll agree though, that the system looks a bit underdone. As far as I was concerned education was supposed to be a state power, though all of a sudden this national movement is being instituted all too soon.

yeah this needed to be implemented over say 5-10 years. but since we had the howard decade of absolutely nothing done, this was the next best thing.

don't underestimate the NSW curriculum - it's one of the best in the world (hate to gloat, but obviously far superior to the other states).

 

[ReNG]

thank god i don't have to put up with such a change.

+1

 

[lychnobity]

I am disappointed. They have already gradually 'dumbed down' the curriculum over the years. You can see this when you compare math exams from earlier years, say the 80s/90s, to now.

And now they just take it even further. I mean, what the hell, there's already GENERAL maths, some of which is easier than Year 10 maths, and now there's ESSENTIAL maths? My god we're literally going backwards.

They also removed, MX2, EX2 and EX1. Chuck in some multiple choice... and we get something disgusting.

+1

It's in its early stages but already it needs some serious reworking to integrate the intermediate skills. The people behind this will need to rethink.

What's this that Year 8 in China must learn but not Australians?

Calculus. They start learning calculus at 13.

lol, seriously, some of you NSW people, "I really hate this - they've changed the names".

lol, "specialist" and "methods" - wankerish much.

 

[Existential]

+1

It's in its early stages but already it needs some serious reworking to integrate the intermediate skills. The people behind this will need to rethink.



Calculus. They start learning calculus at 13.



lol, "specialist" and "methods" - wankerish much.

the people behind this are victorians. im sure that victoria has the greatest influence here. why else would maths and english be framed very similarly to theirs.

the names could be better. and the "essential" english and maths courses better be non-ATAR. which brings us to where this curriculum has failed - being applicable to NSW.

this, among other reasons, is why the NSW gov't is not implementing any national curriculum in 2011.

 

[ilikebeeef]

really? well one can only deduce that because it is:

• scaled poorly, and
  generally designed for those of not excellent science abilities,

that it is not designed for those who want to pursue a science related uni course.

the only reason i said TAFE is because my year 10 science teacher advised our class not to choose senior science.

"Deduce" =/= fact. Its poor scaling is due to the academic ability of its cohort in other subjects. This has nothing to do with TAFE. The intention was as I quoted previously. And also, you can do Senior Science and still get into uni. So you can't just make sweeping statements like that.

Calculus. They start learning calculus at 13.

No wonder why they rock at maths.

lol, "specialist" and "methods" - wankerish much.

lololol +1.

the names could be better. and the "essential" english and maths courses better be non-ATAR. which brings us to where this curriculum has failed - being applicable to NSW.

I doubt they would be non-ATAR, otherwise they wouldn't be "essential" lol.

this, among other reasons, is why the NSW gov't is not implementing any national curriculum in 2011.

Why do you say that?

 

[Gmac_0]

the people behind this are victorians. im sure that victoria has the greatest influence here. why else would maths and english be framed very similarly to theirs.

the names could be better. and the "essential" english and maths courses better be non-ATAR. which brings us to where this curriculum has failed - being applicable to NSW.

this, among other reasons, is why the NSW gov't is not implementing any national curriculum in 2011.

Lol any evidence for it all being Victorians at fault? Really, it is the fault of the federal government in general. Consider that perhaps it was decided that some aspects of the VCE system regarding english and maths were found or thought of to be better in one way or another - rather than some form of say, conspiracy lol.

 

[57o1i]

Lol any evidence for it all being Victorians at fault? Really, it is the fault of the federal government in general. Consider that perhaps it was decided that some aspects of the VCE system regarding english and maths were found or thought of to be better in one way or another - rather than some form of say, conspiracy lol.

With regard to Maths, if the federal government thinks it would be better to 1) reduce the expected standards by making something like Essential Maths a year 11-12 program, 2) strip a chunk of 4U content, thereby reducing the challenge for students of higher potential while also 3) leaving a massive gap between the expected standards for Methods and Specialist students ... well, I think that's probably a sign they need to get their heads checked. One might argue that they've mitigated the damage done by removing 4U content by replacing it with new stuff like matrices and stats, but that contributes to problem #3: Methods and Specialist are too far apart.

The reason why people are pointing at Victoria is because the subject names and mechanics of the courses look like the Victorian system. Plus the CEO of ACARA is out of the Victorian education system (there are two people each from VIC and NSW and one from WA on the executive but the ones from Victoria are clearly the senior pair).

Also, Maths has been working pretty fine in NSW for a while now and what problems it does have will not be fixed by dumbing down the curriculum until everyone gets a prize.

 

[Gmac_0]

With regard to Maths, if the federal government thinks it would be better to 1) reduce the expected standards by making something like Essential Maths a year 11-12 program, 2) strip a chunk of 4U content, thereby reducing the challenge for students of higher potential while also 3) leaving a massive gap between the expected standards for Methods and Specialist students ... well, I think that's probably a sign they need to get their heads checked. One might argue that they've mitigated the damage done by removing 4U content by replacing it with new stuff like matrices and stats, but that contributes to problem #3: Methods and Specialist are too far apart.

The reason why people are pointing at Victoria is because the subject names and mechanics of the courses look like the Victorian system. Plus the CEO of ACARA is out of the Victorian education system (there are two people each from VIC and NSW and one from WA on the executive but the ones from Victoria are clearly the senior pair).

Also, Maths has been working pretty fine in NSW for a while now and what problems it does have will not be fixed by dumbing down the curriculum until everyone gets a prize.

Some valid points about maths though:

1) It isn't an expected standard though, really. Its a very very low program clearly. Currently at VCE as far as I was aware a lot of schools do not have anything like it, the lowest my school ever had was Further. Just further, methods, spec, (and then theres UMEP but thats sorta separate). The idea of this program is to cater for people that really only require the most basic of the basic of maths - it is for those who just need something very basic for whatever they are continuing with in the future. Ideally the system should be able to suit everyone, even those who, I think its fair to say, are not up to scratch with maths.

2) Admittedly yeah, unfortunate that stuff does get stripped, however for those people - there is still UMEP...

3) Actually, by scaling it is not methods and spec that are apparently too far apart, but rather Further & Methods. While in 09 further went like down 1, methods CAS went up about 7, and spec went up 10.

 

[57o1i]

Some valid points about maths though:

1) It isn't an expected standard though, really. Its a very very low program clearly. Currently at VCE as far as I was aware a lot of schools do not have anything like it, the lowest my school ever had was Further. Just further, methods, spec, (and then theres UMEP but thats sorta separate). The idea of this program is to cater for people that really only require the most basic of the basic of maths - it is for those who just need something very basic for whatever they are continuing with in the future. Ideally the system should be able to suit everyone, even those who, I think its fair to say, are not up to scratch with maths.

We have the school certificate to provide the absolute essentials of maths. It would make sense to finish teaching these essentials before kids reach the end of mandatory education and start optional education - i.e. years 11-12.

2) Admittedly yeah, unfortunate that stuff does get stripped, however for those people - there is still UMEP...

3) Actually, by scaling it is not methods and spec that are apparently too far apart, but rather Further & Methods. While in 09 further went like down 1, methods CAS went up about 7, and spec went up 10.

I don't know what UMEP is, but it's not in the proposed syllabus. Also, Further and CAS aren't in it either, which leaves a gaping hole between Methods and Specialist.

Basically I'm not going to debate the merits of the VCE because my knowledge of it is limited and it's not the issue at hand. The issue at hand is whether or not the proposals are decent curricula for years 11-12. I think they've cannibalised the VCE, added a cursory nod to the HSC and others and ended up with a program that won't do students much good at all.