How to dominate economics and chemistry (1 Viewer)

[Triage]

Hello everyone,

Just wondering if any past students or successful current year 12's have any advice on how next year (year 12) I can dominate chemistry and economic?

Study techniques, extra reading, hours etc etc.

Thankyou very much in advance to any contributors as I believe this will be helpful to many.

 

[albertcamus]

I disagree with the rote learning for Chem.

Try to understand as many things as you can, trust me the content can be overwhelming if you try and memorise everything. The inevitable stuff on society, environmental impacts etc. defs requires rote learning, but please don't rote learn concepts such as equilibrium, proton donors, galvanic cells and so on. The rote learning is obviously necessary for things like the scents of esters etc. but those parts aren't major parts of the syllabus.

Recently, HSC Chem has had a tendency to combine concepts that are overlapping, and a holistic understanding of the course (i.e understanding concepts and knowing what's exactly going on) does help in deciphering those types of questions and obtaining the most marks in those.

Besides that, know all your verbs in detail from the BOS website, know what safety/reliability/accuracy/validity are for pracs, know things like including the equipment as part of the method when outlining pracs, using direct action verbs when writing out the method of a prac, line/curve of best fit, calculations and significant figures, drawing labelled diagrams with rulers, drawing flowcharts and other skills from 9.1 in the syllabus.

Add equations wherever possible IF relevant - it's Chemistry, you need balanced equations with correct states to support your answers.

Don't spam too much unnecessary information within your answers since there's no half marks and if you say 1 wrong thing despite 10 right things, you still lose the mark. So just be cautious of that.

Then just practice lots of past paper questions and get to a point where your answers become extremely concise and you're getting full marks according to the marking criteria in the least amount of written lines.

I think that should be it.

 

[hayabusaboston]

albert, which part about "easy to understand" did you not get? and equilibrium etc YOU DONT NEED TO LEARN, the things that you DONT have to learn in HSC chem are intuitive things that come automatically. COME AUTOMATICALLY! You dont have to learn them.

The only thing there IS to learn, is the rote learnable stuff.


and albert what did u get in your half yearly?

 

[enoilgam]

albert, which part about "easy to understand" did you not get? and equilibrium etc YOU DONT NEED TO LEARN, the things that you DONT have to learn in HSC chem are intuitive things that come automatically. COME AUTOMATICALLY! You dont have to learn them.

The only thing there IS to learn, is the rote learnable stuff.


and albert what did u get in your half yearly?

Try thinking a little long term - developing good learning habits will help you in uni. Usually, the people who struggle the most with uni, tend to be the rote learners and others who dont have good learning habits in HS.

Also, I hardly see how his half yearly results are relevant to this conversation.

 

[hayabusaboston]

Try thinking a little long term - developing good learning habits will help you in uni. Usually, the people who struggle the most with uni, tend to be the rote learners and others who dont have good learning habits in HS.

Also, I hardly see how his half yearly results are relevant to this conversation.

I was just thinking after my 2nd post though I didnt post again, that my style of learning is different to everyone elses, and if I understand something one way then that doesnt mean anyone else will understand the same way lol. Its obvious yet I didnt think of it.

Off the cuff I "know" a majority of the HSC phys and chem courses intuitively, the only thing I really spend my time doing is roteing the impact stuff and specific things like examples of esters and acids etc. I assumed others would be able to do the same. I still kinda do. I mean its not THAT complicated, surely most people will intuitively "know" a majority the course. But yeaaa.

Half yearly results relevant to demonstrate whose method of learning the course is better.

 

[RealiseNothing]

albert, which part about "easy to understand" did you not get? and equilibrium etc YOU DONT NEED TO LEARN, the things that you DONT have to learn in HSC chem are intuitive things that come automatically. COME AUTOMATICALLY! You dont have to learn them.

The only thing there IS to learn, is the rote learnable stuff.


and albert what did u get in your half yearly?

I disagree, understanding the content is far more important in chem. Sure there are some things which need to be rote learned, but they are in the minority compared to things which can be intuitively understood. Even the solubility rules can be understood if you know what you are doing (ie conjugates of strong acids etc).

Also some things in chem aren't "easy to understand" for the average student, in fact most things aren't. Even the top students won't find everything easy to grasp first go. I also believe having an understanding of the whole course holistically benefits you for the longer responses where you need to synthesise aspects from all parts of the course to produce a coherent answer.

 

[RealiseNothing]

I was just thinking after my 2nd post though I didnt post again, that my style of learning is different to everyone elses, and if I understand something one way then that doesnt mean anyone else will understand the same way lol. Its obvious yet I didnt think of it.

Off the cuff I "know" a majority of the HSC phys and chem courses intuitively, the only thing I really spend my time doing is roteing the impact stuff and specific things like examples of esters and acids etc. I assumed others would be able to do the same. I still kinda do. I mean its not THAT complicated, surely most people will intuitively "know" a majority the course. But yeaaa.

Half yearly results relevant to demonstrate whose method of learning the course is better.

You know my half yearly results, does that mean my opinion about how to learn chemistry is more valid than yours?

Just saying that you can't compare results until the actual external exams.

 

[hayabusaboston]

I disagree, understanding the content is far more important in chem. Sure there are some things which need to be rote learned, but they are in the minority compared to things which can be intuitively understood. Even the solubility rules can be understood if you know what you are doing (ie conjugates of strong acids etc).

Also some things in chem aren't "easy to understand" for the average student, in fact most things aren't. Even the top students won't find everything easy to grasp first go. I also believe having an understanding of the whole course holistically benefits you for the longer responses where you need to synthesise aspects from all parts of the course to produce a coherent answer.

Read mah last post. I only rote learn stuff thats only rote learnable lol.

INdeed, as I said before too, a majority of the course is intuitive in the first place.

 

[hayabusaboston]

You know my half yearly results, does that mean my opinion about how to learn chemistry is more valid than yours?

Just saying that you can't compare results until the actual external exams.

U didnt have a half yearly... u had research project lol.

And I know waht u mean man dw.

 

[albertcamus]

Realise basically summarised what I wanted to say.

And I got 58/65 for HY wbu haya

 

[hayabusaboston]

Realise basically summarised what I wanted to say.

And I got 58/65 for HY wbu haya

I got 62/70. Fine. U beat me by 0.7 percent. lol. I got all my mistakes in multiple choice though. Bet u didnt get 100 percent in short answer.

 

[albertcamus]

I got 62/70. Fine. U beat me by 0.7 percent. lol. I got all my mistakes in multiple choice though. Bet u didnt get 100 percent in short answer.

Lol wtf... why so immature for. idc if you beat me

And ofc I didn't get 100% in short answer, if anyone is, then they literally shouldn't be because the school's marking too easy.

 

[nerdasdasd]

Stop detracting from the purpose of this thread. Mods, where are you?

This thread was not created for the purpose of boasting.

 

[hayabusaboston]

Lol wtf... why so immature for. idc if you beat me

And ofc I didn't get 100% in short answer, if anyone is, then they literally shouldn't be because the school's marking too easy.

Not necessarily, my HY had one 5, one 6 marker, and the rest below 4. I knew the stuff behind the 5 and 6 markers really well, and everything below 4 was either a very simple concept or a calculation.

 

[Triage]

In my opinion, rote learning is the reason this website exists and is crawling with 99+ students. If it came down to 'critical thinking' then the distribution of scores would be like the distribution of Iq tests and would ultimately be pointless.

Anyone who says "rote learning is bad for people wanting to go onto university study" is actually kidding themselves. Rote learning requires far more effert than just thinking, and really that is what the HSC tests isn't it. A students ability to put in effort.

If it isn't put in place for that purpose, then why don't we just tell children in year 3 that they have a low intellegence and therefor should not pursue highschool and the HSC?

 

[enoilgam]

In my opinion, rote learning is the reason this website exists and is crawling with 99+ students. If it came down to 'critical thinking' then the distribution of scores would be like the distribution of Iq tests and would ultimately be pointless.

Anyone who says "rote learning is bad for people wanting to go onto university study" is actually kidding themselves. Rote learning requires far more effert than just thinking, and really that is what the HSC tests isn't it. A students ability to put in effort.

If it isn't put in place for that purpose, then why don't we just tell children in year 3 that they have a low intellegence and therefor should not pursue highschool and the HSC?

Rote learning is actually quite difficult, whilst it isnt as difficult as critical thinking, it certainly doesnt level the playing field in terms of intelligence. To rote learn you need to have a good memory and be able to take in large amounts of information, which not everyone can do. Whilst rote learning does take effort, critical thinking takes even more so I dont think the whole effort argument stands up.

Also, I'd like to see someone try rote learn their way through a Law degree or something similar - sure, some parts aspects of uni courses can be rote learned, but most of requires critical thinking to a significant extent. To be honest, if you havent developed other, more complex learning techniques in HS, you will be on the backfoot when it comes to uni.

 

[Triage]

Rote learning is actually quite difficult, whilst it isnt as difficult as critical thinking, it certainly doesnt level the playing field in terms of intelligence. To rote learn you need to have a good memory and be able to take in large amounts of information, which not everyone can do. Whilst rote learning does take effort, critical thinking takes even more so I dont think the whole effort argument stands up.

Also, I'd like to see someone try rote learn their way through a Law degree or something similar - sure, some parts aspects of uni courses can be rote learned, but most of requires critical thinking to a significant extent. To be honest, if you havent developed other, more complex learning techniques in HS, you will be on the backfoot when it comes to uni.

Why is the hsc a course then, as opposed to an iq test. You can either think critically or not. A 12 month course in critical thinking would be more benificial than 5 unrelated subjects that by chance help you to think critically according to your logic.

If you have the drive to learn book loads of material (I do not believe in natural ability in this context, I believe this would be a level playing field) then you have the drive to get through a law degree successfully.

 

[enoilgam]

Why is the hsc a course then, as opposed to an iq test. You can either think critically or not. A 12 month course in critical thinking would be more benificial than 5 unrelated subjects that by chance help you to think critically according to your logic.

Critical thinking skills can be fostered and developed, although, like most aspects of education (like rote learning), some people have the capacity to develop stronger critical thinking skills than others. Like life, the HSC and education as a whole is not a level playing field - some people are simply better than others. Whilst hard work and motivation play a greater role, the impact of natural intellect should not be discarded (this is really going off the point of the thread though).

If you have the drive to learn book loads of material (I do not believe in natural ability in this context, I believe this would be a level playing field) then you have the drive to get through a law degree successfully.

Memorising the material in law wont help you much with the degree or the profession - you need to be able to apply the Law and that takes extremely strong critical thinking skills. You can rote learn some aspects of law, but for the most part, it wont get you far.

 

[hayabusaboston]

memorisation is the key to everything. If u memorise, you add to your bank of permanent knowledge. Critical thinking means fuck all if u cant remember what you're thinking about.

 

[nerdasdasd]

memorisation is the key to everything. If u memorise, you add to your bank of permanent knowledge. Critical thinking means fuck all if u cant remember what you're thinking about.

You need a combination of both, pure rote is bad. Memorising and understanding are two different concepts.