NESA Casio calculator ban debacle (1 Viewer)

tywebb

dangerman
Joined
Dec 7, 2003
Messages
921
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
NESA recently announced that the Casio FX 100 AU and 100 AU PLUS will be banned for the new syllabus:

"The Casio fx-100AU and Casio fx-100AU PLUS models will not be approved for use in NSW HSC examinations after 2019." from https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/11-12/hsc/rules-and-processes/approved-calculators (June 2019 version) - EDIT - Following publication of a Sydney Morning Herald article linked to in a subsequent post below, this statement has now been removed and replaced with "A list of approved calculators for the 2020 HSC will be made available in September 2019."

SECOND EDIT: NESA have now backed down and included the 100AU and 100AU PLUS on the new list at https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/11-12/hsc/rules-and-processes/approved-calculators/calculators-for-the-2020-2021-hsc


This follows Casio’s own newly released video on how to use the calculators to do calculations with them for normal distributions. NESA would prefer the calculations to be done via trapezoidal rule.

This is not a new feature. It has been there for years.

Yet only now has NESA decided to ban the calculators.

At what point last year did they inform year 10 students that they will ban these calculators for the new syllabus?

When were year 11 students told?

When were teachers told?

In fact nobody was told till now.

When will current year 11 students who purchased these calculators months ago be compensated because of the incompetent and lethargic decision making processes at NESA?

NESA’s lack of knowledge of the functionalities of the calculators would probably have a large part to do with this huge delay in this decision.

Their incompetence, lethargy and lack of effective communication has clearly led to a financial loss to many year 11 students - a clear trigger for a class action law suit against NESA.

If NESA want to continue down the path of ad-hoc decisions regardless of the financial consequences for their victims then they should be prepared for quite a legal fight on their hands - and also be prepared to lose such fights - as well as substantial legal costs.
 
Last edited:

fan96

617 pages
Joined
May 25, 2017
Messages
519
Location
NSW
Gender
Male
HSC
2018
Uni Grad
2024
What are the other differences between this and the fx-82?

Is it just being able to do arithmetic with complex numbers and the normal distributions thing?
 

HeroWise

Active Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2017
Messages
353
Gender
Male
HSC
2020
What is this. I got used to the fx 100 AU. And I also bought a spare one for next year.....
 

tywebb

dangerman
Joined
Dec 7, 2003
Messages
921
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Nesa have now published advice at https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/11-12/hsc/rules-and-processes/approved-calculators/calculators-for-the-2020-hsc

"NESA recommends that schools and parents postpone purchasing calculators until the list of approved calculators for 2020 is available.

NESA is currently working with stakeholders to review a range of calculators. The list of approved calculators for the 2020 HSC examinations will be published in September 2019.

NESA provides an approved calculator list to ensure the fairness and integrity of the HSC examinations."

- Well where is the fairness and integrity in leaving it so late to provide this advice now - after many months after year 11 have already started?
 

HeroWise

Active Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2017
Messages
353
Gender
Male
HSC
2020
it just does vector calcs and can do basic complex functions
 

Kangaaroo

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2016
Messages
50
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Some of NESA's changes in the new syllabus are so weird. I had my maths prelim today and the presiding officer told us that they changed the rules and they're no longer allowed to notify the exam room when there's 10 mins left to go. Why was that deemed to be a necessary change lol
 

tywebb

dangerman
Joined
Dec 7, 2003
Messages
921
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
I just had a look at the newly released Cambridge Year 12 Advanced book to see how they do normal distributions. They mostly use tables (which is good because that's how most statistics courses treat it too.)

Technically the book does cover the syllabus because they do have 1 question using trapezoidal rule as applied to a normal distribution which is how the syllabus wants it treated. But just 1 question in a 664 page book!

But Cambridge goes further encouraging the use of Excel spreadsheets AND CALCULATORS WITH NORMAL DISTRIBUTION FUNCTIONALITY SUCH AS THE ONES NESA NOW WANTS BANNED!
 
Last edited:

tywebb

dangerman
Joined
Dec 7, 2003
Messages
921
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Now that NESA have reversed their decision to ban the calculators, they may now provide tables and relax their insistence on trapezoidal rule. This is because not every student will have the CASIO fx 100AU or 100AU PLUS. In fact most approved calculators don't have normal distribution functionality.

However the Casio calculator provides a more accurate answer than tables and so the next question is will students be penalised if they give a more accurate answer than that provided by the table?

If such answers are then used in subsequent calculations, a more accurate result from the calculator may well lead to a different subsequent answer.

If this was done on a calculator and the marker has no evidence that it was done so, they may mark the subsequent one incorrect.

This scenario must be deemed unacceptable, given that the calculator version will lead to a more accurate subsequent answer.

So any such considerations should be taken into account in marking HSC exams so as to not unfairly penalise students who provide more accurate answers - even if there is no evidence they used a calculator.
 

tywebb

dangerman
Joined
Dec 7, 2003
Messages
921
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
I suspect that the main reason the calculators were reinstated was because year 11 students had already bought them.

Now that NESA will in future give 2 years notice for any changes, there is a danger that they will in fact be banned yet again.

They were banned in the first place because NESA felt that they provide an unfair advantage.

This feeling may persist 2 years from now and they could end up being banned again.

Of course an argument then will be that they were OK for the previous 2 years so why suddenly not OK now?
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top