Question C - unfair in another way (1 Viewer)

[elissa]

Sorry for making a new thread, but I think this belongs on its own.

I think it is unfair that question C gets special consideration when some people answered the question properly. It's not our fault (students that studied legal studies properly) that some students who failed or didn't bother to do much 'outside' work get special consideration for a crappy response.

Our class went over childrens court and juvenile type things over and over again. So, I think people do didn't bother should just wear it.

Juvenile justice was just one of the very many issues teachers COULD HAVE covered. There were many issues they had to choose from. The only way that equality and fairness can be restored in for the question to be removed completely from marking.

You are suggesting that it is okay for those who did not study juvenile justice to be disadvantaged. The Board Of Studies can only test on what is in the syllabus. Juvenile justice is NOT in the syllabus, so therefore should not have being tested.

Edit: And are you calling all the teachers who taught to the syllabus (which they were required to do) bad teachers?

 

[Danoz The Great]

We studied that as well.

I suppose it made a difference in that we had a teacher with 40 years teaching experience in this field.

This is why I hate 'dot point' teaching. Sure learn the dot points and skim the content but don't learn much more.

DOT POINT 1: explain this this and this.

Boring.

I think we only had the dot points told to us once at the beginning of the 4th term last year and that was about it. Just a procedural matter.

You crack me up. You think you're all that, yet your teacher-of-40-years can't teach you how to spell 'Disguise'.

 

[butterflybird]

I think masterofdisguise or whatever variation they have on the spelling has been suitably torn to shreds now

It is very clear that it is unfair to say that we weren't prepared for legal studies, when it has already been established that it was not in the syllabus.

There's also nothing in the syllabus saying 'students learn to write two essays a week' or 'students undertake practical study in all law-related buildings'. So I hope masterofdisguise had fun with that anyway, I'm sure it was an enlightening experience for a budding lawyer. However we aren't all doing this to become lawyers.

Though I do agree that for a lot of the section, other than (C) you could draw in knowledge from the stimulus and other areas of the syllabus. I mean as a random example, you learn stuff like the minimum age for mens rea in other areas, without it being under the blatant heading "juvenile treatment".

That is my two cents for the evening.

 

[rosepetal25]

meh was suitably stressed about this question but nothing can be done now...hopefully markers will use their discretion (no pun intended!) and mark this section accordingly

 

[Kirika]

yeah it would be nice if they did mark accordingly, but all they are saying is that they MIGHT mark differently, and that the chief marker will check each students answer... i dont think so... how many students are there? how many chief markers are there? ah... now you get my point. they aint gonna do nuthin!

 

[jaihson]

MasterOfDisgyis for crying out loud. I live 2 hours away from Sydney and I still made the effort to not only go to my local court, but to the supreme court and downing centre for the crime topic (yes even in my holidays too!). Our teacher even got us the opportunity to have an hour with senior crown prosectutor Mark Tedeschi to talk about the criminal justice system. To say that myself and the rest of my class didnt put in the effort in like you is wrong and none of us had any clue about it.

 

[bridgett]

If the tables were turned and it was a question on extradition and u hadn't studied it wouldn't you be complaining...and how would you feel if I came on here gloating about how my class studied it!

i agree with melsc ...

 

[NRNOFRIENDS]

DIDNT ANYONE TAKE A SECOND TO THINK THAT: "HMM THE HSC IS SET IN MARCH, WHAT WAS VERRRY TOPICAL IN MARCH? MAQUARIE FIELDS RIOTING AND JUVENILE JUSTICE.." i'm not saying i did that well in that section because it is hard to tell when there is no single 'right answer', but it was hardly out of the blue if you keep up to date with whats happening out there in the real world. Everyone should relax, i'm sure the board will not allow this to distort the marks and bands badly because that will reflect poorly on them.

 

[hammah]

I didnt study juvenille justice at all...the most i knew about it was the young offenders act....

the point of the question, unfair to you all or not was to test your knowledge. Clearly you ARENT a band 6 legal student if u cant adapt to a tough question. Its about assumed knowledge and adapting it to a different issue..

if you knew about punishments, had a rough understanding of juvenilles in the law (which was in the text) and were a capable writer...you should be fine, which will set you apart from the rest

 

[hammah]

What you have just said is laughable. Perhaps it might be true (bullshit!) but it's still not something that Band 6 students had to be able to do in the exam.

well first of all i dont think the question was to compare the problems between males and females...i think it was just compare the problems..

which when you think about it really isnt that hard. And if u say well there arent many problems if any...then outline why. If the markers say they will be lenient in that section and you wrote something have plausible, you should be fine. Thus - a band 6 student

 

[Lozacious]

well first of all i dont think the question was to compare the problems between males and females...i think it was just compare the problems..

which when you think about it really isnt that hard. And if u say well there arent many problems if any...then outline why. If the markers say they will be lenient in that section and you wrote something have plausible, you should be fine. Thus - a band 6 student

No, it said male and female, if they wanted to be ambigious... They would.. have put... PERSONS. See, even YOU don't know what they were asking.

 

[debaser]

lozacious got pwned.

 

[Smartie87]

check out the bio forum... seems like master of disguise of watever his name is got thrown a question today that wasnt in the syllabus... much different reaction to this thread....

 

[debaser]

actually in bio he said he thought it was a hard question. he didnt have a cry that it wasnt in the syllabus.

better luck next time.

 

[=slade=]

lol if u dont do legal debaser, thankyou for ur input. now leave, we dont care for your opinion on a question you didnt even have to write about, let alone revise for for the past 6ish months. but im sure it was a very informed opinion about the situation at hand...not.

 

[rachey_poo]

I understand and agree with the majority of things said in this thread, and i think i did fairly shit in that question, seeing as i'd never studied it before, minus the young offenders act. However, i did write a fair amount (of bullshit probably) on it. The same amount i would have written had i studied what was asked (or it was a semi-normal crime section..lol). (Everyone will probably snap at me for what i am about to say.....)
I think what people should realise too is that, we, the students sitting the exam; are young males and females....Shouldn't we then be able to use what we see happening around us with our peers and ourselves in relation to the criminal justice system. I know in my answers i talked about counselling and youth conferencing. I knew about the justice conferencing because our principal had to attend one (after some random kid came into our school, caused some trouble and then punched our principal....ahahah was truly hilarious). I also talked about problems faced by males and females in relation to police discretion, ie. my friend, got pulled over by the police for a random breath test, and got booked for the corner of his licence plate being covered by his 'p' plate. Another friend, got pulled over for an RBT, and they saw she had no 'p' plates on, no shoes on, and no licence on her. She got off with a warning.......
So without making detailed reference to these exact incidents, i had something to work off............. couldn't anyone else have sort of done the same? i think a band 6 student should be able to adapt to the question, not just have a photographic memory of the syllabus/content and just regurgitate....

 

[hammah]

I understand and agree with the majority of things said in this thread, and i think i did fairly shit in that question, seeing as i'd never studied it before, minus the young offenders act. However, i did write a fair amount (of bullshit probably) on it. The same amount i would have written had i studied what was asked (or it was a semi-normal crime section..lol). (Everyone will probably snap at me for what i am about to say.....)
I think what people should realise too is that, we, the students sitting the exam; are young males and females....Shouldn't we then be able to use what we see happening around us with our peers and ourselves in relation to the criminal justice system. I know in my answers i talked about counselling and youth conferencing. I knew about the justice conferencing because our principal had to attend one (after some random kid came into our school, caused some trouble and then punched our principal....ahahah was truly hilarious). I also talked about problems faced by males and females in relation to police discretion, ie. my friend, got pulled over by the police for a random breath test, and got booked for the corner of his licence plate being covered by his 'p' plate. Another friend, got pulled over for an RBT, and they saw she had no 'p' plates on, no shoes on, and no licence on her. She got off with a warning.......
So without making detailed reference to these exact incidents, i had something to work off............. couldn't anyone else have sort of done the same? i think a band 6 student should be able to adapt to the question, not just have a photographic memory of the syllabus/content and just regurgitate....

Amen...

I was a witness in a childrens court matter... plenty of stuff from there to call upon

 

[tanjap]

well here comes my opinion not that anyone askd for it..

i dont think that it should have been in the exam paper (part c juvinele stuff) cuz it wasn in the syllabus...as for the chik who made this thread and went on about 'omg we worked outside the syllabus and did what were supposed to' screw that ..(no personal offence intended) 'outside' the syllabus is not doing what ur suppose to do its thinking ur so damn cool by adding stuff thats not in the syllabus..outside could be bloody anything..u just got lucky and studied that bit..i think u should be considerate for all the others who didn do that section.

overall the board stuffd up...hip hip horray to them...and now they can screw up the marks even more..without anyone knowing...cuz they have to 'adjust' them...mmhmm...

cheers

 

[orange_sky]

Ok while i understand people are annoyed and they have reason to the question said to contrast and COMPARE which means if you really didnt know that much you just talk about the young offenders act which is in the sylabus and you would still get decent marks.

 

[Robert422]

Listen

Okay look i know that a few out there happened to know the answers (think they did, or trully did) good for all those that did, seriosully it wont affect you you'll get the full marks wont you? who cares about everyone else as log as you do/did well? and seriously you may have studied it over and over again but as far as i know check yourselves if you wont it is not specifically mentioned on the syllabus at all! i am serious teachers went over it again and again at my school and found nothing! Yeah we talked about jouvanile court systems, and all that but not in the detail required and asked by the question. I know people are compalining alot about the test let them, they have a right to and i understand that those who did know the answer feel cheated but there not cause youll get the full marks regardless if you answered the question fully! so stop compaling and remember the hsc consideres all those who participate not yourself at the centre its a fair system and considers all those collectively and how they performed and based on the contriversy this question has caused there is no way of stopping the moderation of the marks it happens in every test based on the trend throughout the state. Hence the difference between raw marks and scalled marks. Focus on your mark forget everyone else okay and good luck for your UAI, or HSC result and the future but please stop it and think for a second about the majority who didnt study it cause it ISNT on/in the syllabus check it yourself only a few passovers like childrens court etc.

Regards,

Robert 422