Scaling for Maths Ext 1 and Maths Ext 2 gone down??? (1 Viewer)

[~ ReNcH ~]

Looking at the scaling table, doesn't it seem rather strange that the scaled marks for 3U and 4U maths have decreased? Especially when they say the standards have risen and with people like Ngai, laurie_field, Giant Lobster etc, getting a good ranking in Maths is getting increasingly difficult for the bulk of us...

 

[grimreaper]

There have always been people like those you mentioned doing 4u. However, there are also a lot more people doing 4u these days - not all of which are necessarily do great at the hsc. Therefore, the quality of the candiditure decreases, and so scaling appears to go "down"

 

[KeypadSDM]

See, even like 5 men can't move a mountain.

 

[Lazarus]

Strictly speaking, scaled marks aren't comparable between years...

Though I guess that given the Technical Committee has produced Table A5 (which consists entirely of a comparison of scaled marks between years) that minor detail can be overlooked when it is convenient to do so.

Looking at the scaling table, doesn't it seem rather strange that the scaled marks for 3U and 4U maths have decreased? Especially when they say the standards have risen and with people like Ngai, laurie_field, Giant Lobster etc, getting a good ranking in Maths is getting increasingly difficult for the bulk of us...

It is possible for students to perform better within a course (than the previous year) and for the scaled marks of that course to be lower (than the previous year) - they're not mutually exclusive.

For any course (e.g. Maths Extension 2):

If the aligned marks have increased, we can conclude that the candidature performed better within that course than in the previous year. The standard of work produced was higher.

If the scaled marks have decreased, we can conclude that, on average, the candidature did not perform as well across all their courses as the previous year. Their overall average academic ability was lower.

In reality, both aligned marks and scaled marks were lower for Maths Extension 2 students this year. This may have been due to a shift in candidature, or other reasons. Extension 2 in 2004 had an influx of ~300 students, which is an increase of 9.00%. The Technical Committee describes an increase of 8.30% as "not appreciable", whereas an increase of 17.81% is described as "substantial". The difference in marks may have been due to reasons other than this apparently inappreciable change in candidature.

(See pp19-20 of the Report on the Scaling of the 2003 HSC.)

 

[~ ReNcH ~]

Strictly speaking, scaled marks aren't comparable between years...

I accelerated 2U and 3U Maths, so what happens to my scaled marks and their contribution to my UAI next year?

If you can't compare scaled marks between years, then how can UAIs be compared between years? - if the candidature is better in one particular year, then an average student would do slightly (even ever so slightly) worse than had he/she done it in a previous year...

 

[Lazarus]

That's an example of one of the instances where the incomparability of the marks is overlooked.

I suppose they decided it was impractical to rescale five years worth of marks every year in order to cater for the few hundred students who accelerate or accumulate courses. Or they decided that the difference would be negligible.

Who knows.