scaling (1 Viewer)

[aussie-boy]

i think the current HSC discriminates against people who dont like the traditional academic subjects, ie maths, english, languages, classics, chem and phys

why are the papers for subjects like economics, DT, geo and food tech etc easier to get marks in than papers for ext maths and english? this just means that the marks have to get scaled down

but what if you are a person who is not an 'academic' and hates 'smart' subjects but is extremely intelligent and interested in more practical spheres of the curriculum - at the moment, because of the scaling, you simply cannot perform to your potential

so i think the papers should be equalised in terms of difficulty

 

[melanieeeee.]

usually it is easier to get more marks in a subject which is less 'academic'.

 

[Smithereens]

but what if you are a person who is not an 'academic' and hates 'smart' subjects but is extremely intelligent and interested in more practical spheres of the curriculum - at the moment, because of the scaling, you simply cannot perform to your potential

Hence the term "apprenticeship".

 

[melanieeeee.]

Hence the term "apprenticeship".

hence the term "you're a fuckwit"

 

[lyounamu]

so i think the papers should be equalised in terms of difficulty

That is just extremely impractical. How do we make sure that exams are equalised in terms of difficulty? What is the definition of difficulty?

I will take myself as an example. I believe I am highly adept at Mathematics and English. However, I am quite pathetic in IPT, SDD and PD/H/PE. I may perform well in English and Mathematics regardless of how difficult they are, I may perform quite poorly in subjects like IPT, SDD and PD/H/PE regardless of how easy they may be if I don't understand the simplest concepts in those subjects.

Difficulty varies depending on the individuals. Even the genius like Einstein will find farming difficult but we all know that farming is significantly easier than Physics & Mathematics.

 

[ccc123]

i think the current HSC discriminates against people who dont like the traditional academic subjects, ie maths, english, languages, classics, chem and phys

why are the papers for subjects like economics, DT, geo and food tech etc easier to get marks in than papers for ext maths and english? this just means that the marks have to get scaled down

but what if you are a person who is not an 'academic' and hates 'smart' subjects but is extremely intelligent and interested in more practical spheres of the curriculum - at the moment, because of the scaling, you simply cannot perform to your potential

so i think the papers should be equalised in terms of difficulty

So, wait, what subjects ARE you interested in?

 

[ccc123]

That is just extremely impractical. How do we make sure that exams are equalised in terms of difficulty? What is the definition of difficulty?

I will take myself as an example. I believe I am highly adept at Mathematics and English. However, I am quite pathetic in IPT, SDD and PD/H/PE. I may perform well in English and Mathematics regardless of how difficult they are, I may perform quite poorly in subjects like IPT, SDD and PD/H/PE regardless of how easy they may be if I don't understand the simplest concepts in those subjects.

True. Whats difficult for one person is easy for another.

 

[midifile]

why are the papers for subjects like economics, DT, geo and food tech etc easier to get marks in than papers for ext maths and english? this just means that the marks have to get scaled down

I dont think that you can really group economics with DT and food technology as economics is one of the better scaling subjects. Generally, it scales better than chem and physics.

 

[lyounamu]

who cares you can use the system too your advantage anyway

http://community.boredofstudies.org/showthread.php?t=170392

http://community.boredofstudies.org/showthread.php?t=170905

That's not necessarily true. Students who achieve Band 6 in Standard English are of higher standards (in terms of performance) than those getting Band 6 in Advanced English (I am only comparing between Advanced student who got 90/100 and the Standard English student who got 90/100).

But it is true. You can take advantage of scaling system instead of being taken disadvantaged by it.

 

[BackCountrySnow]

i think the current HSC discriminates against people who dont like the traditional academic subjects, ie maths, english, languages, classics, chem and phys

why are the papers for subjects like economics, DT, geo and food tech etc easier to get marks in than papers for ext maths and english? this just means that the marks have to get scaled down

firstly, economics is not easier, a lot of people find economics really hard..
secondly, how can you make food tech the same difficulty to 4u maths, the subjects are easier so that's why you get scaled down.

but what if you are a person who is not an 'academic' and hates 'smart' subjects but is extremely intelligent and interested in more practical spheres of the curriculum - at the moment, because of the scaling, you simply cannot perform to your potential

so i think the papers should be equalised in terms of difficulty

Yes you can. Scaling is designed so students will not be advantaged nor disadvantaged by picking a specific subject.

 

[lyounamu]

So what you are saying is that Standard English is harder to get better marks than Advanced?

I was not saying that. Scaling system is designed so that it rewards higher marks to the higher-performing students.

It is not necessarily more difficult to achieve Band 6 in Standard English. Since the scaling system is equal for both subjects, the likelihood or chance of getting Band 6 in Standard and Advanced is equal.

However, it is just that the ones who achieve Band 6 in Standard are generally higher-performing than the ones who get Band 6 in English.

There are only handfuls of students who achieve Band 6 in Standard English where as in Advanced English, 8% of the participants get Band 6 (last year). If you pick 10 of those who got Band 6 in Standard with 10 people from Advanced English, the chance of finding higher-performing students is much higher in Standard English. I know that my comment is not accredited or proven by evidence but I deduce this from the scaling you posted up as the Band 6 in Standard has higher SCALED mark than Advanced English.

 

[me121]

why are the papers for subjects like economics, DT, geo and food tech etc easier to get marks in than papers for ext maths and english? this just means that the marks have to get scaled down

but what if you are a person who is not an 'academic' and hates 'smart' subjects but is extremely intelligent and interested in more practical spheres of the curriculum - at the moment, because of the scaling, you simply cannot perform to your potential

so i think the papers should be equalised in terms of difficulty

I am not refering to scaling, however I think that some subjects curriculum are to easy. I mean they are about stage 5 standard. Stage 6 courses should reflect stage 6 standards not stage 5 standards. In particular Industrial Technology, Information Technology, (and i'm sure other subjects like DT, geo and food tech) could be made more challenging and difficult.

In particular the "Industrial Technology" course is one of the worst offenders, I mean its content is easier than the stage 5 eqiverlant. I mean the stage 6 syllabus is just the stage 5 syllabus, with a whole lot of topics culled, and the depth of study removed.

They designed this course for people who want to work in a trade. But what about people who want to do more academic work in the same area?

I say, make the courses more in depth, and more challenging, they are way to shallow, short and simple. If people start complaining they are to hard, then why are they doing year 12? consider tafe.

 

[lyounamu]

^ I think you misunderstood me. But I won't go further as you are right on what you said (most of them in my point of view). There is no point in arguing when I had similar points of view in comparision to yours. It is just that I poorly expressed myself. I will apologise for that.

 

[the name i want]

I agree with 'aussie-boy'. Tell what i dont understand is some design and art course are above the 90's, how do you people achieve that if DT and or Textiles is a 'low scaling subject' and this where it is frustrating is that i do this subject and companied them with art and history ect no maths or economics ( 'the high scaling subjects') how am i meant to get into a career that i love but have to do lower scaling subjects to do so. Not sure if that just made sense..... mmm haha but its true some people find things easy but to others it is really hard.

 

[BackCountrySnow]

I agree with 'aussie-boy'. Tell what i dont understand is some design and art course are above the 90's, how do you people achieve that if DT and or Textiles is a 'low scaling subject'

because people perform well in them. They are scaled badly not capped...

and this where it is frustrating is that i do this subject and companied them with art and history ect no maths or economics ( 'the high scaling subjects') how am i meant to get into a career that i love but have to do lower scaling subjects to do so. Not sure if that just made sense..... mmm haha but its true some people find things easy but to others it is really hard.

i dont really get what you are saying. Subjects are scaled well because they are hard. Subjects are scaled badly because they are not as hard. if someone is good at art then do art. Scaling is bad but if they are good they should find it easy and they would be far better off doing it then a subject they are not good at but has good scaling.

 

[SamChenDeagle]

That's not necessarily true. Students who achieve Band 6 in Standard English are of higher standards (in terms of performance) than those getting Band 6 in Advanced English (I am only comparing between Advanced student who got 90/100 and the Standard English student who got 90/100).

But it is true. You can take advantage of scaling system instead of being taken disadvantaged by it.

The reason why there are more band 6s and 5s in adv English than std English is because people doing adv English are averagely smarter you boofhead

 

[lyounamu]

The reason why there are more band 6s and 5s in adv English than std English is because people doing adv English are averagely smarter you boofhead

I was just implying that people WHO GET Band 6 in Standard are academicallly better than those WHO GET Band 6 in Advanced.

If you think about the average UAI of those WHO GET Band 6 in Standard with those WHO GET Band 6 in Advanced, the average UAI of those WHO GET Band 6 in Standard would be higher since there are 2000-2300 people who get Band 6 in Advanced (source from 2007 scaling report). I shall not continue this argument further as misunderstand seems to be occurring.

 

[me121]

So what you are saying is that Standard English is harder to get better marks than Advanced?

Yes!

 

[lyounamu]

http://community.boredofstudies.org/showpost.php?p=3390374&postcount=17

lol if they do mark harder for standard than advanced why don't we all do advanced?

They mark harder. You know that Standard Paper is relatively easier than Advanced paper, don't you? Marking harder may even that out a bit.

 

[lyounamu]

What? I don't get what you are saying...
Are they or arn't they marking harder?

Sorry. I should have said that they mark harder. But the exams are relatively easier so that evens things out.

EDIT: I will fix what I said above as it is misleading.