Slightly confused about scaled marks (1 Viewer)

[Giant Lobster]

After scaling, can marks be compared across subjects in terms of how they will contribute to your uai? (I know this sounds silly cos the UAC calculates ur uai independently from BOS but still)
To illustrate:
If I get 95 in 4u math, and 95 in IPT, would they both be taken in equal consideration in terms of your uai or is there some more processes involved?

 

[jm1234567890]

no, the 95 in 4u maths would prolly be worth more

However, it is prolly harder to get 95 in 4u maths than it is to get 95 in IPT. That is where the scaling kicks in.

 

[Ragerunner]

If your talking about aligned marks of 95 in 4U maths/IPT, then when the scaling takes place, the marks will be scaled in order to be able to compare the marks between courses.

As such, 4U maths typically will have a better scaled mark.

 

[Giant Lobster]

Originally posted by Ragerunner
If your talking about aligned marks of 95 in 4U maths/IPT, then when the scaling takes place, the marks will be scaled in order to be able to compare the marks between courses.

As such, 4U maths typically will have a better scaled mark.

So what you're saying is that regardless of what raw mark turned out to be 95 after scaling for both subjects, after scaling they are perfectly comparable? You seem to be contradicting jm1234567890 there... but i guess it makes sense.

 

[Ragerunner]

If the raw mark for 4U maths was 95, and the raw mark for IPT was 95, after scaling, the 4U maths will typically be higher than IPT.

What jm1234567890 is talking about is that getting a 95 in 4U maths is worth more than getting a 95 in IPT - (I'm not sure which he is talking about, aligned or raw marks), but if both subjects had a scaled mark of 95, it means that after they had scaled the raw marks for both subjects, it could be said that person performed equally well in both subjects.

So yes, after the UAC scaling, all subjects are scaled so they are comaprable, so as to fairly give a aggregate of the scaled marks and work out the UAI index.

 

[Giant Lobster]

oic
so after scaling, every "point" is worth the same across subjects...

 

[Ragerunner]

Exactly.

 

[...]

but what determines scaling?

the candiates in the course on how well they do?

 

[Ragerunner]

More or less..

 

[Xayma]

Originally posted by ...
the candiates in the course on how well they do?

How well they do in that subject and other subjects, so it turns into a big mess of muddled numbers.

 

[Ragerunner]

They do not look at a students other subjects.

 

[...]

Originally posted by Ragerunner
They do not look at a students other subjects.

that was what i was thinking

i dun think they take the "level of diffculty" into account do they?

 

[Ragerunner]

The difficulty of a course is not taken into consideration.

 

[Giant Lobster]

Thats unfair in some cases i think, cos for subjects like SDD, well I know a few friends who can write their own operating system; they'd fully own SDD but i guess a trade off for their skills is that they're crap at everything else slightly, which makes SDD scale mediocre. bleh.

Then again, one cant really judge difficulty of a subject against another and say this > that... well for certain subjects neway.

 

[Ragerunner]

Well you are encouraged to pick subjects that you are good at and will perform well. No matter how poor the scaling, if you do well enough you can still obtain a 100 UAI.

SDD isn't a programming subject, as in because they can probably write their own operating systems - which I doubt , SDD is more about the theory involved and the approach to designing it effectively.

It is certainly as fair as it can get - state wise. I'm sure if anyone else cna think of a different approach to scaling, there would be flaws in it that doesn't compensate for the entire state.

 

[Newbie]

if they can write an OS, like not some plaigirised shit like from ground up
then they dont need to do hsc

go work for bill

 

[Giant Lobster]

Originally posted by Newbie
if they can write an OS, like not some plaigirised shit like from ground up
then they dont need to do hsc

wot the hell man, sif anyone here / anywhere *wants* a hsc. For me, I want the uai, which is needed for some real learning in uni, leading to a degree which i also want. Its a real shame that this hsc is attached to it.

But anyway, I'd have to say that to the individual the scaling scheme may not be ideal, but i guess theres no helping it when the whole state needs to be accounted for... in a world of "majority rules"

 

[Lazarus]

Originally posted by Ragerunner
They do not look at a students other subjects.

No - they do. The demonstrated academic achievement of the candidature (scaled mean) is measured by the average performance of each student in that candidature across all the courses they took.

 

[...]

Originally posted by Lazarus
No - they do. The demonstrated academic achievement of the candidature (scaled mean) is measured by the average performance of each student in that candidature across all the courses they took.

so hmm..

lets put it this way then..

How can a course be highly scaled and lowly scaled?

 

[Lazarus]

Courses taken by students who tend to do well in all the courses they take will be scaled up.

Courses taken by students who tend to perform poorly in all the courses they take will be scaled down.