What bos said about the sor 2009 hsc exam (1 Viewer)

[mesbaz]

Error in the Studies of Religion exam - Board of Studies responds. | Daily Telegraph Maralyn Parker Blog


Guys please report/complain/appeal if you found that exam utter bullshit ! they are under the impression that a lot of kids ' loved the exam ' ( i doubt anyone called them up telling them they loved the exam. i mean we have quite a few hsc exams left we dont call to thank bos ) and that question was intended to be the discriminator to see who had A grade knowledge from those who had C level knowledge.

I disagree with this on many leaves because

1) that was not from the syllabus !!! not the hsc one anyway. if theyre going to use prelim stuff we need a warning.

2) questions for buddhism/judaism were much simplier to answer in terms of what yr 12 have studied in contrast to christianity and islam which made NO SENSE

3) It disadvantagd kids in that exam and other exams ! as soon as i saw that question all my blood rushed to my head. everything i covered just started to fall out of my head. i dont even know what i wrote for the other questions i was soo stressed. and im topping SOR in my school and we always get quite a few band 6's. some people just cant cope with that kind of stress under exam conditions. hsc is stressful enough as it is. it also made me depressed which meant i didnt study for modules till like much later and pulled an allnighter. as religion was one of my 10 units and i needed a 97 UAI iv given up hope considering because of them i have lost 40% of my SOR marks

4) if we let them be ignorant and get away with this, theyre going to pull it again. one the next few years. perhaps on your brothers and sisters. fcuk, for all i know they may have done this in some of the other exams yet to come. i understand they wanted a discriminator, but we atleast need a warning, or a question that makes sense !!!

Okay so this has turned into a rant. But i honestly urge you guys to complain, for the sake of yours and so many others who use SOR as one of their 10units. i dont think its fair that the board thinks they can pull this shit on us and get away with it. Ive worked my butt off all year and none of it counted because they decided to be ' mysterious. ' Furthermore it has and without a doubt will impact on mine and your atar if you do 10 units. SO i urge you please please complain. Its ridiculous that only 4 schools have complained so far !

Ps: i apologize fo the grammer. as long as you understand what im saying im sure its all good. got a pack load of study to do and cant be bothered to make it all grammatically correct

c'mon guys, complain

also there might be a few people who felt the question was a good idea because it tested your knowledge. for them i just want to point out

1) you didnt know the marking criteria, so even if you think you went well you dont really know and may be surprised when your atar comes out. personally, thats not a risk i want to take

2) you have to consider that many others in the state were disadvantaged because of this, as students we cant let the board get away with this, we should stick together

3) it wasnt from the syllabus ! hsc is all about the syllabus. and for those who did islam, were not even meant to study Muhammad ( PBUH) for the HSC !!! and there was no mention of the Quran what so ever ! this advantaged those who did not study but are religious or interested in religion and thus just used their own knowledge. very unfair to those who actually studied like they were meant to.


okay
/rant :mad1:

 

[icola]

1. READ THIS Board of Studies News. They did examine what was on the syllabus. You've learnt three different aspects of the religion you studied, if you couldn't work out that they were asking you to talk about them you don't deserve the marks anyway. 3. You can't appeal an exam because you found the question hard. Evidently a lot of people didn't. If you could do that we would appeal every exam. Don't you realise how stupid it is to say "test us on what we already know"?

 

[jackc91]

hmmm interesting... i was talking to my teacher today and he said that the RE coordinator had recieved heaps of emails and phonecalls from other schools asking if we thought it was also bullshit. I did Judaism and wrote about ethics. I had planned to do the Christianity extended but couldn't see how it related and still can't see how we were supposed to infer that it meant ethics and practices.anyway it should be interesting how it pans out. unlucky for the op.

 

[mesbaz]

1. READ THIS Board of Studies News. They did examine what was on the syllabus. You've learnt three different aspects of the religion you studied, if you couldn't work out that they were asking you to talk about them you don't deserve the marks anyway. 3. You can't appeal an exam because you found the question hard. Evidently a lot of people didn't. If you could do that we would appeal every exam. Don't you realise how stupid it is to say "test us on what we already know"?

No news articles found.

There are no news items available that match your criteria. Click here to go to the main page.

Okay i have a few questions for you:

What religious traditions did you do ?
And how do you think you went in them?
Did you know the marking criteria
( the answer is no, because there is no marking criteria for this which you would have known about)
Thus.
You don't even know if you have answered the question.

This isnt about ME only theres 1000's in the state who feel this way. That is why i put in the link. read it.

I'm not appealing because i found it hard im appealing because it wasn't off the syllabus. For Islam, Muhammad is specifically stated not to study.

You dont know me. you dont know my marks. therefore you cant say i dont deserve the marks. you sound quite ignorant.

If you had studied off the syllabus, which is what were meant to do, you will notice that the questions did not allow you to understand what dot point they were looking for. In fact, the question wasn't even from the hsc syllabus ! Im disregarding Judaism and Buddhism but for Islam it was not from the syllabus ! it completely contradicted it. If they wanted to make the exam hard thats fine, but AT LEAST either give us a wanning or make a question that makes sense. The teachers at our school even said the question didn't make sense.

Of course they're meant to test us on what we know. Do you go into exams expecting questions on things you weren't meant to study ? If we did that none of us would know what to study for anything. the hsc revolves around the syllabus !

I dont think you realize how stupid your rebuttal was.

 

[icola]

Ahh this is what the article says


Was Section 3 based on the syllabus?
Yes. All five question options were based on the Studies of Religion syllabus and you can now read the mapping grid of 2009 exam questions to syllabus areas.

Was I supposed to have studied those quotes?
No. The quotations used in the questions seem to have thrown some students - they were intended as a prompt or 'stepping stone' into the answer, and students will not be expected to have studied the quotations themselves.

What happens next?
In the next few days the senior Studies of Religion I and II markers will be looking at the responses to this section, as they do for every part of the exam, to see if there is an unusual performance appearing among student answers. If it appears the section caused more difficulty this year, the NSW HSC standards based system will take that into account in marking.

What's your advice to students who were upset by the exam?
With the early start to exams this year, many students have had a long week of several major exams. Even if you have an exam on Monday you should try to get some rest over the weekend. Look forward and focus your exam thoughts on the ones yet to come, not the ones you will never do again. And remember, 50 per cent of your HSC marks for this course have already been completed in your school based assessment.

Will we have to re-sit the exam?
No. If the exam responses show there was an unexpected challenge in the paper this year, the marking process is designed to handle it. In addition, while some students are undoubtedly worried about Section 3, there are many others among the 14,000 in the course who reported no problems or welcomed the questions.

Why weren't the Section 3 questions the same as last year?
It is not unusual for Exam Committees to slightly vary parts of a paper, particularly if they have used a similar pattern over several years. In the past few years, the Studies of Religion Exam Committee has set questions based on sections of the Depth Study, but students still are required to learn about all sections of the Depth Study. The questions this year allowed students to bring that knowledge together into an overview response.


Last year's Notes from the Marking Centre for Studies of Religion stated "teachers and candidates should be aware that examiners may ask questions requiring an integration of the knowledge and skills gained through the study of the course"

 

[icola]

I did Christanity & Islam which I thought were both kinda obvious. I know it wasn't a straight out question and it confused a lot of people but rather than everyone who wrote 'invalid question' there are three things you have learnt for that depth study.. why wouldn't you just write a bit about all of them and at least you have a chance of getting some marks? (Not saying you wrote that, just in general).
I actually don't know how I went but I think I answered the question to the best of my ability.. and I don't think anyone knows how they will mark it until we get our results. It did say at the top of the exam (I don't have a copy) but something like "Assess the various aspects of the religion" and seeing as we only do three I just linked it to the two that I felt it linked to.
And haha well thanks for answering that for me, no I don't know the marking criteria. I don't know the marking criteria for any of my exams but that doesn't mean I'm going to appeal them all.
I have read the link and I'm aware there are a lot of people who aren't happy with the question, but for people who took the time to answer it and feel happy with their response, I hope you can see how that would also be frustrating.
If you read the board of studies article, it shows that it is from the syllabus. I didn't do Islam as my essay, although I did study it throughout the year, and to my understanding (which I'm not saying is right), it wasn't relying on you to only speak of Mohammed (which is prelim assumed knowledge) but rather the sources of revelation (Qur'an, Hadith).. which you WOULD have done in your practice and ethics at least.
I did study from the syllabus and in fact this years question gave you a greater opportunity to showcase your knowledge as you were able to discuss a variety of practices within the religion, instead of just one. If you had an in depth knowledge (and understood the question.. again AWARE people didn't) the question was really good.
Also your comment "If they were going to test us on prelim stuff they should have warned us", lolll. What were they supposed to do? Send us an e-mail saying 'hey study this'.. defeats the purpose. Plus it was assessing your knowledge of the case study that you learnt in year twelve so the prelim argument is so, so invalid!!!

 

[icola]

By the way, from the BOS site it shows how it did link to the year twelve syllabus which makes the schools appealing it look insanely stupid

Studies of Religion I and Studies of Religion II
Section III — Religious Tradition Depth Study
1 20 Buddhism Ethics or Significant Practices H1, H2, H4, H5, H6, H8, H9
2 20 Christianity Ethics or Significant Practices H1, H2, H4, H5, H6, H8, H9
3 20 Hinduism Ethics or Significant Practices H1, H2, H4, H5, H6, H8, H9
4 20 Islam Ethics or Significant Practices H1, H2, H4, H5, H6, H8, H9
5 20 Judaism Ethics or Significant Practices H1, H2, H4, H5, H6, H8, H9

 

[mesbaz]

Was Section 3 based on the syllabus?
Yes. All five question options were based on the Studies of Religion syllabus and you can now read the mapping grid of 2009 exam questions to syllabus areas.


The mapping grid doesnt show anything but the outcome. We already know about that, its not about the areas its about the specific questions. Interesting how they ignored the specific questions and just linked us to the ' religions ' we were meant to study, which kinda doesnt prove anything....


What happens next?
In the next few days the senior Studies of Religion I and II markers will be looking at the responses to this section, as they do for every part of the exam, to see if there is an unusual performance appearing among student answers. If it appears the section caused more difficulty this year, the NSW HSC standards based system will take that into account in marking.


Basically theyre going to scale the marks up. Doesnt fix the problems though. Those who were lucky and wrote whatever it is they were looking for will get the marks. I ended up filling the whole booklet but thats not to say i filled it out right. Some schools just wrote ' not attempted ' in the whole section.

What's your advice to students who were upset by the exam?
With the early start to exams this year, many students have had a long week of several major exams. Even if you have an exam on Monday you should try to get some rest over the weekend. Look forward and focus your exam thoughts on the ones yet to come, not the ones you will never do again. And remember, 50 per cent of your HSC marks for this course have already been completed in your school based assessment.


' 50% of your HSC mark for this couse has already been completed ' that doesn't fix anything for people who wanted a 95+ Atar. For them every percent counts.

Will we have to re-sit the exam?
while some students are undoubtedly worried about Section 3, there are many others among the 14,000 in the course who reported no problems or welcomed the questions.


In saying this theyre basically saying, yes we have had complaints but not all 14000 have complained. that doesnt mean the other kids were happy with the exam it just means they were busy studying for modules, or many are just not up for complaining. most kids dont take the initiative, which is why i have posted this thread.

Why weren't the Section 3 questions the same as last year?
It is not unusual for Exam Committees to slightly vary parts of a paper, particularly if they have used a similar pattern over several years. In the past few years, the Studies of Religion Exam Committee has set questions based on sections of the Depth Study, but students still are required to learn about all sections of the Depth Study. The questions this year allowed students to bring that knowledge together into an overview response.


this exam has only been introduced in the last 2 years. its stupid that they altered it so much. we deserved a warning or a question that could be interpreted as to what we were meant to answer. At the very least, they should have made all 5 questions of equal difficulty.


Last year's Notes from the Marking Centre for Studies of Religion stated "teachers and candidates should be aware that examiners may ask questions requiring an integration of the knowledge and skills gained through the study of the course"[/QUOTE]



Thats all fine and dandy, but as HSC students weve been told a million times to look over the syllabus, study the syllabus, know your syllabus inside out. NO ONE SAYS " check out and analyse every comment in the marking criteria it gives hints into what questions you will get next year "

I doubt you were even aware of this comment. No one picks up these things. But its clear it was planned by the bos from last year.


In other words.
They have given no REAL answers, just mere responses. They haven't acknowledged the major issue here, all the responses are quite blunt and ' practiced '

 

[mesbaz]

I did Christanity & Islam which I thought were both kinda obvious. I know it wasn't a straight out question and it confused a lot of people but rather than everyone who wrote 'invalid question' there are three things you have learnt for that depth study.. why wouldn't you just write a bit about all of them and at least you have a chance of getting some marks? (Not saying you wrote that, just in general).
I actually don't know how I went but I think I answered the question to the best of my ability.. and I don't think anyone knows how they will mark it until we get our results. It did say at the top of the exam (I don't have a copy) but something like "Assess the various aspects of the religion" and seeing as we only do three I just linked it to the two that I felt it linked to.
And haha well thanks for answering that for me, no I don't know the marking criteria. I don't know the marking criteria for any of my exams but that doesn't mean I'm going to appeal them all.
I have read the link and I'm aware there are a lot of people who aren't happy with the question, but for people who took the time to answer it and feel happy with their response, I hope you can see how that would also be frustrating.
If you read the board of studies article, it shows that it is from the syllabus. I didn't do Islam as my essay, although I did study it throughout the year, and to my understanding (which I'm not saying is right), it wasn't relying on you to only speak of Mohammed (which is prelim assumed knowledge) but rather the sources of revelation (Qur'an, Hadith).. which you WOULD have done in your practice and ethics at least.
I did study from the syllabus and in fact this years question gave you a greater opportunity to showcase your knowledge as you were able to discuss a variety of practices within the religion, instead of just one. If you had an in depth knowledge (and understood the question.. again AWARE people didn't) the question was really good.
Also your comment "If they were going to test us on prelim stuff they should have warned us", lolll. What were they supposed to do? Send us an e-mail saying 'hey study this'.. defeats the purpose. Plus it was assessing your knowledge of the case study that you learnt in year twelve so the prelim argument is so, so invalid!!!

No they didnt have to send us an email. But they should have put in the ' proposed changes ' as they have now for the new syllabus's for next year. Even if they alter one question WE NEED TO KNOW.

In all honesty i cant be bothered to reply to this because you're being just as obscure as BOS. But unlike you i don't rely on ' a chance of getting marks ' thats not enough for me to get 98 and i also tend to rely on the marking criteria to get the best marks that i can ! The marking criteria revolves around the syllabus, and as i have said 50 times already although they have ' linked ' it to the syllabus, they haven't specified what outcomes they were testing and how those outcomes were interpreted in the questions. Im sure it will be revealed sooner or later.

All im going to say is, Im just a student whos been studying this for two years, but I have had teachers who have had 30 years of experience tell me how unfit the question was in terms of how vauge it was and how it simply did not make sense. Yes you could interpret it. Thats what you do. Even in english you interpret the exam to relate it to your essay, but that doesnt mean you interpreted it right.

SO really theres not point of this. Maybe your eyes will open when you see your studies of religion mark and see that the BOS has infact screwed you over. by which point, it will be too late to do anything about it. Thats what im trying to avoid.

 

[Baggygreen408]

The questions did link with the syllabus- i think people are just upset that they did not provide questions which people can really 'prepare' for in the sense that past years have simply been the regurgitation of information, in question and answer form the syllabus... this required an application and wholistic understanding of the rleigious tradiiton... so, the link to the syllabus...Look at the HSC content syllabus: NOT Prelim- HSC...Taking the christianity question from yesterday, aksing to assess how Luke's post ressurcetion account shows how Christianity is a living Religious tradition in the lives of its adherants...The FIRST sentence of the HSC Christianity syllabus, states under the title "Christinaity":"The focus of this study the contribution of significant people, ideas, practices and ethical tecahings to an undertsandning of Christianity as a living Religious tradition"...There is the answer right there- the question required an amalgamation of all 3 syllabus doit points that amny people would previosuly ROTE learn- it was just an applied question, requiring a bit of lateral thought to complete... and in terms of the Gospel passage, you just need to explain that just as the disciples epxerienced that perosnal affirmation of Christ, so too do Christians through those 3 elements (person, ethics, pracice), cretaing a rleigious traition that is 'dynamic' and living... In saing that though... i think BOS will adjust their criteriain marking due to the complaints being raised on the issue... but they do have a defence... it was form the syllabus... its as clear as day...

 

[icola]

Seriously, I know the question was confusing. When I got it I freaked out too but really all you had to do was just interpret it. Like with the Islam question, obviously you knew that they couldn't assess you on just Mohammed because you don't study him and it was clearly about revelation.. you know they can only assess you on the aspects of the religion that you've learnt (practice, ethics, personality).. The Qur'an and the Hadith are both sources of revelation describing these (depending on what you did.. we studied enviro ethics and Hajj which were easy to use in the essay) so you would hope you couldn't go wrong talking about those at least, even if the significant person was irrelevant. And I think what the BOS is saying about the quotes is that they weren't the entire basis of your essay (so it wasn't about Mohammed) but like they said "stepping stones" or whatever to get you to discuss the revelation and it's impact (not exactly sure what the Islam q was).

Here's your warning in the markers comments from last year "teachers and candidates should be aware that examiners may ask questions requiring an integration of the knowledge and skills gained through the study of the course". I know the majority of people won't have read that but if you're aiming for 98 I'd assume you would have. Also I really don't think you need a warning, was there a warning there would only be one related text for English Paper one?

I'm not "relying on getting marks" and I have high aspirations for my results as well, I'm just saying that appeals are absolutely pointless. It's obvious that the BOS are not going to change it as they can justify asking the question (even if you think otherwise). I also think it's really unfair for them to discount section III entirely like some people are suggesting because that completely discriminates against the students who tried their hardest to answer the question.

I'm not actually trying to personally attack you I'm just trying to communicate that I think the scaling system will work everything out. Obviously if people found it as hard as they didn't and couldn't comprehend the question at all, and by what I've read that is the majority, the marks will be aligned in accordance with the SOR cohorts performance, like any other subject.

What do you propose they do with your appeals? Retake the exam? Give every one the same mark for section III? Don't mark it entirely?

 

[raniaaa]

it was form the syllabus... its as clear as day...

if it was as clear as day then half the state wouldn't be having a cry about it no? i think it was very ambiguous and very misleading.

 

[Baggygreen408]

Yes, i also don't think section 3 should be discounted... because what f some students spent l0onger on that section, and can get the marks, at the expense of others in the exam?I guess, as has been said, everything will sort itself out in marking...

 

[Baggygreen408]

if it was as clear as day then half the state wouldn't be having a cry about it no? i think it was very ambiguous and very misleading.

For each religious tradition, the syllabus does not merely contain a few dot ponts- it is not merely the 2 colmns, "Students learn about" and "students learn to", with the respective dot points... its the document as a whole- that one small sentence at the start, which i am sure many people didnt give a seocnd thought when prinitng of the syllabus- is just as important as the dot points- thats the aim of the study of that tradition, thats what teh question asked for... the Syllabus as a whole (for the HSC syllabus, not Prelim, don't get me wrong), is that which is examinable- and that is what was asked yesertday

 

[raniaaa]

in regards to "was there a warning that there would be one related text for the english paper" umm yes. if you look at past papers there have been some with one and others with two.. with the SOR question there has never been anything like it.and it's not like we're lazy, unmotivated students... our teachers have never, not once, ever gone through those outcomes, never heard the phrase "living religious tradition" (in SOR), never ever been taught that. if even the teachers overlooked it then surely it's understandable that students didn't recognise it as a syllabus dot point and hence failed to meet the necessary criteria.

 

[Yllidiah]

Just my opinion of course, but for Islam, you know how they put in the quote about the Qur'an? During the exam I just figured maybe the 'revelation of Muhammed' in the question wasn't a reference to him, but to the Qur'an which was revealed to him by an angel. therefore, i talked about how qur'an's instructions on ethics, religious practices affected the lives of Muslims. I think you could have also used you personality, and written about how that personality's interpretation of the Qur'an affected their perception of the Qur'an role in Muslim life.
any thoughts on this?

 

[shaon0]

Error in the Studies of Religion exam - Board of Studies responds. | Daily Telegraph Maralyn Parker Blog


Guys please report/complain/appeal if you found that exam utter bullshit ! they are under the impression that a lot of kids ' loved the exam ' ( i doubt anyone called them up telling them they loved the exam. i mean we have quite a few hsc exams left we dont call to thank bos ) and that question was intended to be the discriminator to see who had A grade knowledge from those who had C level knowledge.

I disagree with this on many leaves because

1) that was not from the syllabus !!! not the hsc one anyway. if theyre going to use prelim stuff we need a warning.

2) questions for buddhism/judaism were much simplier to answer in terms of what yr 12 have studied in contrast to christianity and islam which made NO SENSE

3) It disadvantagd kids in that exam and other exams ! as soon as i saw that question all my blood rushed to my head. everything i covered just started to fall out of my head. i dont even know what i wrote for the other questions i was soo stressed. and im topping SOR in my school and we always get quite a few band 6's. some people just cant cope with that kind of stress under exam conditions. hsc is stressful enough as it is. it also made me depressed which meant i didnt study for modules till like much later and pulled an allnighter. as religion was one of my 10 units and i needed a 97 UAI iv given up hope considering because of them i have lost 40% of my SOR marks

4) if we let them be ignorant and get away with this, theyre going to pull it again. one the next few years. perhaps on your brothers and sisters. fcuk, for all i know they may have done this in some of the other exams yet to come. i understand they wanted a discriminator, but we atleast need a warning, or a question that makes sense !!!

Okay so this has turned into a rant. But i honestly urge you guys to complain, for the sake of yours and so many others who use SOR as one of their 10units. i dont think its fair that the board thinks they can pull this shit on us and get away with it. Ive worked my butt off all year and none of it counted because they decided to be ' mysterious. ' Furthermore it has and without a doubt will impact on mine and your atar if you do 10 units. SO i urge you please please complain. Its ridiculous that only 4 schools have complained so far !

Ps: i apologize fo the grammer. as long as you understand what im saying im sure its all good. got a pack load of study to do and cant be bothered to make it all grammatically correct

c'mon guys, complain

also there might be a few people who felt the question was a good idea because it tested your knowledge. for them i just want to point out

1) you didnt know the marking criteria, so even if you think you went well you dont really know and may be surprised when your atar comes out. personally, thats not a risk i want to take

2) you have to consider that many others in the state were disadvantaged because of this, as students we cant let the board get away with this, we should stick together

3) it wasnt from the syllabus ! hsc is all about the syllabus. and for those who did islam, were not even meant to study Muhammad ( PBUH) for the HSC !!! and there was no mention of the Quran what so ever ! this advantaged those who did not study but are religious or interested in religion and thus just used their own knowledge. very unfair to those who actually studied like they were meant to.


okay
/rant :mad1:

what? the last question wasn't that hard. Should be in the syllabus in terms of ethics, practices and a combination of other material

 

[mesbaz]

English is completely different. They still asked you on what you studied and people didnt have trouble interpreting/understanding the question. It was simply a matter of extending on one of your related texts which even i wasnt able to do to make up for leaving out my second one, but that being said, it was a mistake on my behalf because you shouldnt rely on prepared answers you should rely on the information you have been taught to study.

That being said, i quote my teacher on this " I doubt there is anyone in the state who has created a prepared answer to accommodate any question that could come up" You simply cant, theres too many possibilities.

Its not about making a prepared answer, its about knowing what you need to have in your answer on the question. Which 1) you learn from syllabus 2) the intent of the question should be stated some how to allow people to answer it based on what they know.

Not put in a question that literally throws people off. People saw that question and went what Muhammad ?were not meant to study Muhammad. Revelation? WHAT? you simply cant think under that stress in the hsc exam and like i said im sure as many others it affected other sections of the paper as well as my modules exams.

I dont know what they should do. I think they should individually contact schools and let schools choose what they think would be best for their students. Then they should make a decision on what the majority of schools/students think would be fair.

I know making us resit the exam will never happen and will frustrate those who liked the question. but im pretty sure everyone will get a better mark if they know what they were being marked on.

I know youre not attacking me, but im just asking you to consider the principle on what this is founded on. I dont think its right that bos can just throw such things at you. the hsc is very important for many people regardless of ' other paths. ' This needs to taken into consideration when making the exams and marking them.

Although i guess it is too late now.
the whole point of my thread was to inform those who weren't aware of what is going on and just let them know that we need more people complaining if we want something to be done about this. Im sure if more people complain bos will be forced to take some form of action. Since after only complaints from " 4 schools and a few other students " over night they have already lodged a statement in the radio and what not. Imagine what would happen if more people took the initiative.

 

[icola]

in regards to "was there a warning that there would be one related text for the english paper" umm yes. if you look at past papers there have been some with one and others with two.. with the SOR question there has never been anything like it.and it's not like we're lazy, unmotivated students... our teachers have never, not once, ever gone through those outcomes, never heard the phrase "living religious tradition" (in SOR), never ever been taught that. if even the teachers overlooked it then surely it's understandable that students didn't recognise it as a syllabus dot point and hence failed to meet the necessary criteria.

I don't actually understand what you mean by a warning. What they asked was perfectly within the limits of the syllabus and assessed HSC topics, I do not see the need for a warning to change the wording of the question!

Like baggygreen said, it is stated in the first line of the syllabus so despite whether or not your teacher explicitly went through it with you is irrelevant. That's not to imply you're 'lazy or unmotivated' because I'm sure you used the syllabus but to say they used the content from prelim or they got a question from no where is not correct.

Also at the top of the exam paper it clearly said 'aspects of a religious tradition' ... could you not have worked out that meant the three aspects that you'd studied all year?

Again, I'm totally aware that the wording confused a lot of people, but just because they didn't understand what was being asked (and a lot of other people did) doesn't mean the BOS is at fault, and it doesn't mean the students who attempted the question and feel confident with their response should be penalised.

 

[mesbaz]

Just my opinion of course, but for Islam, you know how they put in the quote about the Qur'an? During the exam I just figured maybe the 'revelation of Muhammed' in the question wasn't a reference to him, but to the Qur'an which was revealed to him by an angel. therefore, i talked about how qur'an's instructions on ethics, religious practices affected the lives of Muslims. I think you could have also used you personality, and written about how that personality's interpretation of the Qur'an affected their perception of the Qur'an role in Muslim life.
any thoughts on this?

Yup i did that. But i didnt talk about ethics/practice in details because there was no specific mention or reference to them. So i literally talked about the history of islam and islam today and the role of the hadith/quran/prophet/aisha ( my personality ) in the development of islam. I had no idea what to make of the question and given the time constraints thats what my head told me to do at the time. it was only after i came home that i saw on bos everyone answered about ethics/practice/personality. To be honest contrary to what many have said, i think that actually highlights regurgitation of prepared material because even though the question didn't ask about that people wrote about it. Like i understand why they did it and if my head was functioning correctly at the time i would have too, but i think it just contradicts the purpose of this exam. Which by their claims was to stop people using prepared answers.

Not sure if that made sense lol....