What bos said about the sor 2009 hsc exam (2 Viewers)

[NCB619]

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.

Actually, Notes from the Marking Centre are made for this EXACT purpose. That is what they are for, you should have checked them to be prepared. It is common practice at my school for EVERY subject to do this. Just a tip.[/QUOTE]


lolwut?

 

[hecheeseman]

the only argument I have with the religion paper was the fact that you had to spend most of the reading time and part of the writing time trying to understand what the question is asking. yes often we may be confused about the correct answer, or the right response but we should never be confused by what the question is asking!

As a person who studied a lot for SOR 1 I am really upset that everyone on here is saying well, the only people who found it hard were the ones who didnt take the time to study it. It is one of my best subjects and I knew my depth studies back to front. not essays, the actual information and I still didnt know what to write.

hopefully it will be fixed as they cant use the marking criteria they have because then 95% of students would get 0 for wrong subject area.

 

[MzBiiBii]

the only argument I have with the religion paper was the fact that you had to spend most of the reading time and part of the writing time trying to understand what the question is asking. yes often we may be confused about the correct answer, or the right response but we should never be confused by what the question is asking!

As a person who studied a lot for SOR 1 I am really upset that everyone on here is saying well, the only people who found it hard were the ones who didnt take the time to study it. It is one of my best subjects and I knew my depth studies back to front. not essays, the actual information and I still didnt know what to write.

hopefully it will be fixed as they cant use the marking criteria they have because then 95% of students would get 0 for wrong subject area.

I think they might broaden the criteria.

But seriously, 95% of students won't get a 0, everyone who attempted it will surely get some marks.

The only people who will probably receive a 0, will be the ones who didn't attempt it.

 

[kyle_]

section 3 was an obscure question, yes. but when it comes right down to it anything can be manipulated and paraphrased to death to find meaning. i wrote pages of nonsensical jarjon on it.

it was a bad question as past papers and syllabus teaches Bioethics, significant people, and practice. the BOS are retarded- we all know it :rofl:

 

[spazamataz]

Okay, i sent an email, and judging on the reply i think it will really sort itself out. They are taking some sort of action on it, they didn't really elaborate on it. So yeah, i'm not worrying anymore.

 

[MzBiiBii]

Okay, i sent an email, and judging on the reply i think it will really sort itself out. They are taking some sort of action on it, they didn't really elaborate on it. So yeah, i'm not worrying anymore.

email about what?

 

[the-derivative]

the only argument I have with the religion paper was the fact that you had to spend most of the reading time and part of the writing time trying to understand what the question is asking. yes often we may be confused about the correct answer, or the right response but we should never be confused by what the question is asking!

As a person who studied a lot for SOR 1 I am really upset that everyone on here is saying well, the only people who found it hard were the ones who didnt take the time to study it. It is one of my best subjects and I knew my depth studies back to front. not essays, the actual information and I still didnt know what to write.

hopefully it will be fixed as they cant use the marking criteria they have because then 95% of students would get 0 for wrong subject area.

I'm not sure about Islam, Judaism or Hinduism, but for Buddhism and Christianity, the questions were do-able, in my opinion. For the past few years - religion has been a subject where you rote learn responses from the syllabus with no actual stimulus to adapt the question, so basically you're not learning, you're memorising and that's why they put these stimulus questions.

The question wasn't particularly hard, its just that the state had never seen anything like this before and the adaptability to the new format would distinguish those in the higher bands to those in the lower bands.