Why are sciences and mathematics scaled so well? (1 Viewer)

[chewy123]

4U math scales much better than 4U eng.

 

[dat202hoe]

So a 75 in physics is worth more than say an 82 in economics?

 

[chewy123]

So a 75 in physics is worth more than say an 82 in economics?

I don't think anyone would know, but why do you ask?

 

[dat202hoe]

Oh I'm just comparing 'low scaling subjects' to 'high scaling subjects'.

 

[runnable]

Economics would be considered "high-scaling", roughly on the level of Physics.

 

[chewy123]

Oh I'm just comparing 'low scaling subjects' to 'high scaling subjects'.

Economics is not a low scaling subjects, it has a scaled mean of 30 something, around the same as chemistry.

 

[lionking1191]

So a 75 in physics is worth more than say an 82 in economics?

no they are roughtly equal.

and general maths is a lot worse than some humanities

 

[annabackwards]

Definitely, how could general maths scale higher than say extension history or perhaps modern history?

Oh and i heard that you could get the statistics for how each subject scales in past HSC years. Would anyone know where it is because i tried boardofstudies and i haven't been able to find it

 

[dat202hoe]

Where'd general maths come from?

 

[lyounamu]

Definitely, how could general maths scale higher than say extension history or perhaps modern history?

Oh and i heard that you could get the statistics for how each subject scales in past HSC years. Would anyone know where it is because i tried boardofstudies and i haven't been able to find it

http://community.boredofstudies.org/844/uai-hsc-marks-class-2008/195353/preliminary-report-scaling-2008-hsc-w-tables.html

scaling is in A3 I think,

 

[Timothy.Siu]

Definitely, how could general maths scale higher than say extension history or perhaps modern history?

Oh and i heard that you could get the statistics for how each subject scales in past HSC years. Would anyone know where it is because i tried boardofstudies and i haven't been able to find it

http://www.uac.edu.au/pubs/pdf/2008_table_A3.pdf

 

[dat202hoe]

Oh wow that's hilarious.

 

[ZaraKu]

It's cause the Board of Studies whackjobs think that people who don't do maths or science subjects are considered useless, but they obviously haven't realised that not everyone wants to be a doctor or a maths professor. It's even worse when you do a creative/performing arts subject, seeing as everyone considers them "bludge" subjects, when they're just as much work, possibly even more than most maths/science subjects.

There. I've had my rant. Thank you BOS for considering me a complete dumbshit.

 

[kevinx2]

So a 75 in physics is worth more than say an 82 in economics?

75 Physics = 79 Economics

2005 Scaling.

It's cause the Board of Studies whackjobs think that people who don't do maths or science subjects are considered useless, but they obviously haven't realised that not everyone wants to be a doctor or a maths professor. It's even worse when you do a creative/performing arts subject, seeing as everyone considers them "bludge" subjects, when they're just as much work, possibly even more than most maths/science subjects.

There. I've had my rant. Thank you BOS for considering me a complete dumbshit.

Society just arguably doesn't favour the creatives.

 

[ywontuend]

i think its all about falling into the appropriate percentile so that you wont be scaled down too heavily. Due to the strength of the cohort in the maths and sciences and the diifficulty of the subject (come on they ARE difficult) the top percentiles are a lower mark and thus you get scaled well. however for humanities you need to get an exceptionally good HSC mark to get into a good percentile and thus it is only when you do REALLY well at humanities that you get scaled well. I personally didnt do any sciences and focussed on maths and humanities and i found that my hard work in humanities paid off.

You just have to pick subjects you are really good at, that will help you more than any 'high' scaling subject.

 

[Pwnage101]

the system is fair, and allows people to do the subjects they want and still gain a decent UAI

in fact, i know someone who got the same UAI as me, but did not undertake mathematics, but was more a humanities/english person - so the system caters for everyone

 

[breezy221090]

The BOS's marks mean very little to anyone undertaking higher education, they're just basically presenting an image (no one should get below 50 unless they make no serious and relevant attempt at a paper). UAC use raw hsc marks not the ones which appear on your HSC. UAC aren't scaling based on a subjects apparent 'difficulty' they're scaling based on how well the rest of the students doing it did in their other subjects. Therefore determining whether the paper was hard or easy. So one concludes that it's not the subjects which matter it's the students doing them. Meaning you're not doomed to get a low UAI because you've done a 'low scaled subject' you just need to do well in it and be above those kids that have done bad in their other subjects.

 

[Babbu]

It is sickening, this competition for UAI's. This scaling business sounds so manipulative and calculative. People end up opting for a well scaling course that they don't like but simply for good UAI, they have to go for economics and then end up as a doctor.

As long as one gets admission in one's desired course, how does it matter if one gets a 100 or 99.5 or 88.5 or even 75. In our desire to get 100 UAI, we end up pressurising ourselves so much that we get even lower than what we normally get.

So cheers to everyone who try their best, and then get a UAI to sail them to a nice uni course.

 

[Forbidden.]

回复: Re: Why are sciences and mathematics scaled so well?

Scaling of the subject is determiend by the overall calibre of the candidature in the course.

In general, subjects like 4 Unit Mathematics, 3 Unit Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry attract many of those high-calibre students.

Speaking the truth.

 

[Will Shakespear]

Re: 回复: Re: Why are sciences and mathematics scaled so well?

Speaking the truth.

that's all there is to it

all the "omg bos is biased towards maffs" rants are too funny