Students Against Scaling - Post Here! (2 Viewers)

[Schoey93]

Hello all,

My name is James. I am a Year 10 student studying toward my N.S.W. School Certificate this year. I have read extensively about the N.S.W. Higher School Certificate marking processes. A brief summary of the N.S.W. H.S.C. marking process follows.

Higher School Certificate - Record of Achievement - Student X
Order of Marks: Internal Assessment Mark, H.S.C. Examination Mark, H.S.C. Mark
Ancient History - 79, 74, 77 (Band 4)
Chemistry - 92, 85, 89 (Band 5)
English Advanced - 87, 94, 91 (Band 6)
English Extension 1 - 48, 46, 47 (Band E4)
Mathematics - 84, 89, 87 (Band 5)
Mathematics Extension 1 - 42, 39, 41 (Band E3)
Extension Subjects - Moderated Marks Band Cut Offs
E4 - 45+
E3 - 35-44
E2 - 25-34
E1 - 1-24

These results equate to a U.A.I. (Universities Admission Index) of approximately 88.5.

The Internal Assessment Mark or School-based Assessment Mark is equal to the external H.S.C. examination mark corresponding to the student's rank in their subject's cohort (within the school).

The external H.S.C. exam mark is the mark the student obtained in their external assessment, including the submission of projects if applicable and the external exam result. The student's raw mark in the external H.S.C. assessment is converted to a percentage. This percentage is then aligned up slightly to show the standard the student has achieved in the course. An external exam mark of 50 represents the minimum standard expected in a course. Please note that to obtain a mark of 50 a student need not actually score 50% raw in the external assessment or exam. A student need only score a mark which is chosen to represent the minimum standard in an H.S.C. course.



Now, who thinks this system is unfair?

 

[Fortify]

Is moderation included in this?

 

[Schoey93]

Yes.

 

[Zedez]

The UAI is a very complex system. Remember that it is a ranking not a mark, and that is is designed by the Universities Admissions Centre, not BOS, for the purpose of Univiersities Admissions, not as a mark intended for every student. And at the end of the day, although you can say it is unfair, if you are a good student you will get a good mark, and if you aren't, you won't. We can argue about the system, in fact a have a lot of thing I think could change about it, but at the end of the day it works.

That said, its not perfect, so perhaps you could point out exactly what or how this is unfair, because you've been a bit general in your critcism.

 

[Zedez]

Ah, okay, you've edited the OP, but I don't quite understand the logic. The percentage you refer to is I assume your pre-scalled mark? Because in most cases your mark would be scaled down, not up, and this is required to level out each course. You then said that a mark of 50 would equate to about 90.5, or am I reading this wrong, because that can't be right?

 

[aMUSEd1977]

Scaling is pivotal. Unless of course you have a better way of ranking everyone.

 

[tommykins]

if you've got a better system, state it.

otherwise please stop posting.

 

[jellybelly59]

if you've got a better system, state it.

Otherwise please stop posting.

+1

 

[Fortify]

If you think this is unfair, why are you posting it on Bored of Studies?

 

[spagbowl]

I see you are doing chemistry. If there were no scaling you would have no motivation and might as well do senior science and ace it. Is that where you want to be?

 

[aussie-boy]

I think its incredibly unfair... really favours students with 'academic' interests.

Consider 2 students, same IQ and same work ethnic. Student A loves English; student B loves design and technology.

Under the current system, student A will get a better scaled mark. The English course is more difficult, you don't have to scrape those elusive final marks in assessments/the exam because its scaled up so much.

Personally, I loved economics and would have got a raw mark of 90+. I found 3 unit maths extremely difficult, didnt do much work and probably got 50-60% in the HSC exam. Yet my maths mark was higher than my eco mark. Wtf? The fact that BOS decided to compensate via scaling rather than via making eco more difficult cost me dearly.

IMO, all major subjects should be available at high levels of difficulty, to the point where scaling of raw marks would not be required.

 

[Zedez]

But Student B whould get a beter raw mark in D&T, because it is easier.

Besides, you can't have all the subjects the same difficulty, that would be riddiculus. You would have to study most subjects at like Uni level, whilst the dificult ones would have to be completely dumbed down.

 

[helper]

Remember that the scaling process has nothing to do with the difficulty of the subject but reflects the cohort who chooses the subject.

 

[aussie-boy]

But Student B whould get a beter raw mark in D&T, because it is easier.

Its pretty much impossible to get 95+ in an exam, because of the little obscure marks here and there attained by little more than luck... so despite a really good raw mark, under the current system, it still wont be equivalent to an average mark scaled up in a difficult subject

Besides, you can't have all the subjects the same difficulty, that would be riddiculus. You would have to study most subjects at like Uni level, whilst the dificult ones would have to be completely dumbed down.

Dumb argument. "Uni level" is not a set level, its simply where you finish up at the end of school...
Can you give me one reason why some subjects should be more difficult? And why students with certain interests deserve to do better than those with different interests?

 

[CountVonChocula]

i love scaling

i live 2 scal

 

[aussie-boy]

Remember that the scaling process has nothing to do with the difficulty of the subject but reflects the cohort who chooses the subject.

Easy subjects attract dumb cohorts... they are one and the same factor in scaling

 

[khorne]

scaling is a ok system..why not, instead of denouncing it, suggest a better one?

 

[helper]

Easy subjects attract dumb cohorts... they are one and the same factor in scaling

No they aren't. A top student can obtain an excellent UAI in any subjects. A low ability student won't be favoured by scaling, no matter what subjects they do.

 

[Zedez]

Its pretty much impossible to get 95+ in an exam, because of the little obscure marks here and there attained by little more than luck... so despite a really good raw mark, under the current system, it still wont be equivalent to an average mark scaled up in a difficult subject

No, it is only luck is you have not prepared properly and are guessing.

Dumb argument. "Uni level" is not a set level, its simply where you finish up at the end of school...
Can you give me one reason why some subjects should be more difficult? And why students with certain interests deserve to do better than those with different interests?

Because some subjects are harder than others. Period. And the UAI is designed to compensate for that.

And what I mean is, the lower scaling subjects would have to be studied in High School at the level that those subjects (or equivelent courses) are currently studied at Uni, whilst those higher scalling subjects would have to be taught at what is currently Year 9-10 level. I mean, how are you going to make 4 Unit Maths the same difficulty as PDHPE? You can't.

Besides, you can achive a good UAI with any subject, so what is the problem?

 

[khorne]

I bet you're some first year tafe student with a shit UAI because you did nothing all of year 12 and now go on and on about scaling etc.