SOR I - Section 3! YOUR THOUGHTS (1 Viewer)

[M3riJaan]

Fair enough if they wanted to challenge us with a harder question but the CHRISTIANITY QUESTION WAS OBSCENE. They say they will cater their marking for it. But the problem there is that most of the state didnt even know how to answer it and as a result there is so many different answers and half of us didnt even know if we were going in the right direction with our responses! I think everyone should send complaints, cause I have

What direction did you go in? All i did was relate each topic (ethical teaching, sig. practice and sig. school of thought) and combine it with a recent statistic i just happened to know and show that because its still happening today, christianity is therefore a living religion. somehow i still managed to fill up the booklet, i just hope its right is all. personally when i went this way, i was relieved, because there was no way i couldve sustained an essay based on a single dotpoint from the syllabus. but you gotta understand that no matter what the subject is, an essay is still an essay, and as long as you can create a thesis that makes sense, you can go far. thats what you do for english essays, why should it be any different for social science or history? take the question, twiss it, and use it to your advantage.

 

[kweese]

i've been answering the comments on the daily telegraph article and to be honest, all you had to do was pull the 3 study areas together of a religion of your damned choice to create an answer. anyone who wrote non-attempt, 'invalid question' or any of that utter bullshit doesnt deserve an average, because they obviously were just sucking up and spitting out information learnt. the hsc tests your understanding, not just how much you can memorise. the bos cant do a thing, unless theyre bribed by the hundreds of sydney private schools whos mummys and daddys want their child's atar to be at the very least a 98. just because you didnt or couldnt answer a question, why the fuck should you get assumed marks when the people that did actually give an answer honestly attempted to have a go? you're leeching off of other's hard work if you just didnt answer, you dug that grave on your own. if you couldnt answer, you probably bludged through the 2 hours of SOR 1 a week like so many people did, myself included. however, i attempted an answer. i'd tl:dr but honestly, to all you complaining fucks, read this. stop leeching, stop complaining because you were stumped by a question, stop being completely and utterly fucking selfish. most of you deserve to have your necks broken

 

[wils-dog]

what did people put for christianity for section 3???????

 

[Anon4Real]

Get over itThe exam is done, your answer was your answer. It's not like theyre gonna re-do the exam, and yeah I agree the question was retarded.But whinging about it won't do shit

 

[kweese]

Get over itThe exam is done, your answer was your answer. It's not like theyre gonna re-do the exam, and yeah I agree the question was retarded.But whinging about it won't do shit

We have a winner!

 

[GaziMonogue]

I agree we shoulod move on. But since the question is asking for ALL ethics, Does that mean student who bought the excel books could sue the company for stating only ONE ethic is to be learnt ?

 

[Libby01P]

"Students in Tears over HSC Nightmare" - ABC News. Students in tears over HSC 'nightmare' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

 

[rahulpaley]

It was really different. Every other HSC I practiced ws nothing like this and according to the syllabus they can't ask us this. I went pretty terrible and mentioned everything I possibly could!!!!

 

[blozzzz]

I agree that section III was a bit tough and it sort of threw me a bit but writing "invalid question" and not even attempting it is a pretty dumb thing to do. I mean seriously, straight away you've thrown away 20 marks. You may as well try and ramble on about what you know and hope they give you SOME marks for it.
Saying that, apparently one room of special provisions in my school were told by a hsc examiner that the question was a mistake and to write "was not in the syllabus". Whoever she was, she's gonna get slaughtered by the BOS and the girls (+ families) that she told to not even bother.

 

[kweese]

"Students in Tears over HSC Nightmare" - ABC News. Students in tears over HSC 'nightmare' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

oh great, the media is going to have a field day with this shit

 

[M3riJaan]

man, can you imagine these people when they manage to get jobs? their boss asks them to do something different..."Uh...that wasn't in the syllabus? so no attempt"

 

[sean kelly-pain]

it wasn't a part of the syllabus... sounds like something out of two unit..... the BOS fucked up and personally i dont think there is a way they can really fix it. we may have spend the hours studying for english instead... it was total crap.

hey I'm two unit- we're in the exact same crappy position. Never learned it in my life.Someone said it was on the top of the page of the syllabus but....

 

[mfked]

i know we all shouldnt really get that worked up about it because its 1 unit

but still that whole exam was fucking bullshit

 

[chuha]

pretty sure it was reconciliation, (between aboriginals and the church) as this is a syllabus dot point. Also, the cross in the middle also signified the church, and the australia had dots around it, showing it was aboriginal.....so yeah that was my conclusion.
Couldn't have been much else anyway.

thanks mate =)

 

[chuha]

man, can you imagine these people when they manage to get jobs? their boss asks them to do something different..."Uh...that wasn't in the syllabus? so no attempt"

hahahaha you're very funny, but i can assure you t was pretty cutting seeing a question that you weren't prepared for...it was the hsc after all.=)

 

[TechnIx]

Before an exam is approved and printed, an experienced teacher of that subject ‘sits’ the paper to check it can be completed in the time allowed. The teacher also comments on how well the paper covers the syllabus and whether the language is clear.

Whoever had this job should be fired

 

[hazza9]

I had honestly had no idea what the CHRISTIANITY question was implying so I was just like ahh well and just wrote my prepared environmental ethics essay and kept linking it to the question, even though I didn't understand it haha.I agree that they should make it hard to catch people out but if you can't interpret the question then it isn't hard, it's just stupid. No amount of study can prepare for stupidity.No reason why they couldn't of said: with reference to ethics, practice and significant person (or whatever they were after)...

 

[gangagirllol]

Band 6 Responce?

Response* haha band one for you

 

[.Joe.]

The Christianity questio was absolute CRAP!!

Check out this link... it has the syllabus outcomes they wanted for each question...
Studies of Religion – 2009 HSC Examination Mapping Grid - Board of Studies NSW

Man I'm screwed because I spoke about our significant person, ethics and practise in my Christianity essay!

 

[Brendan4952]

This was a whole lot of bullshit. Everyone came out of the exam saying "Did we ever learn about question 3?".

I think it was a preliminary question which mans the whole exam should be scrapped and everybody gets 100%. Or at least for section III.

actually I know I did well in section 3 and was thoroughly prepared. SO I deserve 100% and you all deserve whatever you deserve.