Who thinks the HSC is unfair? (2 Viewers)

[philphie]

I'm not saying that's an issue, I'm merely pointing out that the American model was not a deliberate decision to decentralise, whereas in Australia we did make a deliberate decision to centralise. So they didn't establish the system specifically to address your concerns.



If they did enrol in Law, and did in fact lack the requisite skills to complete the degree, then they'll fail. Quite simply, applicants with those high ATARs aren't stupid - they won't enrol in a degree which they think they will fail at. (And BTW, maths logic and law overlaps quite well, I think )

no they didn't but in my opinion i think a similar system would have more potential here considering our smaller population and the fact our tertiary institutions are on a large majority public

 

[ajdlinux]

no they didn't but in my opinion i think a similar system would have more potential here considering our smaller population and the fact our tertiary institutions are on a large majority public

Well, beyond whatever academic issues there are, I would be concerned about the administrative load - it would require significant budget increases, and require far more forms. I would prefer a system a bit more like Victoria's, where applicants can provide additional information (Pi Form), but the applications are still processed through a central clearing-house. I'd still like to see some evidence that a decentralised, less uniform system actually has positive overall impact though.

 

[philphie]

How is that any improvement? On observation of marks, they would still take the students who would have got the better ATARs. So philphie, I beat you in our previous debate?

i suppose so, but this proposition was one to make all those people complaining about comparative scaling happy and this is the only way i can see of resolving that issue. it's not an issue for me but it's the only revision i could think of. do you have any suggestions?

 

[jellybelly59]

America has an issue of ensuring students are as smart as they can be, my proposition has absolutely nothing to do with that, i'm talking about a new admissions system. plus our landscape is entirely different to theirs, we have a smaller population to deal with. the point of making a direct offer to a university with a report of your scores is to see if you are capable of that PARTICULAR degree, hence there comes the necessity for tertiary institutions to place pre requisites. so ext2 maths would not be placed on the same level as general maths

LOL i don't think any subject of high school any where is comparable or is able to reflect your capability in any particular degree - that's why most things can be learnt through a bridging course at uni.

 

[philphie]

Well, beyond whatever academic issues there are, I would be concerned about the administrative load - it would require significant budget increases, and require far more forms. I would prefer a system a bit more like Victoria's, where applicants can provide additional information (Pi Form), but the applications are still processed through a central clearing-house. I'd still like to see some evidence that a decentralised, less uniform system actually has positive overall impact though.

i suppose that would be a much cleaner and moderate method, yeah i'd agree to that. i think in nsw there's only one institution that has something like that and it's notre dame, too bad that's private though

 

[ajdlinux]

i suppose that would be a much cleaner and moderate method, yeah i'd agree to that. i think in nsw there's only one institution that has something like that and it's notre dame, too bad that's private though

All unis use those sorts of things for certain additional selection programs. Actually, it would be good if they created a standardised form even just for medicine and similar courses that normally require those things - would probably save money to have UAC administer it for everyone, and would save applicants time in just filling out one form.

 

[annabackwards]

scaling is quite fair, because it removes the inflations added on by moderation, and makes each subject comparable. It's not as if the dudes at the scaling centre go 'lololol omg let's scale up 4u by 25% and cos like, va is a crap subject, let's scale it down'
it's based upon how good the cohort is, so i think it's quite fair

+1

 

[suling]

Yeah Suling. Kevin Rudd has only 3-4 hours of sleep a night. ANd his work load, I'll take a bet, was much larger than yours.

i'm slightly confused by what you mean by this comment. I wasn't complaining about anything, simply saying that I don't work too well on little sleep.

 

[noelknows]

i suppose so, but this proposition was one to make all those people complaining about comparative scaling happy and this is the only way i can see of resolving that issue. it's not an issue for me but it's the only revision i could think of. do you have any suggestions?

Yeah, maintain the status quo, make any necessary adjustments, and ignore the whingers. They complain because of their ignorance of the system, and because they didn't perform as well as they would have liked.

 

[philphie]

LOL i don't think any subject of high school any where is comparable or is able to reflect your capability in any particular degree - that's why most things can be learnt through a bridging course at uni.

well this just leads back into my previous argument about the poor methods of intellectual examination. at all the university lectures i've been to, all the lecturers have criticised the poor methods used to teach and examine subjects like English

 

[noelknows]

i suppose so, but this proposition was one to make all those people complaining about comparative scaling happy and this is the only way i can see of resolving that issue. it's not an issue for me but it's the only revision i could think of. do you have any suggestions?

Plus, I don't see how this would resolve the essential issue of some subjects being valued over others. Universities would know the difference between legal studies and extension 1 maths. They would still prefer the subjects that the scaling system had taught them to value as more difficult.

 

[philphie]

Yeah, maintain the status quo, make any necessary adjustments, and ignore the whingers. They complain because of their ignorance of the system, and because they didn't perform as well as they would have liked.

i guess but we still can't deny that this is a problem. god it feels like the ets all over again

 

[philphie]

Plus, I don't see how this would resolve the essential issue of some subjects being valued over others. Universities would know the difference between legal studies and extension 1 maths. They would still prefer the subjects that they had been taught were more difficult through the scaling system.

yeah but they wouldn't know what subjects students did.

 

[philphie]

All unis use those sorts of things for certain additional selection programs. Actually, it would be good if they created a standardised form even just for medicine and similar courses that normally require those things - would probably save money to have UAC administer it for everyone, and would save applicants time in just filling out one form.

well that's what i meant, and the eas is pretty much waht you're talking about the only problem is each university has their own set of rules. uts allows up 10 extra points, usyd only 5 and for some courses only. macquarie has their aptitude test. these schemes and rules should all be regulated into one universal scheme just like it's application countepart

 

[noelknows]

yeah but they wouldn't know what subjects students did.

Weren't you advocating a scheme where students present the marks they got in each subject to be accpeted into a university course?

 

[philphie]

Weren't you advocating a scheme where students present the marks they got in each subject to be accpeted into a university course?

sorry i misunderstood. the point of shwing your studied subjects was to show how much releavnce they had to the degree. though i can see how a university would prefer a student studying harder subjects regardless if they were remotely relatable to the degree than someone who had studied more 'appropriate' subjects but there still is such a thing as being overqualified. if that can stop people from being employed why can't it stop people from being admitted (bad reasoning i know...)

 

[ajdlinux]

yeah but they wouldn't know what subjects students did.

Universities already know what subjects students do, that's how they administer programs like UNSW's HSC Plus. And under your proposed system, they're meant to give more weight to people with different subjects. So as stated, they'll still value the high-scaling subjects like Extension Maths.

 

[philphie]

Universities already know what subjects students do, that's how they administer programs like UNSW's HSC Plus. And under your proposed system, they're meant to give more weight to people with different subjects. So as stated, they'll still value the high-scaling subjects like Extension Maths.

haha you could of said that earlier so i could of stopped debating for my failed system

 

[ajdlinux]

haha you could of said that earlier so i could of stopped debating for my failed system

I did mention bonus points schemes several pages back

 

[philphie]

I did mention bonus points schemes several pages back

i thought for bonus points they would first refer to your eas application, then you would contact certain universities yourself showing whatever subject you studied that would get you the bonus, i'd prefer the service to be a bit more automatic