Is Rawmarks database reliable? (1 Viewer)

[Run hard@thehsc]

just out of curiosity how reliable is raw marks database?

 

[notme123]

id say it is reliable. ive submitted a raw mark there before.

 

[Vall]

I’m pretty sure they ask for proof of your Rawmarks when you submit (ie ask for the pdf straight from NESA).
Also, when putting their data into excel and graphing it I haven’t noticed any obvious outliers so far (although with so little data it’s kinda hard to spot outliers)

 

[carrotsss]

Yes, all the data is collated by @D94 from submissions from people who got their marks from NESA using results services (and prior to that, FOI requests on this forum). There isn’t really any outliers, the only differences between results are because of varying exam difficulties between years

 

[edwxnsamuel]

Yes, all the data is collated by @D94 from submissions from people who got their marks from NESA using results services (and prior to that, FOI requests on this forum). There isn’t really any outliers, the only differences between results are because of varying exam difficulties between years

I know some results of people who sent in results for 2021 who actually had their marks removed from the page and suddenly some random new ones appeared, which seem to contradict the raw marks that I have on me directly. e.g. a raw mark of 49/70 in mathematics extension 1 in 2021 aligned to a 95 in 2021, but nearly all 2021 data on rawmarks data base contradict this; a raw mark of 77 in biology in 2021 aligned to a 93. Clearly this data doesn't align with raw-marks database and I'm more than happy to show you if that is the case for the maths marks (not sure about the Biology mark but i can try). Overall, I'm very skeptical about the raw-marks data base at its current state (after a lot of results were suddenly uploaded recently); graphing the data and fitting a curve onto it doesn't necessarily mean that there is a causation, so I am still very sketch about it lol.

 

[carrotsss]

e.g. a raw mark of 49/70 in mathematics extension 1 in 2021 aligned to a 95 in 2021, but nearly all 2021 data on rawmarks data base contradict this; a raw mark of 77 in biology in 2021 aligned to a 93.

Are you sure about this? There are numerous data points on this forum and on the database which show that in previous years the alignment was nowhere near as good as that, and the band distributions and exam difficulties last year were nowhere near as different from those years to results in such a wild change in alignment. For some context, 49/70 aligning to a 95 would indicate a shift from 60/70 aligning to a 95 in 2018, which is just ridiculous lol. I’m interested to see where you got these statistics from, it sounds like someone has misled you.

 

[edwxnsamuel]

Are you sure about this? There are numerous data points on this forum and on the database which show that in previous years the alignment was nowhere near as good as that, and the band distributions and exam difficulties last year were nowhere near as different from those years to results in such a wild change in alignment. For some context, 49/70 aligning to a 95 would indicate a shift from 60/70 aligning to a 95 in 2018, which is just ridiculous lol. I’m interested to see where you got these statistics from, it sounds like someone has misled you.

Would you like me to send you the NESA rawmarks report? I think you're blindly just reading from rawmarks data base like it is the holy grail of info. Numerous data points doesn't imply they are correct lol. I think you should be able to count 49 from it.

 

[notme123]

the one i put up is still there for mx1

 

[carrotsss]

Would you like me to send you the NESA rawmarks report? I think you're blindly just reading from rawmarks data base like it is the holy grail of info. Numerous data points doesn't imply they are correct lol.

Yep, you got the one from conquerhsc discord, thought so.

If you want to dig into the history of the site, you can check out this thread (and notice how all of the marks are from this forum and there is nobody in the comments contradicting that):

Updated Raw Marks Database (sortable excel file)

Updated Raw Marks Database - Sortable Website ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ UPDATE: I've placed the database on an easily accessible website: http://rawmarks.info/...

boredofstudies.org

The band distributions and exam difficulties since these have not changed enough to cause such a significant shift to the alignment, and these raw marks are pretty much certainly accurate as they all come from real, active users of this very forum.

Looking into what has happened, it seems like someone from conquerhsc sent an incorrect raw marks to aligning conversion in there with good intentions in order to reduce people’s nervousness following some disappointment with 3u exam performance, however as an unfortunate side effect the real and accurate rawmarks.info got caught in the crossfire.

 

[edwxnsamuel]

Yep, you got the one from conquerhsc discord, thought so.

If you want to dig into the history of the site, you can check out this thread (and notice how all of the marks are from this forum and there is nobody in the comments contradicting that):

The band distributions and exam difficulties since these have not changed enough to cause such a significant shift to the alignment, and these raw marks are pretty much certainly accurate as they all come from real, active users of this very forum.

Looking into what has happened, it seems like someone from conquerhsc sent an incorrect raw marks to aligning conversion in there with good intentions in order to reduce people’s nervousness following some disappointment with 3u exam performance, however as an unfortunate side effect the real and accurate rawmarks.info got caught in the crossfire.

I don't think you realise I'm a moderator on ConquerHSC, and this is actually the raw mark of a mentor on ConquerHSC, so I wouldn't really try to throw that around LOL.

 

[chilli 412]

 

[carrotsss]

i have talked to @edwxnsamuel in DMS, and they seem to be being truthful and have meaningful evidence, so I retract what I said earlier.

I still find the significant aligning changes hard to believe, but the evidence seems to point to it so I guess I have no choice but to believe it.

The only possible explanation against them is that their friend modified the PDFs of their results, which seems quite unlikely, so I apologise to @edwxnsamuel for casting doubt.

 

[notme123]

so the raw marks database is actually more strict and harsher than reality?

 

[edwxnsamuel]

so the raw marks database is actually more strict and harsher than reality?

If I'm not mistaken, there are some errors in maths and bio (chem & phys seem okay mostly maybe 1 or 2 sus ones but yeah). maths seems too strict in some areas and same w bio (bc mid to low 80s is not low 90s aligned in bio).

 

[carrotsss]

so the raw marks database is actually more strict and harsher than reality?

I guess it might be, but the problem is his friend's data from 4u and physics aligns with the database, while the 3u and bio results are way different. We're trying to figure out why, because I'm pretty confident the reports are real (they have all the hsc reports and the atar lines up too), but the aligning is way outta hand (she got 70% raw in 3u aligned to 95 and 70% raw in 45 aligned to 90).

 

[edwxnsamuel]

I guess it might be, but the problem is his friend's data from 4u and physics aligns with the database, while the 3u and bio results are way different. We're trying to figure out why, because I'm pretty confident the reports are real (they have all the hsc reports and the atar lines up too), but the aligning is way outta hand (she got 70% raw in 3u aligned to 95 and 70% raw in 45 aligned to 90).

Just correcting, the bio marks are from someone else but yeah very confusing.

 

[MemeCognoscente]

does this mean the alignment for 3u this year should be slightly higher than 2021? or do you guys think 2021 was harder?

 

[Run hard@thehsc]

does this mean the alignment for 3u this year should be slightly higher than 2021? or do you guys think 2021 was harder?

nah no way 2021 was harder. At least bare minimum it was on par. So I would guess alignment would have to be equal if not likely higher in 2022 than 2021

 

[jklol]

nah no way 2021 was harder. At least bare minimum it was on par. So I would guess alignment would have to be equal if not likely higher in 2022 than 2021

vouch

 

[395ENG]

80 fick