2005 UAI Distribution tables (1 Viewer)

[anone.playm8]

Hi all! First post here :wave:

Anyways, I was wondering where I can find the 2005 table on UAI distribution. As in, for each course, what percentile got above 99, 90 etc. I checked the UAC website and found the Tables section but couldn't find this.

Also, I would appreciate it if someone could tell me how to read Tables A3, A4 and A5.

A3: It says the HSC mark and scaled for the different percentiles, but it looks like it's out of fifty. I'm quite sure the UAI is out of 100, so am I just supposed to multiply the score by two?

A4: Again, I don't know whether I'm meant to multiply the "45 ... 25" by two? So this means for "Aboriginal Studies" (the first on the list) only 2.9% got above 90 for their HSC mark?

A5: Again, I don't know whether I'm meant to multiply the "45 ... 25" by two? So this means for "Aboriginal Studies" (the first on the list) only 0.4% got above 90 for their scaled mark?

Thanks for any info!

 

[Lazarus]

Anyways, I was wondering where I can find the 2005 table on UAI distribution. As in, for each course, what percentile got above 99, 90 etc. I checked the UAC website and found the Tables section but couldn't find this.

You're having trouble finding this table because it doesn't exist. There are no statistics describing the proportion of students in each course who attain particular UAIs (or setting out equivalences between course percentiles and UAI attained).

Table A1 does however state the top UAI attained in each course.

Also, I would appreciate it if someone could tell me how to read Tables A3, A4 and A5.

A3: It says the HSC mark and scaled for the different percentiles, but it looks like it's out of fifty. I'm quite sure the UAI is out of 100, so am I just supposed to multiply the score by two?

As webby stated:

The marks are out of 50 because they are being reported on a 'per unit' basis. There are 50 marks for each unit - most courses consist of two units and therefore allow for 100 marks.

Your UAI is not a mark, it is a rank. Your UAI is not the sum of your scaled marks. You cannot infer anything about your UAI (or what your UAI might have been) merely by reading scaled marks from Table A3.

If you are trying to estimate or calculate a UAI, you should determine the scaled mark for each unit in accordance with Table A3 (and double the mark if it's for a course with two units), and then use Table A8 to convert the sum of your scaled marks (the aggregate) to the corresponding UAI.

SAM does all of this for you.

A4: <strike>Again, I don't know whether I'm meant to multiply the "45 ... 25" by two?</strike> So this means for "Aboriginal Studies" (the first on the list) only 2.9% got above 90 for their HSC mark?

Yes. This reading of Table A4 is correct.

A5: <strike>Again, I don't know whether I'm meant to multiply the "45 ... 25" by two?</strike> So this means for "Aboriginal Studies" (the first on the list) only 0.4% got above 90 for their scaled mark?

Yes. This reading of Table A5 is correct.

 

[RayMonda]

Just comparing the 2006 distribution tables to 2005 tables:-

Looking at "Aboriginal Studies" (the first on the lists). In 2005 2.9% scored an HSC mark above 90 and 0.4% got over 90 for their scaled mark. In 2006 4.9% scored over 90 and 55.0% got over 90 for their scaled mark. Is that right ???