Could someone please clarify my ideas of UAI and scaling?? (1 Viewer)

[intuiit]

Hi guys, I haven't really gotten the concept of the UAI - until now... I think.

My subjects are English Advanced, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, IPT, Maths + Maths Ext. 1

To my understanding: if I get, for instance, 70% for a 20% weighted HSC class assessment (a loss of 6 points from the class "assessment" mark without scaling considered), then does that mean a 3 point loss from my "HSC mark" for that subject, right??

If so, my real questions are:

1. How well does my particular set of subjects scale?
I've seen in JUAIseek that my subjects actually get scaled down...why?

2. With this scaling up and down in HSC mark, what would you say the overall trend is? How's it gonna scale this year?
Is it going to go up or down do you think? How do they decide how to scale the subjects - it all seems like they're doing this unsystematically.

3. Are Maths Ext. 1 and IPT really the only subjects that can scale me up (or scale me down if I don't get a 90 + mark)?
Why the drama there?

I'd appreciate any explanations.

 

[midifile]

1. How well does my particular set of subjects scale?
I've seen in JUAIseek that my subjects actually get scaled down...why?

2. With this scaling up and down in HSC mark, what would you say the overall trend is? How's it gonna scale this year?
Is it going to go up or down do you think? How do they decide how to scale the subjects - it all seems like they're doing this unsystematically.

3. Are Maths Ext. 1 and IPT really the only subjects that can scale me up (or scale me down if I don't get a 90 + mark)?
Why the drama there?

1/3. Im pretty sure that out of all of your subjects IPT is one of the worse scaling subjects. I dont know where you got the idea that IPT was one of the best scaling. I saw the scaling report from 2006 on the internet somewhere, but cant seem to find it anymore.

I'm pretty sure that english advanced, maths, maths extension one, physics and chemisty scale up, but then again scaling is not a linear thing and is influenced by the marks you get. Biology and IPT, scale about average, but thats not to say that if you do well in them you cant get a good mark.

Try using SAM instead

2. You can never really tell how well a year will do overall, however our SC results will come into it. A few people in my school seem to think that this is a stupid year overall, because for many schools in my area (mine included) it is one of the weakest years. But as for the whole of NSW you can never really know. Plus, really, you should ignore everyone else and just focus on doing the best that you can do.





English Advanced, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, IPT, Maths + Maths Ext. 1

 

[me121]

1. How well does my particular set of subjects scale?
I've seen in JUAIseek that my subjects actually get scaled down...why?

2. With this scaling up and down in HSC mark, what would you say the overall trend is? How's it gonna scale this year?
Is it going to go up or down do you think? How do they decide how to scale the subjects - it all seems like they're doing this unsystematically.

1. It makes NO difference how one particular subject allone is scaled. People look at the raw scaling data and they see that its scaling down, but so what? The UAI is a rank, if everyone gets scaled down, its makes no difference. You need to compare these scaled marks to other courses.

2. I you look at the scaling trends over the past 7 years you get a general idea of what will probably happen this year.

 

[intuiit]

Without Wings: Thanks for the link! Answered a few more questions.

midifile: Got it.

me121: Where can I find scaling trends, though? I looked at the different years back to 2002 and I don't see much of a pattern...

I'll try to stop thinking about the UAI!!!

 

[me121]

me121: Where can I find scaling trends, though? I looked at the different years back to 2002 and I don't see much of a pattern...

I'll try to stop thinking about the UAI!!!

Presuming you have found the scaling reports, (2007, 2006, others are no longer avaliable via UAC's web site.)

As an example, Mathematics,

2007
...HSC 50.0 48.0 46.0 42.5 38.0 33.5
scaled 50.0 46.3 41.7 37.6 31.6 24.5

2006
...HSC 49.5 48.0 45.5 42.5 37.5 32.5
scaled 50.0 46.1 41.8 37.7 31.5 23.8

2005
...HSC 50.0 48.5 46.0 42.5 37.5 32.0
scaled 50.0 46.2 41.6 37.3 31.1 23.7

2004
...HSC 50.0 48.0 45.5 43.0 38.5 33.0
scaled 50.0 45.8 41.5 37.5 31.0 23.3

2002
...HSC 49.7 48.2 46.1 43.3 38.1 32.8
scaled 50.0 46.1 41.7 37.6 31.3 23.6


The first line is the hsc marks of various percentiles, and the second line is the corresponding scaled mark for the above hsc mark.

If you graph these all, I'm sure you will find that there is an obvious trend that a hsc mark of 50 will scale to 50 (within a small margin of error). Hence you can be fairly safe to assume that the same will happen the next year. (Although you can never be 100% sure.) The major changes will happen when the nature of the candidature changes. If you look, there is a clear trend for other hsc marks as well.

 

[ccc123]

http://community.boredofstudies.org/...ad.php?t=60687
http://community.boredofstudies.org/...ad.php?t=10442
http://community.boredofstudies.org/...ead.php?t=6642
http://community.boredofstudies.org/...ad.php?t=36886
http://community.boredofstudies.org/...d.php?t=167602

 

[me121]

i dont udnerstand how they do the UAI. i mean, avergaing wont work?

THE UAI IS A RANK, NOT A MARK.

 

[midifile]

wow,
man im getting reall stressed out because, my exammarks have just been average. ranging from 50's 70's, and for some topics my assignments are awesome, but when i average it out, its only around 70's, i have to admit, i didnt study to the best of my ability, and revise in time before hand.
im scared my UAI wont be so great, as apprently and robably definately my subjects arent all scaled very well.
Do you think that theres still a chance i could get a 80 UAI. if for my other upcomming assessments i do well REALLY WELL? and make better preparations?

or am i out of LUCK! i dont udnerstand how they do the UAI. i mean, avergaing wont work?

It's hard to tell what your UAI will be because you have to take into account the subjects you are doing, your ranks, the strength of other people etc. However, considering you said you dont understand how scaling works, I think it is best that you just put in as much effort as you can, because no matter how scaling works, better marks will always mean better marks.

 

[ccc123]

wow,

i dont udnerstand how they do the UAI. i mean, avergaing wont work?

NO. THERE ARE A MYRIAD OF THREADS EXPLAINING THE CALCULATION OF THE UAI. PLEASE READ THEM BEFORE POSTING STUPID QUESTIONS.


THANKYOU.

 

[runnable]

I cringed when i saw the word "assignment". Make sure those are ASSESSMENTS as only ASSESSMENTS count towards your UAI.

And pretty much every subject except 4U Maths and Latin Extension scaled down. Its just how much they scale down by. As a rough idea for you:
1 is best scaled

1. Maths EXT 1
2. Chemistry, Physics
3. Maths, Eng ADV (usually little scaling)
4. Biology
5. IPT

 

[me121]

...And pretty much every subject except 4U Maths and Latin Extension scaled down...

This is really meaning less. Whether they scale up or down on their own means nothing as the UAI is a rank. Its only valid to compared scaling across courses, not on an individual basis.

 

[runnable]

This is really meaning less. Whether they scale up or down on their own means nothing as the UAI is a rank. Its only valid to compared scaling across courses, not on an individual basis.

Sry but i call bullshit. Scaling measures the individual course across every course. And thats obviously what im talking about. Eg, IPT scaled down compared to Maths EXT 1

Person A:
EXT 2 English : 90
EXT 1 English: 90
Adv English: 90
Maths EXT2: 90
Maths EXT1: 90
Economics: 90

Person B:
Std English: 90
Gen Maths: 90
IPT: 90
Biology: 90
Bus Studies: 90

Please do not tell me their UAI will be the same. Having the same mark, yet having different UAIs. What distinguished both candidates. Yes scaling of subjects, INDIVIDUAL SUBJECTS.

Those in denial of scaling, please wake up. And those who thinks that scaling is so great and can scale 4U Maths from 60 to 90 also wake up.

 

[runnable]

its pretty unfair to compare the two because student B's subjects are easier to get marks in than student A

http://community.boredofstudies.org/showthread.php?t=170392 (i think you were refering to this thread and it shows a difference of less than one for the subjects i have picked for student 1 and 2)

Haha yea the "difficulty of getting marks" is reflected in the scaling of the subject. So a 90 in 4U Maths is "worth" more than 90 marks in Gen Maths, as marks are harder to get in 4U Maths.

 

[me121]

Sry but i call bullshit. Scaling measures the individual course across every course. And thats obviously what im talking about. Eg, IPT scaled down compared to Maths EXT 1

Person A:
EXT 2 English : 90
EXT 1 English: 90
Adv English: 90
Maths EXT2: 90
Maths EXT1: 90
Economics: 90

Person B:
Std English: 90
Gen Maths: 90
IPT: 90
Biology: 90
Bus Studies: 90

Please do not tell me their UAI will be the same. Having the same mark, yet having different UAIs. What distinguished both candidates. Yes scaling of subjects, INDIVIDUAL SUBJECTS.

Those in denial of scaling, please wake up. And those who thinks that scaling is so great and can scale 4U Maths from 60 to 90 also wake up.

Think about it. If every subjects marks scaled DOWN by the same mark, then it would make no difference as the UAI is a rank.

Just because the scaled mark is less than the aligned mark means nothing, and its not necessarily a bad thing.

I never said i am in denial of scaling.

Also making statements like 4u maths scaled from 60 to 90 is also vague, because again, on its own that scaled mark is 'meaningless'.

I think that instead of people using the term UP and DOWN in terms of the relation between scaled marks and aligned marks, we should use the terms to talk about that scaling relative to some mean or average mark across all courses.

 

[runnable]

Think about it. If every subjects marks scaled DOWN by the same mark, then it would make no difference as the UAI is a rank.

Just because the scaled mark is less than the aligned mark means nothing, and its not necessarily a bad thing.

I never said i am in denial of scaling.

Also making statements like 4u maths scaled from 60 to 90 is also vague, because again, on its own that scaled mark is 'meaningless'.

I think that instead of people using the term UP and DOWN in terms of the relation between scaled marks and aligned marks, we should use the terms to talk about that scaling relative to some mean or average mark across all courses.

The definition of scaling up or down IS compared to all courses.

And when i said 4U scales from 60-90 is BS, im talking about external's raw mark. Raw 60-Scaled 90, bullshit.

Statistics show that pretty much English Advanced is the mean and received minimal scaling. So we can use that(or similiar subjects) as an indicator of another subject being scaled UP or DOWN. But still, every subject can be used as an indicator, eg 4U Maths scales up compared to Chemistry. Chemistry scaled up compared to Business Studies.

But as i said, pretty much every subject scaled DOWN so when we do talk about scaling UP, we talk about it relative to other subjects.

 

[runnable]

yeah but at the end of the day as long as you get good marks in your subject scaling is not going to affect you that much. e.g. take the example that you have gave and make student A's marks 80 instead because you just said it is harder to get the mark compared to student B's. lets see who gets the higher uai.

also it is unfair to compare the two because it is clear that student A has more units than student B.

Pretty sure Student A has 10 units, just like Student B. EXT1 and EXT2 English are both 1 unit each.

Even if they had different number of units, it doesnt influence what i want to convey about scaling.

Scaling pretty much has mimimal effect after you pass around 95-96 in a subject. I dun think thats realistic for most people so we can keep that away for a minute.

And its quite strange for you to "make Student A's marks 80" cuz that defeats the message i was conveying that at the same level, certain subjects scale better. So i dun really understand what you are talking about by making Student A's marks 80. The fact that its harder to get marks, makes a subject scale better, doesnt mean a person do not get 90s in that subject. To put it simply. Do high scaling subjects well, rewards you better than doing lower scaling subjects. Do low scaling subjects well, rewards you better than doing high scaling subjects poorly. Do the same in high scaling and low scaling subjects, the high scaling subject rewards better.

Rant over.

 

[runnable]

yeah but at the end of the day as long as you get good marks in your subject scaling is not going to affect you that much. e.g. take the example that you have gave and make student A's marks 80 instead because you just said it is harder to get the mark compared to student B's. lets see who gets the higher uai.

also it is unfair to compare the two because it is clear that student A has more units than student B.

Oh and i just revisited your other thread. Hey why not make you Student A's marks to be 80s and show that it gives a lower UAI than Student B, and make the conclusion that SCALING ISNT ALL THAT. Your proclamation of "scaling isnt all that" is based on the same marks for both students. Why ask me to make Student A to be 80s and you dun? rofl

lmao. Get a clearer picture of scaling.

 

[me121]

The definition of scaling up or down IS compared to all courses.

And when i said 4U scales from 60-90 is BS, im talking about external's raw mark. Raw 60-Scaled 90, bullshit.

Statistics show that pretty much English Advanced is the mean and received minimal scaling. So we can use that(or similiar subjects) as an indicator of another subject being scaled UP or DOWN. But still, every subject can be used as an indicator, eg 4U Maths scales up compared to Chemistry. Chemistry scaled up compared to Business Studies.

But as i said, pretty much every subject scaled DOWN so when we do talk about scaling UP, we talk about it relative to other subjects.

Are you sure that english adv represents the 'average' scaling? also saying it received minimal scaling is an absolute (not relative) statement, hence are you sure its a straight line to (100,100) from (0,0)

Here is an example.

By looking at the raw scaling data, and seeing if the scaled mark is larger or smaller than the raw mark (although the data reports the aligned mark), we can determine on an absolute basis if it was scaled up or down. However I don't think this is a very good approach, as its all relative. What you were saying about comparing the courses is a better approach, but somehow I don't think the mean is that shown below. i think the mean is a bit below that line, (because as you said, "pretty much every subject except 4U Maths and Latin Extension scaled down.").

Saying if a certain mark is scaled up or down should be done relative to a mean scaling curve, OR with reference to a particular course. Such as shown below.

 

[runnable]

Ok when i say scaling isnt all that i didnt do change the marks, it was clearly all 90. When I say for you to change the marks to 80, I am suggesting that because it is easier to get better marks in student B's subject than student A's. I AM NOT CONCLUDING THAT SCALING ISNT ALL THAT FROM WHAT I WROTE HERE. I was on the other thread but for this I was just merely arguing that because it is easier to get a better mark in easier subjects and hence increace your uai. NOT REALLY TO DO WITH SCALING.

If anything, I was concluding that it is easier to get marks in these 'low scaling subjects' and therefore increase you changes getting a higher uai from the idea that scaling isnt all that. not the other way around.

Yes i think i know what you are saying. But its not relavant here in this thread cuz the person is asking about scaling. And I want to show that scaling exists. Doing this by choosing the same RAW mark for each subject, to show the effects of scaling.

If you read the end of my post #20, you can get what i mean.

 

[runnable]

Are you sure that english adv represents the 'average' scaling? also saying it received minimal scaling is an absolute (not relative) statement, hence are you sure its a straight line to (100,100) from (0,0)

Here is an example.

By looking at the raw scaling data, and seeing if the scaled mark is larger or smaller than the raw mark (although the data reports the aligned mark), we can determine on an absolute basis if it was scaled up or down. However I don't think this is a very good approach, as its all relative. What you were saying about comparing the courses is a better approach, but somehow I don't think the mean is that shown below. i think the mean is a bit below that line, (because as you said, "pretty much every subject except 4U Maths and Latin Extension scaled down.").

Saying if a certain mark is scaled up or down should be done relative to a mean scaling curve, OR with reference to a particular course. Such as shown below.

A scaled mean of 25.0 (on a 1-unit basis) means that the candidature of the course was average, and hence that the course had average scaling. Courses with scaled means above 25.0 had above average scaling. (From BOS scaling section)

English is around 24+, 4U Maths is around 44. Ie <25 scaled down (relative), >25 scaled up (relative)

Not really sure what your graph represents, cuz thats not a scaling graph and all that is is a random graph you made up to somehow represent scaling. Thing is, thats not how scaling works. I heard scaling graph looks like a bell curve but i havent seen it so im not going to comment on that one.

I have a stack of compiled information on about 8 subjects, indicating various raw marks and their eventual scaled marks. And i can tell you, at every mark range, the scaled mark is lower than the raw mark, and it evens out when it hits around 95 (raw mark). Only exception i saw was 4U Maths, which at every Raw mark range, it gave a higher scaled mark.