Distinction Average (2 Viewers)

[iambored]

but there is more competition at uni as well

ithink some people just reach their peak at uni, instead of highschool, that the teaching agrees with them more

 

[santaslayer]

Yes, you are doing something you 'supposedly' like but this is the reason why competition starts to escalate, so uni is definitley harder then the HSC, keeping in mind, that much of the 'easier' competition has been eroded. (People not going to uni, starting TAFE or other pathways are gone, most people in uni possess some level of 'higher' academic achievement, or at least the desire to acheive.)

 

[blue_chameleon]

Originally posted by tactic
yep i dont think it was that much work, i came from getting a crappy 74UAI and then got a destinction average at UWS, and i really didnt have to work that hard for it.. I am at uts now and sitting on a creit average, but after this semester it should go up a bit

I will add my similar story to Tactic's. I got 72 UAI for my HSC and now im sitting somewhere between a Distinction/H. Distinction average. I liked my subjects for the HSC, just couldn't manage them properly and didnt commit myself enough. I think once you hit uni, you see studying in a whole different light, or so was my case at least.

On the other hand I have heard a few stories from friends about other students from my year that scored 90+ UAI and have already dropped their courses all together.

 

[Raiks]

Uni is different to the HSC. People find it different, better or for worse but you're not at uni to compete with everyone else, you're there to achieve your personal academic goals for whatever reason you chose to undertake a university degree.

You're HSC is like your SC, it means SFA once you start the next part of your life.

 

[RIZAL]

Originally posted by flyin'
Okay, the "Bell Curve" is what education-people call the "Normal Distribution", the proper statistical terminology. It can be shown (through the Central Limit Theorem) that if you have large numbers, that your data will be approximately normally distributed, that is, have a so-called Bell Curve.

So even if the university says, we don't use a Bell Curve and we can pass everyone, it doesn't necessary mean the marks distributed won't be like that of a Bell Curve.

Marks generally don't follow a Bell Curve when there are small numbers taking a certain unit. But if you have a unit, where you have 1000 students taking the course, you can almost bet your bottom dollar that the marks will appear like a Bell Curve.

Why this might be intuitively obvious? You'll have students who will work like stupid, people who will cram and do some work, and those who'll drink and party and do no work. There aren't many who will work like stupid, just as there won't be many who'll do nothing. They're on the tails. The rest will achieve marks in the middle.

i dunno whether that is right....

i think that the distribution of the amount of work people put in will almost definitely follow a normal distribution, like you said, but how can you be sure that the actual marks, which are marked by a few people will ALWAYS follow a normal distribution?

actual knowledge of people sitting the exam will follow a normal distribution, but since the exams are marked by humans (who can never be totally unbiased), we can't assume that the exam marks also will follow a normal dist.

i mean, if a marker is having a bad day for example, you'd think that the distribution would exhibit a rightward skew.

so i think that the marks would certainly follow some sort of curve, but not necessarily a normal distribution.

i could be wrong tho.

 

[flyin']

well, it also depends on the course, in quantitative courses it won't matter what mood the markers are in, it's either right or wrong and there is usually a marking scheme in place

whereas if you're in a "writing" subject, then possibly, but even then if the markers are mean, that'd translate to moving the distribution left however many marks.

knowledge on the hand, with consideration wouldn't be normally distributed depending on the course.

however, knowledge and exam pressure and what not should combine to give a relatively normal distribution. even gamma, an extremely right skewed distn becomes normal with large numbers

 

[RIZAL]

yeah but the distribution of marks would depend on the actual character traits of the markers. It's not like all markers are going to mark with the exactly the same normal distribution with simply different means. The different character traits of markers would shift the mean mark, change the variance, alter the symmetry of the distribution etc.

"It can be shown (through the Central Limit Theorem) that if you have large numbers, that your data will be approximately normally distributed, that is, have a so-called Bell Curve."

that's got nothing to do with the distribution of the marks in a single test. the CLT only says that, if you're sample size is large, the distribution of the MEANS will be approx. normally distributed. So if 1000 people took a test, the distribution of the average marks of say 50 people would follow an approximate normal distribution, according to the CLT. but this tells us nothing whatsoever about the original distribution of the 1000 marks.

the CLT applies for both normal and non normal distributions, provided the sample size is large.

 

[Dingo2004]

oh frack !!!
i NEARLY got a Distinction average !!
missed out by just a tiny bit !!!
i high High Credit average of 5.75..
if only i gotten a C instead of a P for my eco . den i would haf gotten a Distinction Average !!!!!!!!
*cries*

 

[ND]

Okay, the "Bell Curve" is what education-people call the "Normal Distribution", the proper statistical terminology. It can be shown (through the Central Limit Theorem) that if you have large numbers, that your data will be approximately normally distributed, that is, have a so-called Bell Curve.

So even if the university says, we don't use a Bell Curve and we can pass everyone, it doesn't necessary mean the marks distributed won't be like that of a Bell Curve.

Marks generally don't follow a Bell Curve when there are small numbers taking a certain unit. But if you have a unit, where you have 1000 students taking the course, you can almost bet your bottom dollar that the marks will appear like a Bell Curve.

Why this might be intuitively obvious? You'll have students who will work like stupid, people who will cram and do some work, and those who'll drink and party and do no work. There aren't many who will work like stupid, just as there won't be many who'll do nothing. They're on the tails. The rest will achieve marks in the middle.

Correct me if i'm wrong (afterall, you have done more stats than i have), but i don't see how this relates to the CLT. The CLT involves the means, for example, if S is the mean mark of n students sitting a particular test, then S will be a standard normal variable provided that n is large enough. It doesn't mean that the distribution of each individual student's marks will be normal.

edit: heh i should ave probably finished reading the thread before posting... Isaac's post pretty much covered what i was saying.

 

[flyin']

You're not wrong. =p

 

[chookyn]

got distinction avg... yay!

but not by much...

 

[theone123]

i almost achieved this, my fingers couldnt grasp the final obstacles to finally end the merrygoaround

 

[stazi]

Sorry to resurrect the thread, but in regards to people trying harder:
Through school I never thought I'd need a high UAI (aiming for 85-88 or so for arts). If I had gotten into this course I probably would have bludged through it aiming at passes.
Then I got a 92.75 uai and decided to chuck a 180 and go to eco and soc sciences at usyd. The reason? Marketing. Something I'm very interested in (especially the advertising part).
So, now I have a lot of motivation for succeeding in this subject. So much that I will aim to attend every lect and tute.
I will probably slack off a bit in econometrics (about the parts not related to marketing statistics as its compulsory for me), political economy (degree requires me to do it and its the best out of the prerequesites.
I'm also interested in human resource management. I will be double majoring in hrm and marketing and accordingly will try very hard in each.
I'm also thinking of marketing honours.
People respond differently. For some reason the break made me realise some of my priorities and just made me feel like studying. A change from my "lets go out and party" attitutde all through year 12.

 

[stazi]

Oh and also would it be correct to assume the bellcurve isnt the only method used for marks?
For example (hypothetically). Philosophy 1001 has 40% of the mark for attendence. 30% participation. 20% penis size comparissons. 10% exam.
Most people get 90+% but even with the bellcurve theres not enough of a range (yay, i remembered something from yr 10 maths. i havent done maths since then ) For example: the range is 89-91.
The class has 5 people.
It would be unfair to give the person on 89 a 50. The ones on 90 a 80. and the ones on 91 a 95.
Shouldnt difficulty also be a factor. I'm sure that constitutional law is harder then art history or a film studies elective.

 

[lukebennett]

Sorry to resurrect the thread, but in regards to people trying harder:
Through school I never thought I'd need a high UAI (aiming for 85-88 or so for arts). If I had gotten into this course I probably would have bludged through it aiming at passes.
Then I got a 92.75 uai and decided to chuck a 180 and go to eco and soc sciences at usyd. The reason? Marketing. Something I'm very interested in (especially the advertising part).
So, now I have a lot of motivation for succeeding in this subject. So much that I will aim to attend every lect and tute.
I will probably slack off a bit in econometrics (about the parts not related to marketing statistics as its compulsory for me), political economy (degree requires me to do it and its the best out of the prerequesites.
I'm also interested in human resource management. I will be double majoring in hrm and marketing and accordingly will try very hard in each.
I'm also thinking of marketing honours.
People respond differently. For some reason the break made me realise some of my priorities and just made me feel like studying. A change from my "lets go out and party" attitutde all through year 12.

thats similar to me but it happened a bit sooner in high school. at the end of yr 10 i wanted to become a doctor (still do) but my grades were pretty average. i just didnt even think of doing any work, didnt pay any attention in class either. i wasnt sure if i was that intelligent but i thought id give it a shot.

so in yr 11 i started having dramatic increases in my motivation to study and marks obviously went way up (science mostly). i went from being in the middle of the yr to near he top of the yr in chem and bio. in yr12 my marks went higher with no extra effort. the focus just seems to do it for you really. i got to top 5 in 3 subjects (chem bio and geo) with about 100 in each course. i got 97 uai which i was disappointed with cause i bombed out in the exams and had done well for the whole yr.

it just shows what some focus and knowing wat you want to do, can do for your study. im still pretty motivated particularly by the fact i dont have to do any english. just science, so ill be aiming for a D average for sure

 

[poloktim]

This advice really goes for everyone. In uni, TAFE, School, work.
To achieve the best you can. Try your best.

Don't worry about how others are beating you. It takes time away from you. You can't do any better than your best.

 

[lukebennett]

but its much easier to try your best if you have a goal which gives you focus. otherwise i wudnt have bothered...........

 

[stazi]

Oh and this guy got a high d average who used to go to my school. He didn't get that high a uai. Just tried really hard. So it is possible

 

[Lexicographer]

This thread has degenerated to spam.

Either it recovers or it gets locked.



Edit: Have it your way. Posts deleted.

 

[SoCal]

This might give some people some hope. I did basically nothing in Year 12 and my UAI of 67.30 reflected this. I worked fairly hard in my first year of University and got a Distinction average based on both my GPA (6.25) and WAM (80.9).