My ranks (1 Viewer)

[J18134]

My own opinion is someone who does standard english, 2 unit maths, CAF and religion should not have the strength of scaling to get near 80. Its a bit late but if you were aiming for 90+ I would have picked MUCH stronger subjects to begin with

 

[Spiritual Being]

My own opinion is someone who does standard english, 2 unit maths, CAF and religion should not have the strength of scaling to get near 80. Its a bit late but if you were aiming for 90+ I would have picked MUCH stronger subjects to begin with

I'm sorry but I fucking lold.

 

[enoilgam]

Going off ranks and school rank alone, there is definitely enough there for 89-93 and maybe more. The OP's subjects arent too bad (CAFS doesnt scale the best and standard is horrible) and there rankings are pretty good.

 

[theind1996]

My own opinion is someone who does standard english, 2 unit maths, CAF and religion should not have the strength of scaling to get near 80. Its a bit late but if you were aiming for 90+ I would have picked MUCH stronger subjects to begin with

1. OP's in Year 11.
2. Scaling is not subjective. I don't see why one "should not" receive an ATAR near 80.
3. Not everyone has the ability to do high-scaling subjects.
4. Not everyone wants to do high-scaling subjects.

 

[theind1996]

Going off ranks and school rank alone, there is definitely enough there for 89-93 and maybe more. The OP's subjects arent too bad (CAFS doesnt scale the best and standard is horrible) and there rankings are pretty good.

Maybe I just predict too harshly. I also went by the OP's posts on this forum.

Also, shouldn't this be moved to the "ATAR & HSC Marks (Guidance & Counsel)" sub-forum?

 

[Spiritual Being]

1. OP's in Year 11.
2. Scaling is not subjective. I don't see why one "should not" receive an ATAR near 80.
3. Not everyone has the ability to do high-scaling subjects.
4. Not everyone wants to do high-scaling subjects.

You go glen coco.

 

[mirakon]

My own opinion is someone who does standard english, 2 unit maths, CAF and religion should not have the strength of scaling to get near 80. Its a bit late but if you were aiming for 90+ I would have picked MUCH stronger subjects to begin with

well your opinion is wrong

 

[LoveHateSchool]

I think everyone's harsh on OP, given the info, I think they'd get at least highs 80s, with the chance of scraping 90.

 

[J18134]

1. OP's in Year 11.
2. Scaling is not subjective. I don't see why one "should not" receive an ATAR near 80.
3. Not everyone has the ability to do high-scaling subjects.
4. Not everyone wants to do high-scaling subjects.

If people don't have the ability to do high-scaling subjects, then they shouldn't be entitled to the higher ATARs.

For example lets say the OP gets a band 6 in Chemistry and a band 6 in CAF. Lets say its both the same mark for example 95. There is no way that the effort for chemistry is equal to CAF (chemistry would require a lot more intellect and ability to understand the complexity of the subject matter) and and it is very unlikely that the same effort would be required.

Thus going back to both my opinion of the OP's subjects relative to her ATAR aim and that I dont think her subjects are warranting of a 90+ ATAR.

 

[theind1996]

If people don't have the ability to do high-scaling subjects, then they shouldn't be entitled to the higher ATARs.

For example lets say the OP gets a band 6 in Chemistry and a band 6 in CAF. Lets say its both the same mark for example 95. There is no way that the effort for chemistry is equal to CAF (chemistry would require a lot more intellect and ability to understand the complexity of the subject matter) and and it is very unlikely that the same effort would be required.

Thus going back to both my opinion of the OP's subjects relative to her ATAR aim and that I dont think her subjects are warranting of a 90+ ATAR.

It's all subjective.

And scaling will account for effort.

 

[barbernator]

If people don't have the ability to do high-scaling subjects, then they shouldn't be entitled to the higher ATARs.

For example lets say the OP gets a band 6 in Chemistry and a band 6 in CAF. Lets say its both the same mark for example 95. There is no way that the effort for chemistry is equal to CAF (chemistry would require a lot more intellect and ability to understand the complexity of the subject matter) and and it is very unlikely that the same effort would be required.

Thus going back to both my opinion of the OP's subjects relative to her ATAR aim and that I dont think her subjects are warranting of a 90+ ATAR.

this guy has no idea of aligning, moderation or scaling

 

[enoilgam]

*Moved to a more appropriate forum*

J18134 - Scaling accounts for differences in subject difficulties. A 95 in CAFs probably equals a 90 in Chemistry (guesstimating here) under the assumption that a 90 in chem is equal to a 95 in CAFs in terms of difficulty (this is obviously debatable). Also, some people work very hard in low scaling subjects and are deserving of an ATAR which reflects that.

 

[mirakon]

If people don't have the ability to do high-scaling subjects, then they shouldn't be entitled to the higher ATARs.

For example lets say the OP gets a band 6 in Chemistry and a band 6 in CAF. Lets say its both the same mark for example 95. There is no way that the effort for chemistry is equal to CAF (chemistry would require a lot more intellect and ability to understand the complexity of the subject matter) and and it is very unlikely that the same effort would be required.

Thus going back to both my opinion of the OP's subjects relative to her ATAR aim and that I dont think her subjects are warranting of a 90+ ATAR.

"shouldn't be entitled to higher ATARs"

NO ONE is "entitled" to an ATAR. You don't get an ATAR just handed to you based on how your subjects scale. An ATAR is earned.

 

[alstah]

Don't let anyone tell you what you can't do.

You can get over 90 if you put your mind to it and work hard. Don't listen to people who say you can't get there.

 

[twinklegal19]

If people don't have the ability to do high-scaling subjects, then they shouldn't be entitled to the higher ATARs.

For example lets say the OP gets a band 6 in Chemistry and a band 6 in CAF. Lets say its both the same mark for example 95. There is no way that the effort for chemistry is equal to CAF (chemistry would require a lot more intellect and ability to understand the complexity of the subject matter) and and it is very unlikely that the same effort would be required.

Thus going back to both my opinion of the OP's subjects relative to her ATAR aim and that I dont think her subjects are warranting of a 90+ ATAR.

UAC scales people, not courses.

1. No subject will guarantee a student a high ATAR.
2. No subject will condemn a student to a low ATAR.
3. The worse the overall performance of the students taking a course, the nearer the top you have to be in order to offset the low scaling.

You can still get 90+ with CAFS and Standard English, you just have to be in the very top percentile to make up for your weaker cohorts pulling you down.

It's all about the people doing the course, not the actual difficulty of the content, CAFS will only "scale higher" than Chemistry if the CAFS students as a group outperform the Chemistry students as a group in their other courses.

 

[theycallmebob]

If people don't have the ability to do high-scaling subjects, then they shouldn't be entitled to the higher ATARs.

For example lets say the OP gets a band 6 in Chemistry and a band 6 in CAF. Lets say its both the same mark for example 95. There is no way that the effort for chemistry is equal to CAF (chemistry would require a lot more intellect and ability to understand the complexity of the subject matter) and and it is very unlikely that the same effort would be required.

Thus going back to both my opinion of the OP's subjects relative to her ATAR aim and that I dont think her subjects are warranting of a 90+ ATAR.

are you actually serious?
people are better at different things.

 

[TheDarkNight]

Studyy Hard