Science& maths vs humanities&arts (1 Viewer)

[The Savior]

After browsing the forum, I have noticed quite a few threads with people complaining about how humanities and arts get scaled down compared to science and maths. So to settle this debate, I am going to say "they don't". First of all subjects like earth and environmental science, agriculture and senior science scales worse than most humanity subjects. Still not convinced? Take biology, it scales worse than modern history. Still not convinced? Several humanities and arts scale even better than physics and chem, for instance music 2, music extension, economics and history extension. Don't do those subjects? That's ok. A mark of 92 in physics is scaled equally to 94 in modern history, 94 in legal studies, 94 in geography,'95 in business studies. Those 2 mark differences are hardly significant when you consider how much more difficult physics would be. Sure extension maths gets scaled up a lot but it is much more rigorous and intuitive than most other subjects, so it would be unfair If extension maths was scaled the same as "easier subjects" like visual arts. Please understand that I am not undermining the importance of humanities and arts but the rigour required for science and maths still needs to be rewarded. To sum up, doing humanities and arts does not disadvantage you in terms of scaling if you apply yourself.

 

[seventhroot]

tl;dr

do the subjects you want/like to do

 

[theodore0307]

If you like and are keen in learning the syllabus of the subject and you revise, you will go well.

Don't get caught up in scaling up or down

 

[Queenroot]

tl;dr

do the subjects you want/like to do

~

 

[unforlornedhope]

If you like and are keen in learning the syllabus of the subject and you revise, you will go well.

Don't get caught up in scaling up or down

This. What's the point of doing physics because it "scales up" and you end up getting a band 4/5 in it, as opposed to economics or modern history where you get a band 6 or even state rank it.

 

[theodore0307]

This. What's the point of doing physics because it "scales up" and you end up getting a band 4/5 in it, as opposed to economics or modern history where you get a band 6 or even state rank it.

If your good at eco and history then stick to those and don't do physics

 

[enoilgam]

I think the majority of people would agree.

 

[Katsumi]

I picked a well scaling subject i didn't like and it is pretty much set to be my worst subject

By this i mean my grades typically looked like this
Business: 97%
IPT: 95%
English: 92%
ITVET: 89%
Math: 60%

 

[Feynman]

Do 4u maths phys chem eng adv no question done 99.95

 

[photastic]

Scaling isn't worth it anyway. I should've done subjects that I was good at cos i've had the worst nightmare with the chem/phys/eco combo because its difficult to motivate and study since I have no interests in them. You're better off doing subjects that you enjoy, which is better during the year as you can easily self motivate. Likewise, I suppose if you're aiming for 99+ then it would be difficult to get that with low scaling but you're better off getting high hsc marks than low marks

 

[BLIT2014]

Economic sales better then chem apperantly...

 

[Queenroot]

Economic sales better then chem apperantly...

Misinformed

 

[BLIT2014]

Misinformed

Does chem even deal with sales?

 

[Queenroot]

Does chem even deal with sales?

Yes

 

[RealiseNothing]

Economic sales better then chem apperantly...

Basically the same in terms of scaling.

 

[kalstar]

Do 4u maths phys chem eng adv no question done 99.95

inb4 rank last for all subjects