Optophobia
Member
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2006
- Messages
- 696
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2005
How do you know you missed it by a point? Have the cut offs been released?
The HSC is unfair because.... (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Sparcod
- Start date
P
pLuvia
Guest
No not yetOptophobia said:
Dimsimmer
Random User
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2004
- Messages
- 254
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2006
The HSC is unfair because
- Your marks could get pulled down if your own cohort performs poorly
- You may not achieve what you want despite putting in all that effort
- It can be difficult to learn if you have a hopeless teacher
- You may not get access to resources that others may have
- Your marks could get pulled down if your own cohort performs poorly
- You may not achieve what you want despite putting in all that effort
- It can be difficult to learn if you have a hopeless teacher
- You may not get access to resources that others may have
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 7,986
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- N/A
quoted for truth.volition said:
Ultimately though, who gives a damn about your HSC? No-one. If you got a bad mark, don't repeat it. Don't look at pathways. JUST GET YOUR BUTT INTO UNI/tafe/apprenticeship of you choice!
T
Testpilot
Guest
Wow! You just described my school.Dimsimmer said:
Bookie
Banned
the hsc IS fair.
EAS on the other hand, isnt.
EAS on the other hand, isnt.
Bookie
Banned
you should update your sig sando.
however looking at it makes me think youve disabled sigs in your options. amirite?
however looking at it makes me think youve disabled sigs in your options. amirite?
UnIqUe_PrInCeSs
invading your mind
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2005
- Messages
- 1,296
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2006
because the scaling's really harsh 
EDIT: the hsc is unfair because I am an xxxEmoxxx
EDIT: the hsc is unfair because I am an xxxEmoxxx
X
xeuyrawp
Guest
I wouldn't say it's unfair, I'd just say it is generally archaic, complicated, and has spawned into a really ugly creature.
Firstly, the scaling/moderating/aligning/etc system is shit. The lack of transparency and disclosure as to how it works, how a student's marks have been changed, etc is terrible. A student needs to know how much they need to get in x exam in order to get y mark. It's a fundamental rule of education that the parents and students are objectively informed as to progress/marks and requirements/goals. Saying 'I think I need to get around 95 in this exam, but I'm not sure...' is insane.
Secondly, the UAI has become such an exercise in psychological fear. The UAI number needs to be scrapped for something like AAA or AAAA, reflecting each subject as it is. Having so much rely on one thing creates huge amounts of emotional stress, especially in the kids who are in the top range - when a UAI of 99 and 98 are years away from each other.
Lastly, the fact that the UAI is a mixture of all your subjects is shit. If we adopted an AAA/AAAA system, two better systems could be in play: Either a) a student's top three/four subjects are chosen to contribute to their AAA/AAAA marks, or b) a student has to chose at least one subject from each of the three/four categories and the marks are reflective of that.
Whilst there are lots of problems with it (mainly that the number of AAA students are increasing), I say 'bring on the A-Levels!' -- it's spread over two years and gets rid of this silly UAI number business.
As it stands, kids go top themselves because they mess up one exam, thinking that it will mess up their chances of 'a career choice'.
Firstly, the scaling/moderating/aligning/etc system is shit. The lack of transparency and disclosure as to how it works, how a student's marks have been changed, etc is terrible. A student needs to know how much they need to get in x exam in order to get y mark. It's a fundamental rule of education that the parents and students are objectively informed as to progress/marks and requirements/goals. Saying 'I think I need to get around 95 in this exam, but I'm not sure...' is insane.
Secondly, the UAI has become such an exercise in psychological fear. The UAI number needs to be scrapped for something like AAA or AAAA, reflecting each subject as it is. Having so much rely on one thing creates huge amounts of emotional stress, especially in the kids who are in the top range - when a UAI of 99 and 98 are years away from each other.
Lastly, the fact that the UAI is a mixture of all your subjects is shit. If we adopted an AAA/AAAA system, two better systems could be in play: Either a) a student's top three/four subjects are chosen to contribute to their AAA/AAAA marks, or b) a student has to chose at least one subject from each of the three/four categories and the marks are reflective of that.
Whilst there are lots of problems with it (mainly that the number of AAA students are increasing), I say 'bring on the A-Levels!' -- it's spread over two years and gets rid of this silly UAI number business.
As it stands, kids go top themselves because they mess up one exam, thinking that it will mess up their chances of 'a career choice'.
Last edited by a moderator:
PwarYuex said:
You speak teh greater truth. It's that obfuscation of the mark that detracts objective thinking and causes all us hscers to bleed with stressful anxiety and quesitons of "what ifs" and "what will?"
the uai isnt one simple number it is the emergent of two things, and personally that assessment portion is fudged. perhaps having a universal, and definitely singular score (which ostensibly stressing and absurd) might prove more reliable then having multiple strings of bias marking (as evident in the assessments)
last line: i think it's a joke, but the uai (as we should acknowledge) is much more simpler than other matriculation tests around teh world (where we should appreciate that it's only the academic faculties they test here rather than perosnality, extracurricular performances, etc)
my 2c of e-biatching
Last edited:
The HSC is unfair because some students are taught by teachers who are new to the job and have not marked the HSC before. These students do not get feedback from a HSC marker and lack knowledge of the exam and thus do not get very good examination marks, even though their potential may be high. My history teacher in high school told me that one of the biggest problems with the HSC is that public school kids get stuck with new teachers who have not marked the HSC because the private schools will not hire them if they have not (they often then go onto private schools once they have marked it). There should be a rule in place that everyone who is employed by the Department of Education to teach the HSC must have marked it first
Last edited:
The HSC is unfair because a student who was overseas for literally half the year (where he had no chance of studying because he was busy being 'extra-curricular') got a UAI of 94. I'm sure his assessment marks weren't brought up at all.
Heipmaster
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2006
- Messages
- 3
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2008
The HSC is unfair because it dominates your life and determines your income within the next 30-40 years.
The HSC is unfair because my SC teacher sat us in front of videos EVERY lesson (that he showed up to) during the prelim, didn't give out textbooks until Term 3 year 12, and wasn't a 'real' SC teacher. The REAL SC teacher left us notes on the schools global folder, but the guy we had didn't tell us about them. At the end of the year, he quietly gave copies on disc to two students out of the seventeen-student class. And the school didn't want to know about it.