Well, we do have several forums here at BoS, if you want to discuss the UAI system.Originally posted by soso
There is a major flaw i have seen in action. You can take extension subjects do badly in exam results and be scaled up.
It doesn't happen a lot because teachers talk students out of doing subjects they may do badly in. But studentd can do better by getting a poor grade in extension rather than a good grade in standard.
If the UAI is fair why is the drop out rate at Uni around 20%. Surely if it was fair it would be lower.
Are you suggesting that if the UAI was "fairer" there would be less people dropping out. And where did you find out that drop out rate.
People drop out for various reasons.
The UAI is a measure of how capable a prospective student might be. It is an estimate.
Also if you are capable of undertaking an advanced subject (Advanced) you are advised to do so.
In regards to Standard, the Board of Studies determines whether Standard students deserve a Band 6 or not. And in 2003, there was 1. The marks for Standard and Advanced are based on the performances of both groups in Paper I. So if people in Advanced perform worse than Standard, there will be more people in higher bands than Advanced.
Furthermore, the marks given by BOS to students are not directly used in calculation of UAI. They are scaled.
Also the assumption that doing poorly in extension is equal in terms of marks to doing well in standard is an assumption. Perhaps the extension subjects require more rigour, which is why it'll apted called extension as opposed to standard or non-extension.
Take for example, Mathematics Extension 2 and Mathematics. Say someone does well in Mathenatics with a score of 90%. And let's say someone else does poorly in Mathematics Extension 2 with a score of 50%. Does that mean that the system is unfair when the person who just passed is scaled up? Perhaps the person who obtained 50% worked twice as hard as the person who obtained 90%.
Last edited: