ViRtUaL said:
Low teens?? Top 10 easily for SBHS class of 06. u seriously have no idea how good we are compared to previous years man, all the teachers are saying it, the deputy principal and principal are saying it, etc. We beat the year 10s overall when we were in yr 9 in the westpac maths comp thingo. And as for Mi Zhou (the guy with the goatie around his adams apple), yeah he did quite well in all of his subjects and i think he came like top 30 overall in the half yearly, but he was by far the best performing new guy in our grade and 1 of lyk only 2 or 3 new guys taken in purely based on their academic talents - mi, ashley (LOL), and i think george zhang. educational scheme my ass. And where did Hornsby girls come from? High's been beating them for ages.
Get your facts right you idiot. Hornsby Girls beat High last yr. The Prizes in the Year 9 Westpac Competition are awarded against other Year 9s in the state. The year 10s are awarded against other Year 10s. It may be the same test, but the year groups are seperate when it comes to grading of awards. And who gives a crap about the Maths Comp, who tries? who studies for it? Its about natural ability, the HSC isnt about natural ability, its about who is willing to work the hardest. Thats why the kids at James Ruse do so well, they work hard. Its not very hard to understand why, yes they are smart, the smartest cohort in the state, but to get that fare, they work hard.
I keep on telling you all, you cant judge a grade before they sit the HSC, before they sit a state-wide standardised test. How can 200 boys be smarter than another group of 200? on the basis of SC or maths comp. And if you haven't realised our school doesnt do that badly. THe rich private schools beat us, because more do lower levels of Maths, low scaling VET courses. Of course its easier to get a band 6 in General Maths and Business Services than Extension II Mathematics and Physics or Chemistry.
The results in the papers are distorted and manuplative, and do not reflect the real nature of brilliance at High. We have one of the largest cohort's in the state, probably the largest 4U cohort, those getting high band 5s in Ext 2, would easily get band 6s in 2u. But those bands 5 are worth more than 2u band 6s. The papers only mention band 6s, they are the only figures tehy get. If it was on the old system, with average UAIs etc, you all would see how good High really is. When you have over 100 doing Phys, Chem, Eco (Higher SCaling Subjects) of course less people wil get band 6s, but overall UAIs will rise. Plus at High, a lot of kids do 12 units, their 12th unit always seem to suffer, like me. Whereas across the flat at the Girls School, Varady encourages 10 units, of course to make her stats look good.
I think the reason why the Girls SChool get us, is that they are better in English and in Languages. SImply more, more people do languages over there. But certainly in Social Sciences and Sciences, High is equal, if not better. And in Maths, if you have ever seen a 3u or 4u trial at SGHS, you would laugh, they make it so easy that "the girls dont cry" (one maths teacher said at High, he will remain nameless).
And i am with Bookie, the who hell have you been sleeping with to tell you all this bullcrap. Yes maybe a class or a small group may be a tad better than previous years, but how can a whole grade be smarter? There are many in my grade who say the same thing, "we are better than 2004". I just hate people who try to spectulate on that, before even sitting the HSC and comparing those results.
