NSW Science syllabuses (physics, chem and bio) are a global embarrassment (4 Viewers)

[lunaaaa4403]

bitch go fucking study what u doinhg

 

[coolcat6778]

The real reason why NESA keeps involving science with politics at the expense of course rigor
I'm certain that the only reasons NESA keeps dumbing down the syllabus is to: one, indoctrinate the youth with left-wing agenda; two, lobbying from low intelligence science teachers who aren't smart enough to teach real science - after all, why as a science teacher would I want to teach a more cognitively demanding course, if I still get paid the same?; three, bar people who aren't good at hsc english style writing from a good university. Fuck them

 

[C2H6O]

Give this guy his own SMH article atp
Or maybe skynews

 

[coolcat6778]

Give this guy his own SMH article atp
Or maybe skynews

bro I'm hoping someone from like SMH quotes my posts soon. NESA needs to know just how miserable our science education is compared to other states in Australia and overseas. Nobody else has complained as vocally as me, however I'm sure many others share the same opinion on our science syllabus, i.e. too much writing and politics at the expense of course rigour and depth.

If someone ran a standardized science exam among most recent high school graduates, I wouldn't doubt NSW would come dead last. Who's fault will it be? certainly the failed education system. I find it funny how Americans say that their HS curriculum is so low quality, yet they haven't seen NSW's. Americans get to do AP courses in High School, which are much more rigorous than any HSC subject except extension 2 maths. Americans genuinely get a better High School education than New South Waliens.

 

[Trebla]

I’ve merged your threads into one rant thread. Please refrain from making new threads which basically repeat the same thing over and over.

 

[coolcat6778]

this thread pertained to physics originally. I made a new thread since it was a separate issue

 

[carrotsss]

yeah HSC physics is sorta silly, maths ext 2 is way way more useful/important for uni physics. chem imo is a bit better designed but still not perfect at all. its annoying but at least the current physics syllabus is better than the one from most of the 2000s/2010s which was even more qualitative heavy, they changed it from 2019 onwards to be a fair bit better.

 

[coolcat6778]

yeah HSC physics is sorta silly, maths ext 2 is way way more useful/important for uni physics. chem imo is a bit better designed but still not perfect at all. its annoying but at least the current physics syllabus is better than the one from most of the 2000s/2010s which was even more qualitative heavy, they changed it from 2019 onwards to be a fair bit better.

While the current 2017 syllabus is much better than the late 2000s syllabus, it really doesn't compare to pre 2000s HSC or even the current day VCE physics syllabus. Theres still too much emphasis on extended responses and essay writing, especially for module 7 and 8. Plus, all the quantitative questions are almost always surface level, despite there being possibilities for more rigour and depth via including a few more mechanics topics such as rotational mechanics (a topic that was in the old hsc physics syllabus).
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________

This question really should be a 1 marker multiple choice with four paragraph options. There's no good reason this should be a 7 marker besides testing your writing skills. This would be a perfect multiple choice question, not so much a section 2 question. Not only that, these marking schemes are ambiguous for no reason. The sample answer uses quantitative analysis, even though it only asked for an explanation?


These questions do not belong in physics. Board of Studies (superseded by NESA) even acknowledged these topics "History of Physical discoveries" in the pre 2000s syllabus, as an optional topic for those who don't want to study physics at a higher level.

 

[coolcat6778]

Is HSC Physics too dumb? | Atomi

www.getatomi.com

This is a well written article.

"The HSC Syllabus basically misrepresents physics as a field. In fact, a brief survey of my fellow physics majors at UNSW reveals that not a single one of them enjoyed HSC Physics, because it was so unlike the problem solving of ‘real physics.’"


"The study of physical phenomena that the HSC syllabus does cover, from the motor effect to superconductivity, is limited to being able to regurgitate descriptions – we can’t learn about why they happen because the syllabus stipulates that you can’t use any real math. For example, we’re forced to study a butchered version of Bohr’s Postulates, because we’ve never been introduced to the concept of angular momentum, which is deemed to be beyond the HSC syllabus [was present in the pre 2000s syllabus though]. "

" One of the most disliked sections of first year physics is the experiment. Because this is where the most catching up is needed. The HSC Physics syllabus has exactly ONE quantitative experiment (measuring the acceleration due to gravity using a pendulum). Incidentally, this is also the first experiment you do at university, because they need to introduce you to the all important concept of actually calculating error, which is ignored totally by the HSC syllabus in favour of simply recognising that error exists and where it might come from. "

I don't know how there aren't any articles on how the current 2017 syllabus still sucks so much. These exact quotes applies to the current syllabus as well. Everyone thought they were getting VCE level physics (or even some how calculus in HSC physics) from reading all the old forum posts dating back to 2017. NESA hasn't done jack shit to fix these issues - the current syllabus is just the old late 2000s syllabus with lipstick

 

[lucas10champ]

Is HSC Physics too dumb? | Atomi

www.getatomi.com

This is a well written article.

"The HSC Syllabus basically misrepresents physics as a field. In fact, a brief survey of my fellow physics majors at UNSW reveals that not a single one of them enjoyed HSC Physics, because it was so unlike the problem solving of ‘real physics.’"


"The study of physical phenomena that the HSC syllabus does cover, from the motor effect to superconductivity, is limited to being able to regurgitate descriptions – we can’t learn about why they happen because the syllabus stipulates that you can’t use any real math. For example, we’re forced to study a butchered version of Bohr’s Postulates, because we’ve never been introduced to the concept of angular momentum, which is deemed to be beyond the HSC syllabus [was present in the pre 2000s syllabus though]. "

" One of the most disliked sections of first year physics is the experiment. Because this is where the most catching up is needed. The HSC Physics syllabus has exactly ONE quantitative experiment (measuring the acceleration due to gravity using a pendulum). Incidentally, this is also the first experiment you do at university, because they need to introduce you to the all important concept of actually calculating error, which is ignored totally by the HSC syllabus in favour of simply recognising that error exists and where it might come from. "

I don't know how there aren't any articles on how the current 2017 syllabus still sucks so much. These exact quotes applies to the current syllabus as well. Everyone thought they were getting VCE level physics (or even some how calculus in HSC physics) from reading all the old forum posts dating back to 2017. NESA hasn't done jack shit to fix these issues - the current syllabus is just the old syllabus with lipstick

bro just sybau and stop complaining

 

[coolcat6778]

bro just sybau and stop complaining

nesa had more than 15 years to fix the issues, the new 2027 syllabus literally hasn't changed, except for the worse .NSW Science Teachers Associations is just full of leftists who can't teaching an actual science course. It's very hard to get a syllabus to fucking change once the teachers are already used to it, even harder if the syllabus is fucking retarded and not cognitively demanding.

 

[AAArated]

ur a highschool student stop pretending you are smart or know anything about the way these subjects work at a higher level
whilst i agree physics should have more demanding calculations writing eloquently is an important facet of pure physics (not as relevant to things like engineering).

instead of being salty and complaining like a little kid "
This question really should be a 1 marker multiple choice with four paragraph options. There's no good reason this should be a 7 marker besides testing your writing skills. This would be a perfect multiple choice question, not so much a section 2 question. Not only that, these marking schemes are ambiguous for no reason. The sample answer uses quantitative analysis, even though it only asked for an explanation?


These questions do not belong in physics. Board of Studies (superseded by NESA) even acknowledged these topics "History of Physical discoveries" in the pre 2000s syllabus, as an optional topic for those who don't want to study physics at a higher level. " go practice writing the response. It's one thing to be able to think about how to answer a question and it's another to be able to actually write out a response --> it's like teaching a concept you can only do it if you really understand it.

And in general anything you do in highschool will be done in like 3 weeks in university, doesn't really matter anyway.

 

[lucas10champ]

nesa had more than 15 years to fix the issues, the new 2027 syllabus literally hasn't changed, except for the worse .NSW Science Teachers Associations is just full of leftists who can't bear a an actual science course.

move to a different state or country, then youll be able to learn better science and no one here will have to deal with u

 

[coolcat6778]

move to a different state or country, then youll be able to learn better science and no one here will have to deal with u

okay, keep enjoying regurgiating bs lol, how do u find this fun

 

[lucas10champ]

nesa had more than 15 years to fix the issues, the new 2027 syllabus literally hasn't changed, except for the worse .NSW Science Teachers Associations is just full of leftists who can't teaching an actual science course. It's very hard to get a syllabus to fucking change once the teachers are already used to it, even harder if the syllabus is fucking retarded and not cognitively demanding.

and like bro ur just salty that ur shit at science like we know ur just trying to cope

 

[coolcat6778]

and like bro ur just salty that ur shit at science like we know ur just trying to cope

shit at science since the exams are shit lol 🥱

 

[lucas10champ]

okay, keep enjoying regurgiating bs lol, how do u find this fun

i never said it fun but u come on every single forum and say the exact same shit again and again like u think u know everything

 

[AAArated]

move to a different state or country, then youll be able to learn better science and no one here will have to deal with u

hes just salty hes failing the sciences because he is a mathematically gifted genius who would state rank them all if they were tailored to his liking

 

[lucas10champ]

shit at science since the exams are shit lol 🥱

if u were actually smart, u would adapt to these style of questions but ig ur not at that level

 

[coolcat6778]

hes just salty hes failing the sciences because he is a mathematically gifted genius who would state rank them all if they were tailored to his liking

it's not even tailoring. literally NSW is the only state that does such a retarded essay physics exam.