Prelim 2015 Chit Chat Thread (1 Viewer)

[Sien]

Yes I know, but I feel that economics is a subject in which you really need a teacher to provoke thought and inspire creativity.

I have tried to do well without a teacher, but it's not easy. Maths/sciences you can rote learn, but I don't have the ability to do this on my own for economics
Whenever we have subs it feels like we learn so much more and actually understand the concepts.

Even if I top 5, we only got one DA last year for economics


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's a dangerous practise

 

[hawkrider]

Why would a subject scale higher because it's upper limit is defined? Of course there are people that are rather average at humanities, I'm one of them. Also,I do know that Latin scales higher, but don't understand its relevance to your point. And yes, I do know scaling changes each year, but thanks for telling me anyway.

Back to the point.
I still think it's safe to assume that if an ENTIRE cohort is stronger at subject X, and weaker at subject Y, Y is the harder subject

Give 10,000 people two tests. One for subject X and one for subject Y. I'm sure that if most people do good in X and bad in Y, Y is the harder test..

Also, you said if there's s more students excelling in a subject, it is bound to be scaled up?

By my understanding, it is scales down. If I theoretically created a hsc course that is extremely easy ( questions were as simple as 1+1), and almost 99% of students do well in it, it would not be logical to scale it up
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As I said before, scaling is not determined by difficulty, it's the ability of the WHOLE cohort and how they perform. Take for example, MX2. Of course in an objective sense, it's the most conceptual subject that can be challenging and I'd say many students taking MX2 would have trouble doing the questions, and at first glance you may attribute it to difficulty. But the main reason it scales well is because of the calibre of students in MX2 is much higher and thus they'd pull the rest up.

The main problem however with your argument is that you cannot apply it in the context of the HSC. Maybe if you took your proposal outside the NSW educational system, then it could be valid. Otherwise, we're keeping within the HSC itself, so your premise is flawed once again.

Scaling =/= difficulty of subject.

That's a dangerous practise

yeah, rote learning is not the best idea for maths (but there are some nuanced bits you have to memorise for convenience such that you're more efficient when doing Q's). but yes, overall, maths necessitates reasoning and logic which is the most crucial part of doing well. although from my experience i would say that the hsc counterparts of chem, bio and phys is mainly rote learning - you'd be surprised at how little is concepts and how much is basically environmental societal BS info lol

I think english being subjective is subjective, lol.

One person's interpretation of a text may differ from another's, but as long as you can back up your interpretation with evidence from the text, you will get marks. It's about demonstrating your ability to perceive meaning from texts. Whether or not you get good marks seems objective to me - do you demonstrate the ability to perceive meaning or not?

excellent post +1

Yes I know, but I feel that economics is a subject in which you really need a teacher to provoke thought and inspire creativity.

I have tried to do well without a teacher, but it's not easy. Maths/sciences you can rote learn, but I don't have the ability to do this on my own for economics
Whenever we have subs it feels like we learn so much more and actually understand the concepts.

Even if I top 5, we only got one DA last year for economics

that goes with any subject tho LOL

and you can still cope without a teacher if they're crap - i personally have to teach myself three subjects because the class time is near useless for me

and yeh, you do need to memorise, but there are things you must understand in economics as well tbh. pure rote learning in eco won't get you very far unfortunately. you probs need a mix of both understanding and rote to excel in eco. up to you tho

 

[SammyT123]

That's a dangerous practise

Working wonders so far. I also mean 2/3U math , not 4U

Also, working wonders is an understatement . I'm not sure what your getting at here, I find rote learning very easy in these subjects and I have a greater depth of understanding compared to my peers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SammyT123]

As I said before, scaling is not determined by difficulty, it's the ability of the WHOLE cohort and how they perform. Take for example, MX2. Of course in an objective sense, it's the most conceptual subject that can be challenging and I'd say many students taking MX2 would have trouble doing the questions, and at first glance you may attribute it to difficulty. But the main reason it scales well is because of the calibre of students in MX2 is much higher and thus they'd pull the rest up.

The main problem however with your argument is that you cannot apply it in the context of the HSC. Maybe if you took your proposal outside the NSW educational system, then it could be valid. Otherwise, we're keeping within the HSC itself, so your premise is flawed once again.

Scaling =/= difficulty of subject.



yeah, rote learning is not the best idea for maths (but there are some nuanced bits you have to memorise for convenience such that you're more efficient when doing Q's). but yes, overall, maths necessitates reasoning and logic which is the most crucial part of doing well. although from my experience i would say that the hsc counterparts of chem, bio and phys is mainly rote learning - you'd be surprised at how little is concepts and how much is basically environmental societal BS info lol



excellent post +1



that goes with any subject tho LOL

and you can still cope without a teacher if they're crap - i personally have to teach myself three subjects because the class time is near useless for me

and yeh, you do need to memorise, but there are things you must understand in economics as well tbh. pure rote learning in eco won't get you very far unfortunately. you probs need a mix of both understanding and rote to excel in eco. up to you tho

Not really, I do not feel that I need to be inspired to do mathematics, and I simply do not care about its applications in the real world. Either way, I'm doing extremely well so I'm sticking with it. ( I also enjoy it)
Also, creativity doesn't work in the hsc 3u syllabus. There are defined ways to do a problem and only those ways are accepted.

I cannot use 4U methods in a 3U test . I cannot use calculus to sketch graphs in 4U. I cannot sketch a function to show its odd or even, I must do the substitutions.


I'm glad you agree you can't rote learn Eco . There are very few economic phenomena that are easy to understand, and very few teachers explain them well.

I often have to dig through ancient papers to finally understand how a certain phenomena was derived.

I love applying knowledge to the real world, e.g. The recent greek default but I don't think I can do well in the subject solely due to my passion. I need a teacher.

As for scaling, it was my misunderstanding. Subjects may be equally as challenging but (for example) MX2 and science students are generally much more capable than students doing humanities

Do I have it correct now ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hawkrider]

Not really, I do not feel that I need to be inspired to do mathematics, and I simply do not care about its applications in the real world. Either way, I'm doing extremely well so I'm sticking with it. ( I also enjoy it)
Also, creativity doesn't work in the hsc 3u syllabus. There are defined ways to do a problem and only those ways are accepted.

I cannot use 4U methods in a 3U test . I cannot use calculus to sketch graphs in 4U. I cannot sketch a function to show its odd or even, I must do the substitutions.


I'm glad you agree you can't rote learn Eco . There are very few economic phenomena that are easy to understand, and very few teachers explain them well.

I often have to dig through ancient papers to finally understand how a certain phenomena was derived.

I love applying knowledge to the real world, e.g. The recent greek default but I don't think I can do well in the subject solely due to my passion. I need a teacher.

As for scaling, it was my misunderstanding. Subjects may be equally as challenging but (for example) MX2 and science students are generally much more capable than students doing humanities

Do I have it correct now ?

fair enough. if that's how you learn maths then that's fine and i respect that

eco is pretty cool haha and ikr - only heard about the greece default recently - must be pretty terrible over there. unemployment at like 40% and rising I believe

yes, you got it correct now

 

[SammyT123]

I think english being subjective is subjective, lol.

One person's interpretation of a text may differ from another's, but as long as you can back up your interpretation with evidence from the text, you will get marks. It's about demonstrating your ability to perceive meaning from texts. Whether or not you get good marks seems objective to me - do you demonstrate the ability to perceive meaning or not?

Look at me - defending my most (or maybe second most) hated subject.



Hey buddy!

I would love to believe it's true, but if the senior English Hsc marker and many teachers from the committee have said there is a high level of subjectiveness in THEIR OWN marking, it can be safe to assume English is a slightly subjective subject.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Carrotsticks]

Also, creativity doesn't work in the hsc 3u syllabus. There are defined ways to do a problem and only those ways are accepted.

I cannot use 4U methods in a 3U test . I cannot use calculus to sketch graphs in 4U. I cannot sketch a function to show its odd or even, I must do the substitutions.

1. No, there are no defined ways of doing a problem. However, you are sometimes bounded by what you have learned. Or the stock standard way is significantly better than others, hence why it is the standard approach.

2. It is not true that only one method is accepted. In the HSC, many differerent methods are observed and they are all accepted so long as they are mathematically correct.

3. In a properly written 3U test, having 4U knowledge will give you little to no advantage. Also, you are allowed to use 4U methods in a 3U exam (last year's Rates of Change problem, 4U students used implicit differentiation and we're not penalised for doing so)

4. You are allowed to use Calculus to sketch 4U graphs if the equation is provided. However, these questions can almost always be done without calculus very quickly. Also, how about the questions so where no equation is provided?

5. Sketching a function is not a mathematically valid way of proving that a function is odd or even. How do you provide an accurate sketch without first knowing whether it is odd or even?

In short, you're either talking a lot out of your ass, or you've been sorely misguided by an ill-informed teacher.

 

[SammyT123]

fair enough. if that's how you learn maths then that's fine and i respect that

eco is pretty cool haha and ikr - only heard about the greece default recently - must be pretty terrible over there. unemployment at like 40% and rising I believe

yes, you got it correct now

That's hard to swallow , even though I'm a maths and science type person,

It doesn't seem fair (I know it is) that humanities scale down solely due to the low calibre of others. I can't accept the fact that people who are bad at everything do humanities , though it's probably true.

Then again , if your in the 99th percentile it doesn't matter for any subject

Check out khan academy for a theoretical solution to the Greek economy. (Although, I can think of 10 reasons why it won't work )
People aren't stupid. They will realise what the government is trying to do.

Also, even if we assume the public are all autistic, people do not demand welfare payments for the sake of having money. Money has no value unless you can buy goods. In this case, they demand the money for food and basic necessities.
The next time they go down to the store with 20 Dracma and find that they could only buy half the amount of food, they will demand more from the government, not because they want pieces of plastic(money), but because they want food.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SammyT123]

1. No, there are no defined ways of doing a problem. However, you are sometimes bounded by what you have learned. Or the stock standard way is significantly better than others, hence why it is the standard approach.

2. It is not true that only one method is accepted. In the HSC, many differerent methods are observed and they are all accepted so long as they are mathematically correct.

3. In a properly written 3U test, having 4U knowledge will give you little to no advantage. Also, you are allowed to use 4U methods in a 3U exam (last year's Rates of Change problem, 4U students used implicit differentiation and we're not penalised for doing so)

4. You are allowed to use Calculus to sketch 4U graphs if the equation is provided. However, these questions can almost always be done without calculus very quickly. Also, how about the questions so where no equation is provided?

5. Sketching a function is not a mathematically valid way of proving that a function is odd or even. How do you provide an accurate sketch without first knowing whether it is odd or even?

In short, you're either talking a lot out of your ass, or you've been sorely misguided by an ill-informed teacher.

Exactly my point, thanks for confirming. You can only use methods in the syllabi. One way may be easier or better, but if the second method is still correct and not in the scope of the hsc syllabus it is marked incorrect.

I think you misread, I wrote wayS, i.e. plural . I understand there are many ways to do a question, especially in 4U (some complex number problems have 5 or 6 methods . My first point still holds. Creativity is bound by the syllabus. Step outside the box and be penalized.

Implicit differentiation is a 4U technique?? I thought it is also taught in 3U

My life is a lie, I was told if a function is symmetrical about the origin it is odd. When doing an inverse trig test, I was marked incorrect for drawing the graph of sin^-1 x instead of using substitution to prove its odd.

All of this has nothing to do with my point. I still believe maths lacks creativity, but feel free to disagree. Just my personal opinion, not saying anything bad about maths (my fav subject).

 

[Carrotsticks]

I disagree with the idea of "step outside the box and be penalised". Can you provide me with some specific examples please? I'd very much love to see what you are referring to. Also, yes implicit differentiation is a 4U technique.

Before you give any example, I'd like for you to first consider "If I use this technique which is outside the scope of the syllabus, then is it within my capacity to understand the mechanics of it? Do I know the proof, or am I using it blindly?"

If you are using an advanced technique blindly, then I think it would be quite right for you to be penalised. The purpose of Mathematics at this stage is to see what you can do with the tools available, NOT to see what you can do given higher powered machinery that you don't fully understand.

A student who makes good and extensive use of basic tools is far more valued than a student who makes basic use of more powerful tools.

If you said "HSC Maths" lacks creativity, then I would disagree and agree to some extent. However, to say that all of Maths lacks creativity is a huge insult to those who study it at a much deeper level. Please refer to my BOS Trials where I write the papers specifically to show students that HSC Maths can be creative and very cool.

 

[DatAtarLyfe]

Exactly my point, thanks for confirming. You can only use methods in the syllabi. One way may be easier or better, but if the second method is still correct and not in the scope of the hsc syllabus it is marked incorrect.

I think you misread, I wrote wayS, i.e. plural . I understand there are many ways to do a question, especially in 4U (some complex number problems have 5 or 6 methods . My first point still holds. Creativity is bound by the syllabus. Step outside the box and be penalized.

Implicit differentiation is a 4U technique?? I thought it is also taught in 3U

My life is a lie, I was told if a function is symmetrical about the origin it is odd. When doing an inverse trig test, I was marked incorrect for drawing the graph of sin^-1 x instead of using substitution to prove its odd.

All of this has nothing to do with my point. I still believe maths lacks creativity, but feel free to disagree. Just my personal opinion, not saying anything bad about maths (my fav subject).

Not trying to start a riot lol, but to attempt certain questions in maths, you need to have a sort of creative spark, mostly in algebra, to solve the problem. For example, in mathematical induction, you need to be able to have that flair with algebra in order to inverse steps and attempt to get to the answer, which doesn't come from straight up wrote learning. Even just straight up breaking the fraction a+b/c into a/c + b/c requires some form of creativity. Also, 3u maths doesn't have set methods to answer their questions, if anything, as you move up in the difficulty of maths in high school, the methods become more open and less "bounded by the syllabus". You go from doing consumer arithmetic in general which involves just straight plugs to 4u graphs where you are graphing things like 1/|f(x)| (sorry i don't know how to use Latex) which don't have fix methods in order for you to graph it and you have to be able to imagine things like what happens to the graph if x->infinity etc. So in saying that, 3u and even 2u require creativity as well.
Just my opinion but especially in algebra related topics, maths does need a bit of creativity to produce a way to solve/prove/graph etc.

 

[SammyT123]

I disagree with the idea of "step outside the box and be penalised". Can you provide me with some specific examples please? I'd very much love to see what you are referring to. Also, yes implicit differentiation is a 4U technique.

Before you give any example, I'd like for you to first consider "If I use this technique which is outside the scope of the syllabus, then is it within my capacity to understand the mechanics of it? Do I know the proof, or am I using it blindly?"

If you are using an advanced technique blindly, then I think it would be quite right for you to be penalised. The purpose of Mathematics at this stage is to see what you can do with the tools available, NOT to see what you can do given higher powered machinery that you don't fully understand.

A student who makes good and extensive use of basic tools is far more valued than a student who makes basic use of more powerful tools.

If you said "HSC Maths" lacks creativity, then I would disagree and agree to some extent. However, to say that all of Maths lacks creativity is a huge insult to those who study it at a much deeper level. Please refer to my BOS Trials where I write the papers specifically to show students that HSC Maths can be creative and very cool.

Good point, I completely overlooked that. You are absolutely correct, I do not fully understand the advanced methods to some extent.

What are these BOS trials you speak of ? I'm interested in how maths can be exciting (90 % of maths homework is boring, it would be a nice change to see something different)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SammyT123]

Not trying to start a riot lol, but to attempt certain questions in maths, you need to have a sort of creative spark, mostly in algebra, to solve the problem. For example, in mathematical induction, you need to be able to have that flair with algebra in order to inverse steps and attempt to get to the answer, which doesn't come from straight up wrote learning. Even just straight up breaking the fraction a+b/c into a/c + b/c requires some form of creativity. Also, 3u maths doesn't have set methods to answer their questions, if anything, as you move up in the difficulty of maths in high school, the methods become more open and less "bounded by the syllabus". You go from doing consumer arithmetic in general which involves just straight plugs to 4u graphs where you are graphing things like 1/|f(x)| (sorry i don't know how to use Latex) which don't have fix methods in order for you to graph it and you have to be able to imagine things like what happens to the graph if x->infinity etc. So in saying that, 3u and even 2u require creativity as well.
Just my opinion but especially in algebra related topics, maths does need a bit of creativity to produce a way to solve/prove/graph etc.

Yes , in that sense it does require creativity . I can think of heaps of examples

E.g. The last question (r= 0,2,3,4,5..)

Without multiplying the entire eqn by x-1, there was no way to solve it . It was so random but at the same time so intuitive to see r=1 was missing

And the stuff about multiplying the y-intercepts of stat pts to show distinct roots without actually solving anything

4U usually has a (very) long algebraic way or a simpler graphical way , e.g. Root of unity qs

I don't see this in 3U though. We are TOLD these tricks.

I've actually never thought about it like this, but I guess even stuff like that is pretty creative, despite being simple .



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SammyT123]

P.s I meant Hsc maths LOL. I constantly love reading about mathematics as a whole.
Just a few weeks ago I found the entire birthday paradox thing to be fascinating, aswell as how mathematics can be used to break ciphers and find weaknesses

Anyway, I guess nobody likes to party

Goodlife/Defqon anyone?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wiliaamnguuyen]

Lmao Sammy, do you go to Ngo & Sons by any chance?

 

[MilkyCat_]

Yee Goodlife

 

[WrittenLoveLetters]

Some people can't do maths :c Like me!

 

[Speed6]

Yeah if you neglect maths, it will also neglect you.

 

[Sien]

Some people can't do maths :c Like me!

same, the struggles D:

 

[WrittenLoveLetters]

Well, in a perfect world, I think no subjects should be compulsory since everyone has different strengths and weaknesses in regards to a standardised education. Personally for me, English isn't too difficult and I'm doing way above average (in my cohort of about 100 something) which makes me happy.