SAM and Premium Membership (1 Viewer)

[Asheroth]

Since I can't post in the Premium FAQ forum, I'll post this here. Maybe a mod can move it if they see fit

After the teaser campaign finished, some people were angry at the BOS staff for charging for previously free services. It was then explained to those people that everything that was free, remains free, and upgrading to Premium is an option for those who want extra services. This was repeated several times by various users and moderators.

But it looks like the standard SAM has been significantly downgraded to make way for the Premium Edition. We can no longer adjust the year that we want to calculate the UAI for, the tables containing the approximate 'percent in state' figures are gone, and the graphs showing the bell curves for each subject are also missing.

Now I don't care too much about the missing 'change year' option, but the latter two functions of SAM are functions that I found useful and helpful. I'm just curious as to why they've been removed, and if it's because of the new Premium Advanced SAM, I'd like to politely request their return, since their removal contradicts the assurances made when Premium was introduced.

 

[lala2]

I agree with this--instead of upgrading SAM for the premium version, it seems they have had to downgrade SAM for the free version. And not only that, I found an anomaly, for lack of a better word, when I used the free SAM to estimate my UAI using my HSC marks. I was curious to see if the estimating power of SAM would have been affected by the new changes, and it seems so.

I actually got a UAI of 96.95, but with SAM the day before UAIs came out, using my HSC marks, I got predicted a UAI of 97.15, which is pretty good. But now, when I use SAM, I got predicted a UAI of 97.70! I think that's a bit too inaccurate. I don't remember anyone telling us that SAM would be less accurate as a result just because it became free.

I don't mind because I've done my HSC, but you're talking here nearly a full UAI point above what I got, and this may give some people false hopes--not good, especially if they relax at that.

 

[pLuvia]

But the changes to SAM are some of the factors that distinguish us non-premium members from the premium members, even though this problem I agree is bad, if they pay to go on this site then they should be abliged to more things.

Your problem with the UAI maybe that before there was an average of UAI's from 4 different years? maybe they only show the average of the 4 years instead of only the latest year

 

[lala2]

Oh ok maybe that's why. It's just that under the year given, the latest calculation is from 2004, which I used when I used SAM to predict my UAI.

 

[kami]

But it looks like the standard SAM has been significantly downgraded to make way for the Premium Edition. We can no longer adjust the year that we want to calculate the UAI for, the tables containing the approximate 'percent in state' figures are gone, and the graphs showing the bell curves for each subject are also missing.

The scaling changes each year in regards to the current cohort not the previous, so an inability to choose to generate an estimate for 2003 as opposed to 2005 is rather irrelevant to the base purpose of SAM - which is to generate an estimate based on previous year's trends and it still does so. The same can be said of the percentage figures and scaling graphs as they did not directly provide the estimate to you.

You also have the option of downloading JUAIseek and using that if you are unhappy with the current state of SAM, or alternatively paying the premium fee.

I actually got a UAI of 96.95, but with SAM the day before UAIs came out, using my HSC marks, I got predicted a UAI of 97.15, which is pretty good. But now, when I use SAM, I got predicted a UAI of 97.70! I think that's a bit too inaccurate. I don't remember anyone telling us that SAM would be less accurate as a result just because it became free.

I don't mind because I've done my HSC, but you're talking here nearly a full UAI point above what I got, and this may give some people false hopes--not good, especially if they relax at that.

SAM could never truly be accurate though - it will always use year old data to give an estimate and less than a whole point difference is rather minimal when the majority of SAM users have no actual aligned marks to enter as of yet.

 

[Asheroth]

The scaling changes each year in regards to the current cohort not the previous, so an inability to choose to generate an estimate for 2003 as opposed to 2005 is rather irrelevant to the base purpose of SAM - which is to generate an estimate based on previous year's trends and it still does so. The same can be said of the percentage figures and scaling graphs as they did not directly provide the estimate to you.

That's irrelevant. I said I didn't really care about the inability to change years, but I did like those graphs and tables, and the fact that they've been taken away goes against the base promise that Premium was floated on, which was that all services to non-paying members remain the same.

But the changes to SAM are some of the factors that distinguish us non-premium members from the premium members, even though this problem I agree is bad, if they pay to go on this site then they should be abliged to more things.

Yes, of course they should. But it was said that the 'extras' provided to Premium members would not be at the expense of non-paying members.

I assume it wouldn't be too difficult to reinstall the features in question. If possible, I'd really like them back.

 

[Asheroth]

Well that's irritating. And what about those bell curve graphs?

Looks like my question's answered then...

 

[iambored]

I actually got a UAI of 96.95, but with SAM the day before UAIs came out, using my HSC marks, I got predicted a UAI of 97.15, which is pretty good. But now, when I use SAM, I got predicted a UAI of 97.70! I think that's a bit too inaccurate. I don't remember anyone telling us that SAM would be less accurate as a result just because it became free.

I don't mind because I've done my HSC, but you're talking here nearly a full UAI point above what I got, and this may give some people false hopes--not good, especially if they relax at that.

I don't know how school people use SAM these days, but considering that you can't put your raw school marks in to estimate your UAI and since you can't really even guess what your scaled marks would be, and considering it's a 'rough' estimate, I don't think 1 point would give false hope.

 

[Riviet]

But it looks like the standard SAM has been significantly downgraded to make way for the Premium Edition. We can no longer adjust the year that we want to calculate the UAI for, the tables containing the approximate 'percent in state' figures are gone, and the graphs showing the bell curves for each subject are also missing.

The selection of the year is not that useful, as the further you get away from the present, the less accurate your UAI calculation should be. I believe over the last years, it has gradually been more competitive between all the students, meaning that marks that you put into earlier years would give you a slighter higher UAI. I don't remember ever seeing a bell curve in SAM before premium was introduced, but overall, the free version of SAM hasn't really been degraded much in my opinion.

 

[lala2]

I don't know how school people use SAM these days, but considering that you can't put your raw school marks in to estimate your UAI and since you can't really even guess what your scaled marks would be, and considering it's a 'rough' estimate, I don't think 1 point would give false hope.

Oh this was in the context of the day HSC results came out, before UAI comes out. I guess during the school year it wouldn't really matter, as you said, because no-one has any way of knowing how school marks translate to your final mark, but SAM has always seemed (to me) to be consulted the most just before UAIs come out because everyone's in panic mode. That was what I was mainly thinking of, rather than particular use during the school year.

 

[iambored]

Thanks for the explanation, I forgot marks and UAI came out on different days you do forget these simple things after a while . In that case yes I guess they should remember it's an estimate but yes, it could get their hopes up.

 

[Minai]

Well that's irritating. And what about those bell curve graphs?

Looks like my question's answered then...

I don't want to strike a nerve or anything, but have you considered signing up for premium membership? I mean if the advanced SAM features are really important for you, I think you should consider making the investment.

 

[pLuvia]

The selection of the year is not that useful, as the further you get away from the present, the less accurate your UAI calculation should be. I believe over the last years, it has gradually been more competitive between all the students, meaning that marks that you put into earlier years would give you a slighter higher UAI. I don't remember ever seeing a bell curve in SAM before premium was introduced, but overall, the free version of SAM hasn't really been degraded much in my opinion.

There were bell shaped curves but I clicked it once, but couldn't find it again

 

[Asheroth]

I don't want to strike a nerve or anything, but have you considered signing up for premium membership? I mean if the advanced SAM features are really important for you, I think you should consider making the investment.

I had considered it, and I may sign up soon, but I was kind of campaigning on the principle of the thing.

There were bell shaped curves but I clicked it once, but couldn't find it again

Good to know it wasn't just my imagination

Riviet: I know the selection of the year isn't that useful. That's why I've said I don't care about it. Twice.

 

[xeuyrawp]

I had considered it, and I may sign up soon, but I was kind of campaigning on the principle of the thing.

How is this a 'principle'?

 

[vizman]

hey guys, just wondering if you could pay for premium membership by credit card, i don't really want to get paypal

 

[Asheroth]

How is this a 'principle'?

The principle of 'Premium Membership will not result in any previously free services being taken away or charged for.' While that sentence wasn't said explicitly, it was definitely implied that the state of BOS for non-paying members would remain the same. That's the principle.

vizman: quit hijacking my thread, please

 

[xeuyrawp]

The principle of 'Premium Membership will not result in any previously free services being taken away or charged for.' While that sentence wasn't said explicitly, it was definitely implied that the state of BOS for non-paying members would remain the same. That's the principle.

vizman: quit hijacking my thread, please

No, I mean how is there a principle? Let's see:

1. BoS dies, but at least they would have offered free orsum notes,
2. BoS lives, but to get the orsum notes, you have to pay 2 hours wage.

There's no principle, it's a practicality.

 

[nwatts]

two hours wage? that's slave labour it is.

 

[Asheroth]

No, I mean how is there a principle? Let's see:

1. BoS dies, but at least they would have offered free orsum notes,
2. BoS lives, but to get the orsum notes, you have to pay 2 hours wage.

There's no principle, it's a practicality.

I don't dispute the practicality of Premium Membership. I reckon it's a great idea and it should help BoS stay alive and all that. I don't see what any of the above has to do with returning my graphs and tables to me. I never had a problem with lack of access to orsum notes.