scaling (1 Viewer)

[lyounamu]

Ok fine lets say that they do mark harder. Where would they give extra marks for advanced students or where would they deducte marks from student that are doing standard.

General maths is relatively easier than 2U maths does that mean that they mark harder for that as well?

Also the Standard Paper has 3 essay questions just like the Advanced Paper has 3 questions. The only difference is the content that they use.

Their marks get adjusted to the relative position they are in the AOS which is a common paper. Since Standard English people perform poorer than those in Advanced, their marks in the paper 2 get down, that's why I said that their marks are marked harder (or scaled harder in the end).

The first paper is like scaling system or ranking system.

 

[lyounamu]

but they use raw marks to calculate UAI?

No, raw marks are aligned. Say you got 70 out of 100 in exam. That is raw mark. This raw mark is aligned (scaled in English Standard with English Advanced together). Whatever you get in the HSC result paper is the aligned mark you got. That aligned mark is scaled again to produce scaled mark which is used for UAI.

So, English standard people would get high raw marks but would get lower or higher aligned mark depending on how they did in AOS.

 

[lyounamu]

What? I though raw marks and aligned marks were different...

Aligned marks are proportional to your raw marks. However, in English it is different as we have 2 different exams (Standard & Advanced papers) but we have one scaling system. That's why Standard people get marked harder because the exam is considered 'easier'.

 

[lyounamu]

Tbh I don't really understand what you are saying there.

But I get what you were saying before.



They don't get 'marked' harder. They are aligned so it makes the system fairer. So really Advanced and Standard are of equal opportunity and one isn't disadvantaged over the other.

Hahahahaha....

I don't even really understand what I am saying either. I am currently involved in the most difficult assignment and the task of puttting up post here. My brain is addled at the moment. I am very sorry if you can't understand what I am saying because I am currently in the state of maximum confusion. I will make sure I clear what I said up. I just need a break.

 

[tommykins]

Tbh I don't really understand what you are saying there.

But I get what you were saying before.



They don't get 'marked' harder. They are aligned so it makes the system fairer. So really Advanced and Standard are of equal opportunity and one isn't disadvantaged over the other.

Raw marks = your percentage in the exam. A raw mark alone means nothing, as you need to be compared to evyerone else who does your subject. This is where an aligned marks come into play.

For example, if 5 kids did an exam and the top mark was 68% (raw), that could be aligned to a 99-100 since it IS the top mark. A person who gets 54% in the same exam could be aligned to 86, as per alignment. Your mark is aligned based on how you go in your internals and how your whole grade (including those around the state) perform in the externals.

For Standard English, less than 1% of students get a Band 6. Hence, those th at do get band 6 are often the top of the top of the Standard cohort, their ability in English would be no less than the band 6 students in Advanced English.

 

[nayyarv]

if u ask me, i think standard english is pointless.

Its not all that much easier than Advanced (the main diff is that they don't do shakespeare), and u essentially get scaled down.

I think the scaling we are talking about here is the conversion to a UAI. The HSC mark scaling is comparitively unimportant, if u just looking at the subjects u do. The HSC mark scaling is more concerned about caps (top marks, like 48 above the average or sumthin similar), school's performance and ur ranking.

Say u get 91 in X2 maths, the UAC would scale this to a UAC score of sumthin like 93/94, while for English advanced, a 91 would get scaled down slightly, to sumthin like 88/89. English standard would get scaled from 91 (which would be like a state rank, im serious) to sumthin like 84/85 by the UAC for ur UAI calculation. This is done so harder courses have more rewards than 'easy' courses. On the flipside, they determine how 'hard' a course is by the quality of candidature

For example, i do engineering studies, it is not an easy subject (its huge, like 5 massive modules) its actually quite hard, but does not have very benificial scaling because the quality of the candidates are quite low, due to the fact not many schools offer this subject. This means a low average, and a low UAC scaling. On the other hand, X2 maths (im just using it as in example), has a high quality candidature and so the average is higher and UAC considers it to be 'hard' and so it actually scales up (it's like the only subject, i think 4u english too, if u get like 70, the UAC would scale it up to like 80). One subject that bucks the trend is Latin and Latin extension, considered hard, but still scaled down. I think it has something to do with the really high raw marks people achieve. (Like 60% get B6, and like 90% get E4). Im not quite sure about it

Yeah, so thats the UAI scaling in a nutshell. It may not be completely accurate, but its wat i learnt from teachers, friends and the UAI estimator, and SAM.

 

[lyounamu]

Raw marks = your percentage in the exam. A raw mark alone means nothing, as you need to be compared to evyerone else who does your subject. This is where an aligned marks come into play.

For example, if 5 kids did an exam and the top mark was 68% (raw), that could be aligned to a 99-100 since it IS the top mark. A person who gets 54% in the same exam could be aligned to 86, as per alignment. Your mark is aligned based on how you go in your internals and how your whole grade (including those around the state) perform in the externals.

For Standard English, less than 1% of students get a Band 6. Hence, those th at do get band 6 are often the top of the top of the Standard cohort, their ability in English would be no less than the band 6 students in Advanced English.

That's not true. Aligned mark is pre-determined (which means that particular raw mark gives particular aligned mark).

Someone who topped in the state for Chemistry got 98 as his aligned mark but he ended up getting scaled mark of 100. So aligned mark is not like that.

I am very sure about this as I know actualy people who came first in Chemistry (Jack Dwyer, ex-Epping Boys' student).

EDIT: His aligned mark of 98 means that he got mark that is in the range of 98 aligned mark that was pre-determined by markers.

 

[risole91]

TBH, i do not understand the adv vs std english thing.

All I know is i'm going to do my best.

 

[lyounamu]

TBH, i do not understand the adv vs std english thing.

All I know is i'm going to do my best.

Best answer so far!

I better take that advice too.

 

[Azamakumar]

They don't give out high marks for standard english because they could argue that you are competing below your 'level'. They only do this because everybody has to do english and advanced and standard are used as the benchmarks for aligning the other subjects.

They don't mark harshly, they just don't tend to give out high marks.

 

[tommykins]

That's not true. Aligned mark is pre-determined (which means that particular raw mark gives particular aligned mark).

Someone who topped in the state for Chemistry got 98 as his aligned mark but he ended up getting scaled mark of 100. So aligned mark is not like that.

I am very sure about this as I know actualy people who came first in Chemistry (Jack Dwyer, ex-Epping Boys' student).

EDIT: His aligned mark of 98 means that he got mark that is in the range of 98 aligned mark that was pre-determined by markers.

I was just giving her an idea of how aligned marks work.

I know aligned marks are pre-determined, they determine aligned marks based on the difficulty of that years paper, so my example of aligned marks was solely to help her understand it, I wasn't saying it for EVERY year that a top mark of 68% will get you 99-100.

 

[me121]

http://community.boredofstudies.org/showpost.php?p=3390374&postcount=17

lol if they do mark harder for standard than advanced why don't we all do advanced?

becaise the course is more invlolved and more difficult. its a higher standard. e.g. a 2 yr old won't stand a chance in hsc english. the same can be said for many hsc students.

I say, if you don't like it then bugger off cause I think the system is going to change until a long time. If you read requirements for TAFE for certain courses you will actually find that they do need a year 12 qualification to get in. Saying that is just like saying 'academic students' should go off to uni already.

the educational system must provide for both the high end and low end of students. not everyone is of the same standard. there should be enough courses so that both the low end and top end students are catered for. I believe that the current curriculum is too narrow. They need to make extra more challenging and widespread courses available to high school students.

 

[me121]

but you just admited that not everyone has the same standard and that should be catered for.

yes which includes making harder courses

 

[me121]

but by doing that won't necessarily 'cater' everyone.

if you persist.. then they could also make some lower caliber courses for the people who 'aren't capable' or don't want to do the higher caliber courses.

i think that there needs to be more courses. but there is a real problem with this. you end up with more classes with less than 10 students. i believe that there is a shortage of teachers, hence many schools will simply not offer these courses because they don't have the staff.

some courses which i would like to see are,
computing
psychology
language and linguistics
graphic design
technical drafting
remove all the history/social outcomes from the sciences courses into a new course called Social Science.
more maths courses.

etc.. etc..