Was the calibre higher this year? (1 Viewer)

[thommy]

I hear it was higher than in a few previous years?

 

[aussiechick007]

yeah, my uai was lower than what it would have been in previous years

 

[thommy]

yeah, my uai was lower than what it would have been in previous years

Ditto, I've heard 2005 and 2007 were very inferior to years like 2003 and 2008.

 

[Trebla]

Of course it's higher in an overall sense. Every year, the number of Distinguished Achievers and All Rounder increases, so that's no surprise. Expect Class of '09 to beat Class of '08 and Class of '10 to beat Class of 09' and so on...

 

[aussiechick007]

also 2004 was a pretty bad year according to the sam, cos this year i got 90.45 where as in 2004 i would have got about 94.7

 

[thommy]

also 2004 was a pretty bad year according to the sam, cos this year i got 90.45 where as in 2004 i would have got about 94.7

Yeah, but I hear that 2007 was worse than 2004, and 2003 was better than 2004-2007, Trebla's theory of each year going up isn't necessarily correct.

 

[lionking1191]

marking standards is theoretically the same. you should be looking at the percentage in top bands as a judgment of 'calibre' rather than what your uai would have been in past years.

 

[Trebla]

Just because your UAI differs between year to year doesn't mean the calibre of students follow the same trend.
First thing to note is that your UAI is composed of DIFFERENT SUBJECTS. Since your UAI consists of a limited number of subjects it would be wrong to say changes in your selected subjects reflect changes throughout all subjects.

The calibre within each course fluctuates from year to year. So the calibre of course X in year 2005 may be better than the year 2006 but worse than the year 2007, whereas the calibre of course Y in 2005 may be worse than 2006 but better than 2007. You may only do course X and not course Y and only see the effects of course X on your UAI and not course Y.

However, OVERALL the number of band 6s is rising despite some courses decreasing in band 6s in one year and other increasing in the same year.

 

[thommy]

Just because your UAI differs between year to year doesn't mean the calibre of students follow the same trend.
First thing to note is that your UAI is composed of DIFFERENT SUBJECTS. Since your UAI consists of a limited number of subjects it would be wrong to say changes in your selected subjects reflect changes throughout all subjects.

The calibre within each course fluctuates from year to year. So the calibre of course X in year 2005 may be better than the year 2006 but worse than the year 2007, whereas the calibre of course Y in 2005 may be worse than 2006 but better than 2007. You may only do course X and not course Y and only see the effects of course X on your UAI and not course Y.

However, OVERALL the number of band 6s is rising despite some courses decreasing in band 6s in one year and other increasing in the same year.

Fair enough, I see yout point, but overall, I heard that 2003 and 2008 have been the best years in recent history.

 

[iluvGG]

lol yeh. i think 2004 was pretty poor. it predicted 100. lol all the others predicted 95.

 

[emytaylor164]

yeah, my uai was lower than what it would have been in previous years

mine was higher by a point

 

[hallelujah.]

I remember last year they kept saying on the news that it was the smartest group of school leavers ever, and i havent heard it this year at all. But on the other hand, according to the 2007 data i would have gotten 98.30 while i got 98.00

In 2004 i would have got 100 haha

 

[imoO]

It means you've ALL FAILED MISERABLY IN COMPARISON TO ALL THE OTHERS.

Nah jks....it's hard to judge calibre based of diff years.....so that's why we'll prob beat you

09ers!!! FTW

 

[thommy]

Is it true that 2003 and 2008 were of a higher calibre than other years in the 2000's? That's what I've heard.

 

[kevinx2]

UAI cut-offs were quite high across many unis in 2004. Causality between calibre of HSC cohort and UAI cut-offs? Maybe, maybe not.