Well why?
I thought, you picked a course which teaches you the basics of whatever field your planning to get into, and the exams are supposed to, above all make sure you know these basics.
Why then do we have people getting less than 80% on a course and being satisfied with it? Does that mean that student might as well have only learn't 80% of the course?
The problem i see, is "trick" questions being placed in exams. Things that're put in there for no purpose other than trivia. These marks determine UAI, UAI determines people's futures. Are we really basing people's futures on their ability to answer
"trick" questions?
Since when did school become some sort of Academic gladiatorial battle? What happened to simply testing the students knowledge on the course, and expecting a good 90% from all students, rather than this ranking system to thin the class where most people get 75%, and only the absoloute eliete top the 90%s.
Why is doing PAST papers necessary in order to succeed? You should be testing course knowledge, not the ability to recognize past questions, and regurgitate past answers from past regurgitation.
Basically schooling should seperate only the able from the inable. Rather than diffuse the cohort into many subtle levels, each based on how many past questions they've seen. Sure you might go into the world being VERY well educated on practice exam papers, but what does this do in terms of raw knowledge/applicability.
/rant
bad cssa physics paper
I thought, you picked a course which teaches you the basics of whatever field your planning to get into, and the exams are supposed to, above all make sure you know these basics.
Why then do we have people getting less than 80% on a course and being satisfied with it? Does that mean that student might as well have only learn't 80% of the course?
The problem i see, is "trick" questions being placed in exams. Things that're put in there for no purpose other than trivia. These marks determine UAI, UAI determines people's futures. Are we really basing people's futures on their ability to answer
"trick" questions?
Since when did school become some sort of Academic gladiatorial battle? What happened to simply testing the students knowledge on the course, and expecting a good 90% from all students, rather than this ranking system to thin the class where most people get 75%, and only the absoloute eliete top the 90%s.
Why is doing PAST papers necessary in order to succeed? You should be testing course knowledge, not the ability to recognize past questions, and regurgitate past answers from past regurgitation.
Basically schooling should seperate only the able from the inable. Rather than diffuse the cohort into many subtle levels, each based on how many past questions they've seen. Sure you might go into the world being VERY well educated on practice exam papers, but what does this do in terms of raw knowledge/applicability.
/rant
bad cssa physics paper