For myself, I found the opposite was true (bizarrely enough)
But keep in mind that it also depends at what level you are performing at - be honest, are you (speaking to a general "you") performing at the top/middle/lower range?
If you're among the very top:
I would say early assessments DO matter, simply because the competition gets fierce and among the students competing for top ranks (say 1 to 5) very few marks are dropped, so its a matter of who can be the most consistent and not crack. Inevitably a little bit of cracking does happen at the end of the year (naturally - very few people are machines), so its important to make the first few assessments as near to perfect as possible. That's what I found saved my butt, when I dropped a few marks in the later assessments, I was suprised to see that I preserved my (1/2/3) ranking thanks to getting perfect/near perfect marks early.
If you're middle to lower range:
1. Of course you're not screwed!
2. Then there is alot of scope for improvement and for the trials to make a good deal of difference. I've seen plenty of students really pick things up and overtake kids who did well early - just a matter of maintaining/picking up energy.
Imo, the HSC is about intelligence, sure, but moreso it is about organisation, ability to juggle time pressures and consistency.
Put the assessments in context of
- Rank
- Weighting.
Its less disastrous to stuff up a lightly weighted assessment, and its ok to get a low mark but to rank high. Put it in context, and finally, put it in context of the overall weighted mark at the end. :uhhuh: