Search results

In the integrand, make sure you replace x/y with different variable names (e.g. u and v) to avoid confusing boundaries with variables.

They are most likely sourced from the UAC scaling reports published each year. In particular, Table A3 of that report which gives particular percentiles of scaled marks and most ATAR calculators attempt to interpolate the gaps in between.

BoS meets had occurred at Kings Cross once upon a time.

According to Table A3 of the UAC preliminary scaling report for 2020 a HSC mark of 95 in Business Studies in 2020 corresponded to the 99th percentile of the cohort.

If you do 3 units of Maths you have Mathematics Advanced - X/100 Mathematics Extension 1 - Y/50 If you do 4 units of Maths you have Mathematics Extension 1 - X/100 Mathematics Extension 2 - Y/100 Basically, each unit is reported as out of 50 marks.

May be worth reading the below info from NESA https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/11-12/hsc/about-HSC/moderation

Perhaps best to illustrate on a table below. Using my earlier example, suppose that the Band E4 cut-off was 79/100. The aligned marks between 90 and 100 are determined by linear interpolation as shown below (green to amber columns). This is how you get decimal points on the aligned marks...

It is because aligned marks are based on linear interpolations of the band cut-offs. For example if the band E4 cut-off is 79 that means that a raw mark of exactly 79/100 aligns exactly to a mark of 90/100. Since 100/100 aligns exactly to a mark of 100/100 then a raw mark of say 84/100 aligns...

Technically it is because a selection of 'judges' behind the marking process have determined that the cut-off is higher. If the process is consistent then yes it should be correlated to the relative exam "difficulty" between the years.

Pretty much this. Bands between different subjects are not comparable. The whole point of aligning marks into bands is to create some consistency between of HSC marks between different years within a given subject.

Such a thing would need to be released directly from the UAC (who are responsible for calculating ATARs) rather than NESA. That prospect seems less likely given the confidentiality around the ATARs.

Maybe it's time NESA started publishing the distribution of all band performances in each school? Even better if the UAC releases a median ATAR by school but that seems less realistic...

I just did a name check on the state ranks and it looks like two state rankers attended the BoS trials in Maths and one state ranker attended the BoS trials in Chemistry.

...except the media doesn't have access to ATARs, they only have access to the publicly available honour roll which is why they rank based on number of band 6s.

There isn’t really a “last school” per se. The rankings are based on how many band 6s the school gets. So there would be a number of schools who do not get a single band 6 at all.

Isn’t this a proof of the converse statement? You are given the sum is zero and modulus is 1. You will then need to effectively show that they satisfy the cubic roots of unity, rather than the other way around.

Honour roll is only for people who get at least one band 6 or one band E4 in their HSC marks. It has nothing to do with the ATAR.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/hsc-2020-how-your-school-ranked-20201208-p56lpz.html

ATAR calculators estimate ATARs differently to how the ATARs are actually calculated. You need the data for every student in the state for all their subjects to do that. ATAR calculators mostly try to just make interpolations based on any data that is publicly available (think of it as trying...

This is mainly on the premise in that I couldn’t find anything official from NESA which specifically says students cannot get marks reduced from the process. They just say it is to “confirm your mark was processed correctly” which seems to imply accuracy is the intent. I am aware that there is...