Scaling has nothing to do with the difficulty of a subject, but rather the performance of the subject's cohort in other exams. Although 'difficult' subjects do tend to scale better (since 'smarter' students are more likely to pick them anyway), correlation does not imply causation.The process of alignment is NOT designed to compensate for varying difficulties of subjects. That is what the ATAR scaling is for.
Yeah thanks, I know how it works. I was giving a simplified response to the statement at hand, and in that respect my comment did its job.Scaling has nothing to do with the difficulty of a subject, but rather the performance of the subject's cohort in other exams. Although 'difficult' subjects do tend to scale better (since 'smarter' students are more likely to pick them anyway), correlation does not imply causation.
E.g. Your raw mark in MX2 might be in the 60th percentile of the cohort, however if everyone in the state sat that same exam as well then your mark might actually be in the 90th percentile (how UAC actually determines this is an unknown, complex process). Hence your mark is scaled up due to the strong subject cohort, not the difficulty of the exam.
Does anyone have v3 of this they can PM me?
Looking forward to seeing an update!!
Calm down you guys. The raw marks aren't out for many.BUMP!! Has anyone offered to do it for 2013???
cool i guess i got 73 raw too, since same mark. i can't quite believe that i got that high but okFor Chemistry HSC 2013, I got a raw mark of 73/100 and that was an 86 external HSC mark
I must have gotten a 75/100 raw for 88.cool i guess i got 73 raw too, since same mark. i can't quite believe that i got that high but ok
Really?! Only?! I swear it was much higherProbably about a 94 in 2013.
Yep, 94, possibly 95.Probably about a 94 in 2013.
Thanks for offering, only like a couple hundred of pages of posts to filter throughDid anyone compile the 2013 data?