from what I can gather, it is undoubtedly better to have an indepth understanding of as much as humanly possible. Questions in past HSCs have often been tricks, in which the slightest mistake could mean the loss of several marks. Our class primarily uses the Jacaranda texts, and Macmillan as a supplementary reference. I read both thoroughly for each topic, and generally don't get caught in these loophopes. Knowing a topic in depth would also allow you to easily DISCUSS and ASSESS (god I hate the board conventions
) it and its ramifications on society. For example, our last assessment task included this question:
Assess the need for transformers in the transfer of electrical energy from a power station to the point of use.
An ideal response would compare energy losses between high and low voltage lines (I actually did a mathematical proof for this
) and identify the need for high voltage energy transmission. They would also have to consider the significant amount of energy lost to eddy currents in the iron core, and how this results in a gradual 'step down' of voltage at substations (a mention of the cost of high order transformers wouldn't go astray either).
I'm not sure what the excel book says about this issue, but the Jacaranda book was excellent.
With regard to note-taking; I HEAR YA! Our physics professor (Doctor actually) insists that we make thorough notes of EVERYTHING. Over the past 6 months, we have essentially re-written 70% of the textbook :/