Is my physics exam unfair? (1 Viewer)

[brent012]

I cannot agree with any of you. This is just my opinion.

I do understand your point about needing new/unique questions to properly test students knowledge but there isn't much you can do about it. Unfortunately it's encouraged to regurgitate chunks out of textbooks in the HSC science subjects. But the practice of reusing questions is not unique to high school - in my experience it's common place for questions out of past papers or tutes to be reused in exams at uni. Usually not exactly or word for word but they do like to reward students who do the work and use the resources available to them (plus are lazy)

 

[iBibah]

It is not fair whatsoever

It doesn't reward people who want to sit and think. It rewards people who put in the hard work and don't think, and that is NOT the point of an exam. The point of an exam is to assess how well you know the subject, it isn't about how much stuff you can rote learn and spit out in 2 hours.

But that doesn't make it unfair. The fact of the matter is all the resources available to those students were also available to OP. Now I'm not saying the exam was a good one, but it was fair. The teacher never gave any students extra information and he never told them what questions were going to be in there.

 

[Macqncheese]

But that doesn't make it unfair. The fact of the matter is all the resources available to those students were also available to OP. Now I'm not saying the exam was a good one, but it was fair. The teacher never gave any students extra information and he never told them what questions were going to be in there.

+1

 

[nerdasdasd]

But that doesn't make it unfair. The fact of the matter is all the resources available to those students were also available to OP. Now I'm not saying the exam was a good one, but it was fair. The teacher never gave any students extra information and he never told them what questions were going to be in there.

+1. This should be the end of the discussion.

 

[Macqncheese]

+1. This should be the end of the discussion.

It really should be. The only argument you can extend here is that currently HSC exams are flawed.

 

[deswa1]

I don't agree with what the teacher did- there is a place for some HSC questions but the test shouldn't be comprised mainly of them and if you have to take past papers, you should do earlier papers and ideally more random trial papers that people are unlikely to have seen.

Having said this, there is absolutely nothing unfair in what the teacher did. They didn't help any student more than any other, every student had equal access to notes etc. Its like walking into a test having mainly studies gravity and the test is mainly on gravity- you get lucky. People get lucky. Suck it up and move on- sorry to sound so harsh but there's no point worrying about this- its in the past- you're obviously good at phys- you'll beat them next test.

Good luck

 

[Immortalp00n]

only reason ur upset is coz u weren't exposed to/didn't do those past questions and u feel that the others in the class had an advantage.
if u were the one who had done the questions and came up in ur assessment, u would be cheering
stop yo double standards

 

[iSplicer]

It is allowed though. Your fault though, you had equal chance to look up old questions.

^

 

[lochnessmonsta]

I remember my physics yearly preliminary exam. Our teacher gave us a practice exam to test, and around 4/25 people did the exam.

Sure enough, the actual exam was a direct copy of that exam. I scored 100%, and some others got 98%. Some bitched and moaned, I held by my stance that they were actually given the exam and no one had an 'unfair advantage', you're just complaining for the sake of complaining.

But our teacher caved and gave us another assessment (which I dont even think is legal).

I dropped that damn subject soon as I could, stupid class, stupid teacher, and never looked back

 

[D94]

Everyone is thinking about how unfair it is to the OP who didn't do those past papers, but really, it's unfair to all students, especially the ones who did do those past papers which the questions were copied from. Those student who did the past papers aren't being tested in a rigorous and effective way. They know how to do those specific set of questions so they merely recall a method or solution, but that in no way tests their understanding of the concept.

For those students who have done those questions previously, they don't know if they understand the concepts or if they are just recalling the solution. They aren't being tested fairly, and they don't know if they can handle never before seen questions in test conditions.

It's also lazy on the teacher's part if it's purely copying and pasting.

 

[Immortalp00n]

Everyone is thinking about how unfair it is to the OP who didn't do those past papers, but really, it's unfair to all students, especially the ones who did do those past papers which the questions were copied from. Those student who did the past papers aren't being tested in a rigorous and effective way. They know how to do those specific set of questions so they merely recall a method or solution, but that in no way tests their understanding of the concept.

For those students who have done those questions previously, they don't know if they understand the concepts or if they are just recalling the solution. They aren't being tested fairly, and they don't know if they can handle never before seen questions in test conditions.

It's also lazy on the teacher's part if it's purely copying and pasting.

let's be honest though
most students are looking for quick marks
not many ppl give a shit about getting tested in a "rigorous and effective way".

 

[RivalryofTroll]

Look, even if the teacher just incorporates past HSC questions.... NO-ONE will be able to memorise the perfect model answer FOR EVERY SINGLE QUESTION IN EVERY SINGLE HSC/TRIAL PAPER.....

If their memory was that godly.... they're just inhuman

So in the end, just know your shit from first principles... but also rote what needs to be rote.

 

[RealiseNothing]

It is unfair, but a better way to put it would be a "mother fucking retarded teacher who sucks at his job"

It is unfair in the sense of direct blind luck. The odds are very high that a student has done past papers and been lucky enough to have done the questions. It obviously disadvantages the students' indirectly, and so even though it may not have been unfair intentionally, the teacher designed the test in such a way that it allowed for the very real possibility of the test becoming unfair.

tl:dr unfair

 

[D94]

let's be honest though
most students are looking for quick marks
not many ppl give a shit about getting tested in a "rigorous and effective way".

I can assure you the best students in the best schools want to be tested so you don't have 10 people ranked 1 in a subject. They would rather the exam be very hard than very easy. It is the difference between state ranking and being outside of the top 10 in the state, or the difference between Band 5 and 6.

And you kind of missed the point. The question is, "is it unfair?". It is irrelevant if students want free/quick marks or not, that doesn't matter - the fact is if students aren't being tested rigorously and effectively, they aren't being fairly tested to a high level of standard. If you compare their level of education and testing to those at say JR or NSB/NSG, then it isn't fair to them. Free/quick marks in school assessments is pointless, you want free/quick marks in the HSC exam when it counts. They aren't going to achieve that if they aren't being tested rigorously and effectively at school assessment level. Then those students complain and wonder why they did great at school, but bombed out in the HSC exams...go figure.

Maybe you don't give a shit, but to those who do care about their education, they do give a shit about it.

 

[RealiseNothing]

I can assure you the best students in the best schools want to be tested so you don't have 10 people ranked 1 in a subject. They would rather the exam be very hard than very easy. It is the difference between state ranking and being outside of the top 10 in the state, or the difference between Band 5 and 6.

And you kind of missed the point. The question is, "is it unfair?". It is irrelevant if students want free/quick marks or not, that doesn't matter - the fact is if students aren't being tested rigorously and effectively, they aren't being fairly tested to a high level of standard. If you compare their level of education and testing to those at say JR or NSB/NSG, then it isn't fair to them. Free/quick marks in school assessments is pointless, you want free/quick marks in the HSC exam when it counts. They aren't going to achieve that if they aren't being tested rigorously and effectively at school assessment level. Then those students complain and wonder why they did great at school, but bombed out in the HSC exams...go figure.

Maybe you don't give a shit, but to those who do care about their education, they do give a shit about it.

+1

 

[Immortalp00n]

I can assure you the best students in the best schools want to be tested so you don't have 10 people ranked 1 in a subject. They would rather the exam be very hard than very easy. It is the difference between state ranking and being outside of the top 10 in the state, or the difference between Band 5 and 6.

And you kind of missed the point. The question is, "is it unfair?". It is irrelevant if students want free/quick marks or not, that doesn't matter - the fact is if students aren't being tested rigorously and effectively, they aren't being fairly tested to a high level of standard. If you compare their level of education and testing to those at say JR or NSB/NSG, then it isn't fair to them. Free/quick marks in school assessments is pointless, you want free/quick marks in the HSC exam when it counts. They aren't going to achieve that if they aren't being tested rigorously and effectively at school assessment level. Then those students complain and wonder why they did great at school, but bombed out in the HSC exams...go figure.

Maybe you don't give a shit, but to those who do care about their education, they do give a shit about it.

lol m8

 

[tattoo2200]

IT IS FAIR!!!!!!!! as long as the teacher does not provide preferential treatment to a student or a group and everyone sat the same exam under the same conditions then it is fair.

 

[RealiseNothing]

IT IS FAIR!!!!!!!! as long as the teacher does not provide preferential treatment to a student or a group and everyone sat the same exam under the same conditions then it is fair.

You are still looking at it one dimensionally. You are only considering whether the test was intentionally unfair. It wasn't - obviously.

However it was indirectly unfair as the teacher designed it so that it had the possibility of becoming unfair, and as we can see it did.

 

[iBibah]

It is unfair, but a better way to put it would be a "mother fucking retarded teacher who sucks at his job"

It is unfair in the sense of direct blind luck. The odds are very high that a student has done past papers and been lucky enough to have done the questions. It obviously disadvantages the students' indirectly, and so even though it may not have been unfair intentionally, the teacher designed the test in such a way that it allowed for the very real possibility of the test becoming unfair.

tl:dr unfair

The exam was not unfair in any way. It came down to whoever practised the most questions, or whoever knew the concepts the best in order to answer the questions. Those who happen to practice the right questions and get lucky will not be lucky forever.

As to the nature of the exam, yes the teacher is a douche, and yes it was a bad exam.

 

[Immortalp00n]

The exam was not unfair in any way. It came down to whoever practised the most questions, or whoever knew the concepts the best in order to answer the questions. Those who happen to practice the right questions and get lucky will not be lucky forever.

As to the nature of the exam, yes the teacher is a douche, and yes it was a bad exam.

+1 to this.