VCE HHD Question Thread!

[kirstym1204]

Can someone please help me. 
Is it true that that topic for Sustainable Development Goals has changed?
Apparently it's gone from 8 goals up to 18 !!!!!!   please help!  is this true?  What is a good way to remember all 18?

[victoriakamb]

From what I see in the textbook in chapter 11, there are 17 (page 379 PDF.) I would recommend making acronyms for them, or perhaps even grouping them into which ones have to do with the environment and which ones have to do with individuals in particular. Then just remember how many are in each group or make acronyms within those groups. Hope this helps

[Joseph41]

Can someone please help me. 
Is it true that that topic for Sustainable Development Goals has changed?
Apparently it's gone from 8 goals up to 18 !!!!!!   please help!  is this true?  What is a good way to remember all 18?

You may wish to read this post: Change to HHD Study Design - Sustainable Development Goals

[leiaorgana]

I recently got my latest Health SAC results back and to say the least, my result has really put me off. I got a 77% which isn't the worst yet I can't help but feel really disappointed. Despite Health being my favourite subject, the ranking of the cohort and the pressure to get a study score of 40+ is really disheartening. And I feel like getting 40+ is unattainable for me now. What do you guys do to get out of this state of mind?? What can I do to change things?
Thank you so much, I appreciate all the advice I can get! ^.^
(and don't be afraid to hit me with the cold hard truth)

[Joseph41]

I recently got my latest Health SAC results back and to say the least, my result has really put me off. I got a 77% which isn't the worst yet I can't help but feel really disappointed. Despite Health being my favourite subject, the ranking of the cohort and the pressure to get a study score of 40+ is really disheartening. And I feel like getting 40+ is unattainable for me now. What do you guys do to get out of this state of mind?? What can I do to change things?
Thank you so much, I appreciate all the advice I can get! ^.^
(and don't be afraid to hit me with the cold hard truth)

Welcome to ATAR Notes, firstly. Stick around!

The cold hard truth, you reckon? Well, here are my thoughts:

Firstly, if you have a look around the Victorian Technical Score Discussion section, you will find that raw SAC scores mean very little. Like, very little. And they're very hard to compare. A 40+ study score is by no means unattainable; from what you've said, a 50 study score is by no means unattainable.

But to respond to your post more directly, I feel you. Getting scores back that you're disappointed with sucks. Really, it does. But as you say, 77% isn't objectively poor, and I'll just emphasise again here that raw scores really mean diddly squat. I understand that you're disappointed, but why not take this opportunity to improve? Why did you lose those marks? What can you improve on for the exam? I strongly suggest that you try to take the feedback as a positive thing rather than a negative thing. That might be hard, I know, but feeling angry or frustrated or disappointed or whatever else won't necessarily improve things.

My main point is that yeah, you might be disappointed at your 77%, but it really doesn't mean much. And a subsequent lack of motivation to improve and do well in your next SAC is going to be a lot more detrimental to your eventual study score than that 77% ever will be. Does that make sense? I understand the pressure and whatnot, but you can do this. Keep pushing yourself, keep working hard, and you will do well. There's no point thinking about ifs and buts at this stage; just do your best and the results will come.

[leiaorgana]

Welcome to ATAR Notes, firstly. Stick around!

The cold hard truth, you reckon? Well, here are my thoughts:

Firstly, if you have a look around the Victorian Technical Score Discussion section, you will find that raw SAC scores mean very little. Like, very little. And they're very hard to compare. A 40+ study score is by no means unattainable; from what you've said, a 50 study score is by no means unattainable.

But to respond to your post more directly, I feel you. Getting scores back that you're disappointed with sucks. Really, it does. But as you say, 77% isn't objectively poor, and I'll just emphasise again here that raw scores really mean diddly squat. I understand that you're disappointed, but why not take this opportunity to improve? Why did you lose those marks? What can you improve on for the exam? I strongly suggest that you try to take the feedback as a positive thing rather than a negative thing. That might be hard, I know, but feeling angry or frustrated or disappointed or whatever else won't necessarily improve things.

My main point is that yeah, you might be disappointed at your 77%, but it really doesn't mean much. And a subsequent lack of motivation to improve and do well in your next SAC is going to be a lot more detrimental to your eventual study score than that 77% ever will be. Does that make sense? I understand the pressure and whatnot, but you can do this. Keep pushing yourself, keep working hard, and you will do well. There's no point thinking about ifs and buts at this stage; just do your best and the results will come.

Your time and wise words are very much appreciated Laugh at me but I'm actually very tempted to hang your reply up somewhere in my room. In particular, the line that most resonated with me: "There's no point thinking about ifs and buts at this stage; just do your best and the results will come." I definitely feel a lot better now! Thank you!!

[Joseph41]

Your time and wise words are very much appreciated Laugh at me but I'm actually very tempted to hang your reply up somewhere in my room. In particular, the line that most resonated with me: "There's no point thinking about ifs and buts at this stage; just do your best and the results will come." I definitely feel a lot better now! Thank you!!

All of last semester I had on my whiteboard: "If your dreams don't scare you, they're not your real goals."

Best of luck.

[randyz]

Guys could anyone help me with

Why Sustainability is important for Human Development?

[Bade98]

I have 2 questions;
1.What is a limitation of the Mortality strata?
2. What are the 4 human development indicators? ( I feel like I know this questions answer but I am not sure. Is it Life Expectancy, Mean years of school, Expected years of schooling and  Gross National Income?)

[Aimee26]

I have 2 questions;
1.What is a limitation of the Mortality strata?
2. What are the 4 human development indicators? ( I feel like I know this questions answer but I am not sure. Is it Life Expectancy, Mean years of school, Expected years of schooling and  Gross National Income?)

Hi There,
If the mortality strata that you are referring to is the WHO stratum of A, B, C, D, and E, a limitation is the criteria of the strata levels.  Since they are only based upon child and adult mortality rates, other issues that can classify as developing countries are not included.  For example, a country may be in strata B with low adult and child mortality rates, may still experience rates of gender inequality and low education rates, making it a developing country.
And as for your other question you are correct with your indicators.
Hopefully these are right as I completed Health and Human last year and the study design has changed.
Hope that helps 

[tas18]

I have 2 questions;
1.What is a limitation of the Mortality strata?
2. What are the 4 human development indicators? ( I feel like I know this questions answer but I am not sure. Is it Life Expectancy, Mean years of school, Expected years of schooling and  Gross National Income?)

For the first question, another possible limitation of the Mortality strata is that the classifications for adult mortality are made on the basis of statistics of the mortality rates of males aged between 15 and 59. So only the data from one gender is used to determine which strata a country classfies in with regards to adult mortality rate. Essentially, it is a limitation because, the classification of adult mortality isn't really considering all adults within the population, just males.
(Note: Under-5 mortality rate is based on data for both genders, so I'm not entirely sure why adult mortality is based on just male data)

[oooo]

With the morality strata, it's calculated afrom how high, or low, U5MR and adult male mortality is. But how do you know when something is low, very low or high?

[tas18]

With the morality strata, it's calculated afrom how high, or low, U5MR and adult male mortality is. But how do you know when something is low, very low or high?

While I believe it is difficult to distinguish between what the difference between for example, 'low' and 'very low' or 'high' and 'very high' adult mortality rate would be, there's nothing to worry about since data can be interpreted differently (to a certain extent..) and examiners do take that into account... hopefully. Usually, if the mortality strata is 250 per 1000 people (would be males aged 15-59 since it's for the mortality strata), I could consider that as high, but you could say that's very high. Hence, my answer would be strata D, and yours would be strata E. I believe I have seen a VCAA exam question asking about mortality strata based on data and both answers D and E were accepted where the mortality rate was 'high-ish'.

But still, here is a rough guide to (hopefully) help you:
If you're given a table with data for adult mortality and U5MR, then you have to make your classification based on whether:
The adult mortality rate is very low, low, high, or very high and whether the U5MR is very low, low, or high.
To make this classification I'll give you some estimated numerical values..
For very low - If the data is per 1000 population (for adult mortality) or per 1000 live births (for U5MR), then examples would be countries like Australia or Japan which would have a U5MR of 3 or 5 per 1000 live births. (These figures are very small so that gives it away, but also when you'll be given data you will be provided with the country too, this should also give you an idea of what strata it belongs to)
For low - I feel as though the distinction between low and very low is hard to make, but it would be relatively higher than low.. for example Indonesia may have a mortality rate of 43 per 1000 population - which isn't exactly very low, but it's still comparatively lower than a country which has for e.g. has an U5MR of 139 per 1000 live births.
For high - I would consider 65-140 per 1000 live births high.
For very high - 140+ per 1000 live births, my reasoning for this: VCAA Examiner's report 2012. In a 2012 question where Afghanistan which was presented as having an U5MR of 199 per 1000 live births, the examiner's report stated that this is 'very high'.

Generally speaking, as long as you are able to identify that a mortality rate of 5 per 1000 population is very low, and in comparison that 209 per 1000 population is very high, you should be fine. Anyways.. I hope I was able to help, but I'd like to stress that this is based on 40% of my own understanding + 60% of what my teacher has told me and what the examiner's report has shown, so I'm sorry if it's not 100% accurate.

[gemmaruffin]

Has anyone come up with a good mnemonic for the sustainable development goals yet?? All I have is
New
Zealand
Good
Quality
Gas
Chefs
Decent
Pizzas

[heids]

Hey gemmaruffin!  There's some ideas in this thread if you scroll down, probably the last post is the best