STFU CUNT
the difference between what is right, and what is easy
He has a point I guess, I just thought it was a bit pretentious to go on about it like that. lol. Jeremy William is on par with Derrick, and I think got a a similar aggregate. He's a good friend of mine and he offers tuition.
50 Literature
50 Specialist Maths
50 Chemistry
43 French
5.5 Uni Maths
4.94 Methods
not youSTFU CUNT
Excuse-me, referring to whom exactly?
Rofl-"Hit the dancefloor-I'm serious!"
http://www.smh.com.au/national/more-cheers-than-tears-for-vce-students-20091214-ksad.html
Man I reckon he just made that little sentiment in the paper to show off his literary prowess.
sorry i just felt like flaming him
he shud move on, go to uni and get into the real world
And he got five 50s too (ESL, Chinese First Language, Chem, Physics, Spesh). =)
Who is this guy??? *hyperventilates* how do you get five 50s????Calm down, the guy is clearly a freak
It is a bit sad that VCE basically confines what you learn to a set "syllabus". There's no real room for academic discovery on your own in that respect; you'd be considered "wasting your time" if you went out and read/learned more than what the course necessitated, whereas in systems like IB where the depth is almost limitless (I think?) you'd be getting a lot more out of it.
Man I reckon he just made that little sentiment in the paper to show off his literary prowess.
i agree with jejakThanks zzdfa. Also I agree his writing style, although impressive, sounds a bit too stiff to me. "Pernicious" is a bit hyperbolic in any case; although clearly things could be improved, I really don't think the situation is grave enough to cause serious harm, as the term would otherwise suggest.
I agree with him, I hate vce. I hate how at the start of the year teachers will always tell us the format of the exam and what mistakes people made last year. Like, fuck that. I don't go to school to prepare for exams, I go to school to learn./0, you share my mind.
It is a bit sad that VCE basically confines what you learn to a set "syllabus". There's no real room for academic discovery on your own in that respect; you'd be considered "wasting your time" if you went out and read/learned more than what the course necessitated, whereas in systems like IB where the depth is almost limitless (I think?) you'd be getting a lot more out of it.Thats strange! Because my teachers are the exact opposite, our class started complaining how we were not being prepared for the exams, whereas otehr schools/private mainly were teaching their kids everytihng about the exam. Our teacher was slow and did no revision/minimal, and spent a lot of time teaching us exta stuff which was not neccessary
and who is this lu person....can some1 summarise quickly?
Man I reckon he just made that little sentiment in the paper to show off his literary prowess.
It isn't the first time he's published something in The Age. Compared to his last letter (which basically blasted the entire medical profession), this one was rather tame.
Can I just add quietly >< I know nothing about him,
But isnt it GOOD that a guy who got PERFECT is complaining? Thats what makes society BETTER, not a guy who gets a 30 ENTER and says its a bad system....
BUT, I like the way VCE is, i got a score which 100% reflects how I did, I am so proud, Im not trying to be cocky, but yeah, I think it really reflects how u did in most cases.
^^LMAO, there was an EXACT same thread on this that I created where people argued whether extra curricular actiives should play a part etc, please dont open that can of worms!
We ended the argument peacefully, no side winning ><
BUT, yes, the American system has like GAT tests to determine ur place into Uni, and that I say SUCKS.
Sure, his point is fairly cynical, but I don't think it was "pretentious" per se.
but I regret my lack of academic failure.
In any case, if he believed VCE to be the source of mediocrity then he should take a look at his own subject selection.Well said!
I really hate it how there's so much focus on score - I think it's sickening how some people do academics merely to compare their performance to others. When these people achieve superior scores to others, they rub it in other people's faces. When they achieve inferior scores, they just remain silent. It's lame.That happens in life too though :P
Also, I totally agree with the "afraid to go beyond syllabus requirements" part. Sometimes a teacher will go "This isn't part of the course", and some students will go "Phew, I don't have to learn this." That attitude is toxic to later life. And the VCE system does punish independent learning - there are times when I want to spend time learning something, but instead I have to spend time on something else just so I can get marks.Thank god university is different!
the difference between what is right, and what is easy
I read that in Dumbledore's voice. ~Now is the time that we must choose between what is right, and what is easy~
Sure, his point is fairly cynical, but I don't think it was "pretentious" per se.
I read it and immediately thought "you arrogant douchebag":Quote from: James Lubut I regret my lack of academic failure.
He makes a really good point; if only his elephantine ego didn't shine through with it.
Although by no means do I agree with the way that that he addressed the issue of VCE but he certainly does raise a good point about the fact that the VCE system is indeed flawed and there is a need to change this system.
I personally think that the system needs a dramatic change (and hopefully when I become a teacher I can eventually push for changes to make Australia have a world class education system that we are proud of). For a start, is it really fair to give a majority (in most cases) of marks for how a student performs on one day? Better yet, is it really fair for students to be marked purely on essays and tests (again, in most cases)? I wasn't aware that education was based on disadvantaging certain students.
The fact that students receive an ENTER or study score is not the issue here; it is how how we determine what those study scores and ENTER's are and how much each task counts to these things. This is what the basis of education reform should be.
There is also the issue of what is taught in VCE, how much say a teacher should have in the curriculum and the education restrictions when teaching things that are not necessarily in the course but I won't go into those things this evening.
Feel free to agree, disagree or argue with me. I don't believe that my opinion is the only, nor necessarily the right one and I like to get a sense of what other people think.
Check out his letter to The Age:
"IT MIGHT seem a strange sentiment coming from a recent high school graduate, but I regret my lack of academic failure. Our education system churns out students who are afraid to fail, afraid to go beyond syllabus requirements, and perhaps even afraid to genuinely learn.
It is a disgusting enterprise. And the result? Entry via meaningless scores into a vocational vortex with only one destination: mediocrity.
This system does not teach students the difference between what is right, and what is easy - students simply take the path that secures more marks, unquestionably exemplified by the stereotypes that exist in subject selection.
The sense of wonder and discovery that should accompany the academic experience is lost amid all the interest in scaling and the ENTER. It is simply part of a pernicious culture that considers high scholarship for its own sake quaint.
James Lu, South Melbourne"
Entry via meaningless scores into a vocational vortex with only one destination: mediocrity
did you read the thread nova, 5th post down. he wrote a letter to the age.err I tried to decipher it >< it used so many words beyond my daily word usage LOL.
i want to see his original letter.
Isn't the scaling past 50 a result of the governments incentive for LOTE's ?
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=wall&gid=108791706666
rofl
Did anyone read the letter in today's Age replying to James' letter (I'm not sure if it was in reply to the same letter that this thread is centred around but it was replying to something written by James Lu)? The writer pretty much gave the generic "scaling is done to make everything fair" spiel while ignoring what I think is the central point of complain; how the current VCE education system stifles a sense of wonderment and discourages independent learning in favour of wrote learning the subject syllabus.
But really I think the core of the problem lies with the ENTER score. Anything which essentially attempts to quantify intelligence will ultimately be flawed. Unfortunately, the ENTER happens to be a convenient and easy way to rank people and has thus endured for so long despite its clear short comings.
James Lu perhaps lacked a bit of tact in that he started criticizing the system at a time when the system was rewarding himWhen else could he get his point across? The media wouldn't give a fuck if he wasn't in that situation
Yes that's true.James Lu perhaps lacked a bit of tact in that he started criticizing the system at a time when the system was rewarding himWhen else could he get his point across? The media wouldn't give a fuck if he wasn't in that situation
This is the letter?
"Keeping it even
JAMES Lu's critique of VCE scaling (Letters, 15/12) demonstrates a glaring misunderstanding of how and why subjects are scaled. Scaling exists to ensure a level playing field, so that no one subject poses an advantage over another in the allocation of marks.
Distribution of scores across subjects can differ greatly, with many not representing a normal distribution. Scaling fixes this problem. If scaling didn't exist, then students would gravitate towards subjects perceived to be conceptually easier. That would foster real exploitation of the system.
Tristan Gooey, Dingley"
http://www.theage.com.au/national/letters/a-public-treasure-we-must-retain-20091215-kufs.html
This is the letter?
"Keeping it even
JAMES Lu's critique of VCE scaling (Letters, 15/12) demonstrates a glaring misunderstanding of how and why subjects are scaled. Scaling exists to ensure a level playing field, so that no one subject poses an advantage over another in the allocation of marks.
Distribution of scores across subjects can differ greatly, with many not representing a normal distribution. Scaling fixes this problem. If scaling didn't exist, then students would gravitate towards subjects perceived to be conceptually easier. That would foster real exploitation of the system.
Tristan Gooey, Dingley"
http://www.theage.com.au/national/letters/a-public-treasure-we-must-retain-20091215-kufs.html
I don't have a problem with scaling, but I believe the fact to a select few subjects scale above 50 is is where the system begins to fall apart. In most subjects, all students have the opportunity to achieve the best possible score, being 50. If this was the same across the board, then the system could no longer be exploited. The maximum aggregate should be 210, and all students should have a chance at achieving this.i 100% agree with this
Scaling above 50 should be removed, as this is the biggest cause of students exploiting the system and choosing their subjects based purely on this reason, and not because they have a genuine interest in the subjects. I question why LOTE's scale above 50. Obviously the government incentives are the main factor. Sure learning a LOTE is possibly the hardest of the VCE subjects, however when you consider that LOTE's aren't prerequisites for any university courses, it's hard to see why a student would choose to do the study, other than for scaling incentives.
As for Specialist Maths, the scaling should also be brought back to a maximum 50. This will probably cause outrage amongst many students, as Specialist Maths is again considered one of the most difficult VCE subjects. Most students would immediately think, "stuff this, I'm doing Further Maths instead," again demonstrating how students simply choose subjects based on whether or not they scale above 50. Sure a 50 in Further Mathematics isn't comparable to a 50 in Specialist Maths, however this is where VTAC needs to step in, and make Specialist Maths a prerequisite for Engineering and Science courses which do require this high level of mathematics, ensuring students don't take this easier option. UMEP programs should also be brought back to a maximum contribution of 5 points to the aggregate, to ensure equality across the entire VCE program.
Furthermore, I believe that achieving a 50 study score in any study is an extraordinary achievement, and a student who is capable of doing this multiple times, should at least have a shot at getting a perfect ENTER.
I honestly believe that if scaling above 50 was removed and the maximum possible aggregate was 210, you would see more students doing studies they enjoy and require to gain entry into university, rather than merely choosing those that will give the best score.
Just so I am clear, I still believe that subjects need to be scaled, just not above 50.
Can I add, I just read the above post, I agree I find it ridiculous how subjects I think Latin? Scale up to 55? 53? There is no need for this, 50 should be the maximum, this way EVERY SINGLE subject is fairDepends how you see 'fair', does fair mean that no matter what subjects you undertake you are not disadvantaged? Or does it mean that no matter what you are rewarded for your work? Assumably a 50 in a subject with a higher scaled mean is 'harder' work than in a subject where the scaled mean is low. How can it be that(generally) all but one score is scaled - that doesn't sound fair.
As a result of government policy to encourage the study of LOTEs,Specialist scaling above 50 comes from VTAC ensuring that no student is disadvantaged by selecting a harder maths subject - how can they do this without scaling above 50? As methods scaling is already huge.
the mean (or average) of each LOTE is adjusted up by adding five to
the ENTER subject score mean. This does not imply that all LOTE
students receive an increase of 5 ENTER points. For each LOTE the
scaled mean = “normal” scaled mean +5. In general all students of a
LOTE receive an adjustment, but it is not a uniform adjustment. For
example a student achieving a perfect study score of 50 is guaranteed
an ENTER subject score of 50, with the maximum ENTER subject
score only going above 50, when the scaled mean plus twice the
scaled standard deviation exceeds 50.
VCE Mathematics studies are designed to cater for students of differing
abilities and interests. Specialist Mathematics is the most difficult,
followed by Mathematical Methods and then by Further Mathematics.
In the second instance and to ensure that students undertaking
the more difficult Mathematics studies are not disadvantaged,
Mathematical Methods is compared to Further Mathematics and
adjusted up as and if necessary (scores in Mathematical Methods
(CAS) and adjusted to be consistent with those in Mathematical
Methods). Similarly Specialist Mathematics is compared to
Mathematical Methods and adjusted up as and if necessary.
he's probably gonna find this one day, or his family, and there going to feel bad.He already has, read EvangeionZeta last few posts, that's James Lu.
you should be negative karma'd all the way to forum hellDon't you want your own karma lowered??
I don't have a problem with scaling, but I believe the fact to a select few subjects scale above 50 is is where the system begins to fall apart. In most subjects, all students have the opportunity to achieve the best possible score, being 50. If this was the same across the board, then the system could no longer be exploited. The maximum aggregate should be 210, and all students should have a chance at achieving this.
Scaling above 50 should be removed, as this is the biggest cause of students exploiting the system and choosing their subjects based purely on this reason, and not because they have a genuine interest in the subjects. I question why LOTE's scale above 50. Obviously the government incentives are the main factor. Sure learning a LOTE is possibly the hardest of the VCE subjects, however when you consider that LOTE's aren't prerequisites for any university courses, it's hard to see why a student would choose to do the study, other than for scaling incentives.
As for Specialist Maths, the scaling should also be brought back to a maximum 50. This will probably cause outrage amongst many students, as Specialist Maths is again considered one of the most difficult VCE subjects. Most students would immediately think, "stuff this, I'm doing Further Maths instead," again demonstrating how students simply choose subjects based on whether or not they scale above 50. Sure a 50 in Further Mathematics isn't comparable to a 50 in Specialist Maths, however this is where VTAC needs to step in, and make Specialist Maths a prerequisite for Engineering and Science courses which do require this high level of mathematics, ensuring students don't take this easier option. UMEP programs should also be brought back to a maximum contribution of 5 points to the aggregate, to ensure equality across the entire VCE program.
Furthermore, I believe that achieving a 50 study score in any study is an extraordinary achievement, and a student who is capable of doing this multiple times, should at least have a shot at getting a perfect ENTER.
I honestly believe that if scaling above 50 was removed and the maximum possible aggregate was 210, you would see more students doing studies they enjoy and require to gain entry into university, rather than merely choosing those that will give the best score.
Just so I am clear, I still believe that subjects need to be scaled, just not above 50.
This is the letter?
"Keeping it even
JAMES Lu's critique of VCE scaling (Letters, 15/12) demonstrates a glaring misunderstanding of how and why subjects are scaled. Scaling exists to ensure a level playing field, so that no one subject poses an advantage over another in the allocation of marks.
Distribution of scores across subjects can differ greatly, with many not representing a normal distribution. Scaling fixes this problem. If scaling didn't exist, then students would gravitate towards subjects perceived to be conceptually easier. That would foster real exploitation of the system.
Tristan Gooey, Dingley"
http://www.theage.com.au/national/letters/a-public-treasure-we-must-retain-20091215-kufs.html
you guys are all fags
epic fags
ALL OF YOU
ok. I know flaming is against the rules, but I think its justified when you can do it to someone not on the forum BUT VERY LIKELY TO SEE THIS POST
if you type in his name plus vce, guess what the first result is?
do you realize he is a real person
Wildareal, you should stop bitchin about another guy with a reasoned view on an internet forum.
you don't have any argument. YOUR the one who's bitchin
stupid fags
he's probably gonna find this one day, or his family, and there going to feel bad.
you should be negative karma'd all the way to forum hell
I also disagree with students doing these university subjects during VCE. Most schools don't offer this and the students who do this can get anadditional 4, 5 or 5.5 points added to their aggregate. If students want to do them, they can add it to their uni credit. Basically it's allowing someone to get credit for 7 subjects when the majority only can do 6.
I also disagree with students doing these university subjects during VCE. Most schools don't offer this and the students who do this can get anadditional 4, 5 or 5.5 points added to their aggregate. If students want to do them, they can add it to their uni credit. Basically it's allowing someone to get credit for 7 subjects when the majority only can do 6.An extension subject replaces a sixth VCE study, meaning this person can obtain at most a .5[5.5 vs. 5] point boost to their aggregate than someone who did not complete an extension study.
Scaling above 50 is why (the vast majority) students do ... specialist maths.I doubt that this is the case, any student who is capable of achieving 45+ RAW[>50 scaled] would have an interest in maths hence another reason to do it, there would be several cases but I assume they are a dismissible minority. The ones who do it for scaling I think would achieve <35 RAW maybe 40. LOTE's are a different question, especially ones such as Classical Greek, Classical Hebrew and Latin.
I thought that was the case matty. :)If it wasn't it would be awesome :P Even more to make up for English.
Crap I should have researched this before speaking.lol
Crap I should have researched this before speaking.lol
"It is better to leave your mouth closed and have others think you a fool than open your mouth and prove it." - Abraham Lincoln
not calling you a fool or anything, the quote just popped up in my mind when i read ur post :P
This person really is misinformed in regards to VCE. If strong students gravitate to 'conceptually easier' subjects those subjects will become more competitive, and would result in higher study scores requiring higher GA grades, the grade distribution will be shifted up. Where strong students congregate there will be a need for strong scaling. Gooey also doesn't understand how the exams are marked, VCAA makes their own bell curve, all they require is a well written exam with questions increasing in difficulty to separate students.This is the letter?
"Keeping it even
JAMES Lu's critique of VCE scaling (Letters, 15/12) demonstrates a glaring misunderstanding of how and why subjects are scaled. Scaling exists to ensure a level playing field, so that no one subject poses an advantage over another in the allocation of marks.
Distribution of scores across subjects can differ greatly, with many not representing a normal distribution. Scaling fixes this problem. If scaling didn't exist, then students would gravitate towards subjects perceived to be conceptually easier. That would foster real exploitation of the system.
Tristan Gooey, Dingley"
http://www.theage.com.au/national/letters/a-public-treasure-we-must-retain-20091215-kufs.html
That person themselves seems to have a misunderstanding of the scaling system. It's not to balance out the difficulty of subjects (with the exception of perhaps Specialist Maths with it scaling over 50), but rather, to account for the strength of the cohort in each subject. The 'perceived conceptual difficulty' of a subject is irrelevant, just as is the difficulty of the exams that came up that year. Neither has any bearing on scaling.
Melbourne Grammer School
Sure learning a LOTE is possibly the hardest of the VCE subjects, however when you consider that LOTE's aren't prerequisites for any university courses, it's hard to see why a student would choose to do the study, other than for scaling incentives.
Sure learning a LOTE is possibly the hardest of the VCE subjects, however when you consider that LOTE's aren't prerequisites for any university courses, it's hard to see why a student would choose to do the study, other than for scaling incentives.
My German class only had 3 people in it, none of whom cared about the scaling - we all just wanted to learn.
If I wanted the scaling incentives I would've done Chinese. It's my first language but I would have qualified for 2nd language - I did a Chinese 2nd language advanced exam for fun without having studied it past year 8 and it was very easy for me.
^ Yeah they do, I know this chick who openly said shes doing French for the scaling, she was so cocky and stuck up, she only ended up getting like a 30 SCALED, even thoguh she kept getting A's etc in SACS.I only did French for the scaling, didn't work out well haha
Goes to show, you should only do a subject if you really have a passion for it, like Ninwa did and many others, its stupid to look at the scaling
^Again, the scaling is a government incentive for students to study languages in VCE. It is meant to be a major reason to do it. Hence, teachers should be pointing out the scaling.
WOW, come to think of it, when I was choosing a LOTE, each time they list the "advantages" of doing a LOTE, and why you should do it is because "IT SCALES", thats been on every list. So in fact the LOTE teachers/ schools can be blamed for putting this thought into peoples minds...
OOO, so THATS the contention.
"Our education system" churning out "students who are afraid to fail, afraid to go beyond syllabus requirements, and perhaps even afraid to genuinely learn."
The thing is Evangelion, my school DOES NOT do that =S
Well my teachers anyway, everyone was compalining that we are not being "reaided" for the exam and that private schools "Were ahead"
Students were planning to complain to the co-ordinator because we weren't being readied for the exam!
One of our teachers thoguh was helping about the exam since February, basing questions on exams, teasing specifically FOR the exam etc.
So tit goes both ways. But I think it's a great example where I talked about, STUDENTS wanting to be taught about the exam...whereas James Lu is saying its the other way around (i think?)
James Lu's point basically states that this entire process needs to be destroyed altogether; rather than worrying about the exam, students should simply worry about learning. He disapproves of American GAT-like systems as well (I asked him about this), saying that schools will just end up teaching students how to do well in that instead.But then how will assessment work? He hasn't come up with any possible solutions to... well, anything.
I think we should have a system more like the education system in China. That way, no school would be "behind" in anyway in their ongoing studies into university. In Victoria, because your performance largely depends on how well you have been taught, many of the schools that have top notch teachers get a somewhat unfair advantage over the rest.
James Lu's point basically states that this entire process needs to be destroyed altogether; rather than worrying about the exam, students should simply worry about learning. He disapproves of American GAT-like systems as well (I asked him about this), saying that schools will just end up teaching students how to do well in that instead.But then how will assessment work? He hasn't come up with any possible solutions to... well, anything.
All year in Japanese, all I have done in class is past exam questions, how to score high on essays, how to minimise mark loss on the oral exam, and yeah. I didn't learn anything about Japanese at all. All my learning was basically done at home. I think this is the sort of stuff that James Lu is attacking.Your DP is cool again btw =D
OOO, so THATS the contention.
"Our education system" churning out "students who are afraid to fail, afraid to go beyond syllabus requirements, and perhaps even afraid to genuinely learn."
Well, now it makes a bit more sense ><
I completely disagree here, because the MAJORITY of people, do not really care or MIND. Let me put it this way, I think every single user on this website, (fine, except 1-2%) really fall into this category that James talked about, CARE about their VCE, and learning, and doing well etc.
However, for the majority of students they dont really care.
A perfect example is VCAL people, or people who plan to go to TAFE,, I know so many people who are only doing a single TAFE course whilst juggling VCE, and therefore do no CARE about their VCE, and are merely doing it to preoccupy their time until they can start TAFE full on.
There are about 10-15 of these type of people in every school really, save for maybe inner city? I don;t know, but yeah, do you think they care in differentiating between "am I learning for myself, or am I just rote learning?"
And can I also stress this is not BAD, I am not doing a "them" versus "us".
Now, 99% of us on this site do fit into James category of people who care about their education.
I know 4 people already who scored 30-40 as their ENTER, four! And I have only asked 10 people their ENTER scores... (well 10 people told me, not me asking), these people do not even plan to go to my career adviser to work out a pathway! I was so shocked by this......their reason?
"I can't be bothered"
My reaction= o.O
Many people on this site come from private school, or inner city school, so please just think outside the box for a little here, in many public schools people are doing TAFE, VCAL, and even VCE "just to get a score and move on", not many care whether the curriculum is good or not.
Can I also say, of COURSE, many people I know want to do good, and care about exams blah blah.
Conclusion= the system is not bad people! For those who don't like the structured system of VCE, have TAFE, VCAL, VET etc.
don't hurt me :-[
James has pointed out what most of us agree in regards to VCE, but there is no easy fix in regards to our high school education system. The real learning begins at uni.but is that a BAD thing?
Just like to say that this is probably one of the best threads I've seen in a while in terms of pure intellectual discussion. Love you all for this, even if I try to argue against what you say. :pI reckon! Nobody is flaming each other (except one instance), and everybody is talking so intelligently, makes me so proud >< LMAO
James has pointed out what most of us agree in regards to VCE, but there is no easy fix in regards to our high school education system. The real learning begins at uni.but is that a BAD thing?
If the system was SO bad, don't you think our Uni's would be crap? When clearly there not (look at pplz studying here form o/s, and look at rankings by international organizations)
If the VCE system was so bad, people wouldn't be scoring so well. So many people are happy at their results.
btw midas_touch, not attacking you, just creating new points/areas of interest
James has pointed out what most of us agree in regards to VCE, but there is no easy fix in regards to our high school education system. The real learning begins at uni.
Just like to say that this is probably one of the best threads I've seen in a while in terms of pure intellectual discussion. Love you all for this, even if I try to argue against what you say. :pI reckon! Nobody is flaming each other (except one instance), and everybody is talking so intelligently, makes me so proud >< LMAO
Just like to say that this is probably one of the best threads I've seen in a while in terms of pure intellectual discussion. Love you all for this, even if I try to argue against what you say. :pI reckon! Nobody is flaming each other (except one instance), and everybody is talking so intelligently, makes me so proud >< LMAO
Yeah, we haven't had this quality of argument in ages...
As I should note though, even the United States has exams that roughly matches what gets done here in Australia. It's called the APs or Advanced Placements, and while it's not required for entry into university technically, you'd probably want to do so if you want to get into a university that's worth mentioning.
See http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/ap/about.html
James has pointed out what most of us agree in regards to VCE, but there is no easy fix in regards to our high school education system. The real learning begins at uni.
I don't agree with this at all. I think that we can fix our high school education system. It may take a while but if it was worked on over time, we can achieve a strong, world class education system. It may be difficult but I have no doubt that it can be done.
Not to mention, the real learning has been occurring fromt he word go. I don't think we can say at all that what we have been learning all throughout school is not 'real' learning. It's just a case our our education becoming more and more sophisticated as we get older.
Our system is not a perfect one. I doubt it ever will be. When all students must be placed in a line there will always be a rush for the front. Consider the TV series 'The Amazing Race' where participants race around the world, they have no time for the scenic route, they see some sites on the fast track through town but they miss the true beauty of the countries they visit, they focus on reaching the end before the others. VCE is like this. We must take in as much of the scenery as we can whilst making sure not to fall behind.
What about the fact that more often than not, the way we "learn" courses is based around knowing where not to drop marks, what kind of questions will be on the exam, etc.? Perhaps it doesn't create a race of drone-like mechanoid Anime robot students (with lasers), but the fact is that the way schools often teach VCE subjects does in fact fall in line with what James seems to be suggesting.
Just to clear things up though, I'm with Enwiabe; James' criticisms are legit, but he really needs to offer an alternative to this system which endorses "mediocrity".
All year in Japanese, all I have done in class is past exam questions, how to score high on essays, how to minimise mark loss on the oral exam, and yeah. I didn't learn anything about Japanese at all. All my learning was basically done at home. I think this is the sort of stuff that James Lu is attacking.
I disagree here. His subject selection clearly articulates what he was trying to say. Was he supposed to select subjects that didn't scale up just to prove his point? Everyone wants to do well, and in order to do so, the VCE system is forcing people to choose well-scaled subjects. The subjects that he has chosen may not be his best interests nor helping him at all for his future studies. But again, VCE forces him to make this selection because of the fact that he wants to get a high score (like everyone!)
Yes, what he wants is there to be less subjects; he wants there to be a V IB-Victorian International Baccalaureate.I do not recall him saying that, and that would be crazy because THEN people will only pick subejcts which scale higehr since they cannot choose the MYRIAD of subejcts which they may have an interest in....as which currently exists
what about germany's system?That is ridiculous! I just checked out Germany's education system and you do have to do compulsroy subejcts in grade 12
everyone has to do every subject........
yes there would be a lot of issues as some people would hate one subject or another but then at least there would be no scaling issues. Also the ENTER formed (not sure what they call it) would be more accurate as both your strengths and weaknesses would be known... ?
yes but maybe only the subs that relate to what you want to do later in life is what the unis would look at ?what about germany's system?That is ridiculous! I just checked out Germany's education system and you do have to do compulsroy subejcts in grade 12
everyone has to do every subject........
yes there would be a lot of issues as some people would hate one subject or another but then at least there would be no scaling issues. Also the ENTER formed (not sure what they call it) would be more accurate as both your strengths and weaknesses would be known... ?
Seriously, THAT would be enough for me to emigrate aka LEAVE Germany. I would never want my children being put through that, and they have to hand in research papers etc.
Can you imagine a pure sports men (likes P.E/ health and human development, out door ed), or a humanities person, being forced to do chem, phsyics, etc..... they would fail hardcore, and I guarantee, and if they dont fail, they'd get like 40-60%.
Thats ridiculous, in VCE i dropped ALL my subjects I did crap in, in order to do what I LIKE, and GOOD at.
Yes, what he wants is there to be less subjects; he wants there to be a V IB-Victorian International Baccalaureate.
No he never said that, but that's what he is implying. Why else would he criticise the VCE with its myriad of subjects?Your assuming. Don't assume.
He probably lost interest. Either that, or he's celebrating getting into Yale. :pNice, what course is he doing there?
He probably lost interest. Either that, or he's celebrating getting into Yale. :p
as long as you have the prerequisites i don't see a reason why james lu should complain....
james lu doesn't have a VN account does he... LOL imagine if he read this thread LOLOLOL
Just out of curiosity, can ANYONE think of a way that University's can pick out the hard dedicated workers from the bludgers other than VCE's system of ranking and scaling? I know this isn't the best mindset too have, but I have always seen VCE more as a filter to help University's derive the students who are willing to learn out.
I understand what James is getting at, it is sad that VCE doesn't encourage free learning (until you a free, which as Eriny has stated, afterwards you STILL are learning from what basically is a syllabus for your whole life), but I just don't see there being any better way for our secondary education to be taught or a better way for Uni's to pick their students.
Zach Charge, and everyone else, I think I have an answer to that, and Eriny's post about "rote learning"
I think you hit it on the nail without intending to, or noticing!
Okay, teacehrs teach us the subject....they filter the "important" things from the tetxbook, i.e. what we should know, and is relevant to the study design, and what isn't just a repeat of a previous chapter or concept. <<<everyone is arguing this is bad....we are just taught by the syllabus.
Well!!! *I am so hypo at this point* thats just it! the majority of stduents i.e. 90% of the class? Will TAKE this information, merely do the board questions, homework, and read the prescribed chapters to scrape through, get a "good" mark.
WELL, come EXAM TIME, examienrs need to DIFFERENTIATE between those 90% of students who merely follow the rule book, and the SMALL number who do their OWN learning (such as myself).
For example, in English I got my OWN quotes (so did many of u guys on here), ratehr than use the "class handouts".....i read EXTRA context books and movies (rather than the prescribed texts), AND I handed in extra essay questions........well guess what, that put me ABOVE my peers to GET the mark I got =D (40's)
Ladies and gentlemen, from what my teacehrs have told me throughout VCE, is to NOT just do what they have taught us, they always told the class "get your own statsitics (for economics)......learn new words (for english).....do every excersie in the book (for maths).......not just the MINIMUM.
THIS is what makes the difference between a person with an ENTER of 50 and an ENETR of 70+ (i reckon 80).
The system is designed to reward those who are DIFFERENT, and have done their own independent learning.....
I think this has answered a big question in these last 7 or say pages =D
"It has been said that VCE is the worst form of university admission
except all the others that have been tried."
Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)
Although I doubt he would appreciate his letter being used within the very system he chastises.
“I think the big mistake in schools is trying to teach children anything, and by using fear as the basic motivation. Fear of getting failing grades, fear of not staying with your class, etc. Interest can produce learning on a scale compared to fear as a nuclear explosion to a firecracker.”
"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education" - Albert Einstein
=S
The above 2 posts contradict
I don't know what to choose =S
"Never let your schooling interfere with your education." - Mark Twain
"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education" - Albert Einstein
... who cares about james lu seriously its just another persons opinion who seemed to ace VCE. WHO CARES GET OVER IT farrrrrr people arguing about one persons opinion is sad. 14 pages of nothing but james lu god if i was james lu and saw this id be incredibly amazed at the amount of time people would waste on meNo matter who wrote it, the points brought up from the letter and the comments made by everyone here are still valid.
... who cares about james lu seriously its just another persons opinion who seemed to ace VCE. WHO CARES GET OVER IT farrrrrr people arguing about one persons opinion is sad. 14 pages of nothing but james lu god if i was james lu and saw this id be incredibly amazed at the amount of time people would waste on meeveryone has an opinion about vce i dont see why a 14 page thread needs to be started just because a person with 99.95 made a few points.
No matter who wrote it, the points brought up are still valid.
Although, this thread may be seen as coal, steaming up the guys apparently large ego.
... who cares about james lu seriously its just another persons opinion who seemed to ace VCE. WHO CARES GET OVER IT farrrrrr people arguing about one persons opinion is sad. 14 pages of nothing but james lu god if i was james lu and saw this id be incredibly amazed at the amount of time people would waste on me
at this point i riposte vigorously with a veritable lexicon of polysyllabic, illogical procession of compound adjectives.
what if there were no aggregate, only study scores? university courses would be more detailed in their pre-requisites and so students do the pre-req subjects that lead into their career choice. there would be no need for scaling and students would do what they were interested in. of course universities would look for students who have a broad range of subjects like LOTEs to indicate a lively intellectual curiosity. in this way uni admins will have to do a bit more than just ring up people on the day of results... but isnt that what's needed to improve this education system? to encourage a continued drive for obtaining a holistic education beyond high school? or year 10?
i hear you say this: most students do not know what they want to do for their careers.
i know. tell me about it. but in this case they would choose a broad range of subjects which most appeal to them to ensure maximum career path.
please comment and critique delineated replacement system.
my fingers are becoming tired. i end this post abrup
what if there were no aggregate, only study scores? university courses would be more detailed in their pre-requisites and so students do the pre-req subjects that lead into their career choice. there would be no need for scaling and students would do what they were interested in. of course universities would look for students who have a broad range of subjects like LOTEs to indicate a lively intellectual curiosity. in this way uni admins will have to do a bit more than just ring up people on the day of results... but isnt that what's needed to improve this education system? to encourage a continued drive for obtaining a holistic education beyond high school? or year 10?You seem to assume that universities care about things like intellectual curiosity and on improving the overall education system. They probably do, to some extent, but these matters are periphery. If it were the case that universities cared about being 'fair' then they would have already moved to a system similar to yours because ultimately they have complete control over admissions. But, the bottom-line tells them that this is unfeasible and you get people who did the Asian 5 with ESL get into a Law degree.
Nova, which one is Med?I am not too sure (hence I left it out :P), because I get confused between biomedicine, pharmacy etc, but it's definitely either Monash or Melbourne, but like I said, I get confused between those two ><
I'd put Melb as Med, having watched all their Biomedicine videos and what medical facilities they have!... :)
VCE = Showing how good you are at learning.
VCE = Showing how good you are at learning.
more like = showing how good you are at not making mistakes.
Scaling is only controversial because most people don't understand it.
Aside from this, and I've said this before and will say it again. If you're already whining about how VCE assessments are done, wait until you get into university. Then you'll know what the meaning of unfair assessment is.
Scaling is only controversial because most people don't understand it.
Aside from this, and I've said this before and will say it again. If you're already whining about how VCE assessments are done, wait until you get into university. Then you'll know what the meaning of unfair assessment is.
Scaling is only controversial because most people don't understand it.
Aside from this, and I've said this before and will say it again. If you're already whining about how VCE assessments are done, wait until you get into university. Then you'll know what the meaning of unfair assessment is.
How is it unfair?
Scaling is only controversial because most people don't understand it.
Aside from this, and I've said this before and will say it again. If you're already whining about how VCE assessments are done, wait until you get into university. Then you'll know what the meaning of unfair assessment is.
How is it unfair?
Yeah I'm kind of lost with that statement of yours. Uni for me has been incredibly fair so far.
Scaling is only controversial because most people don't understand it.
Aside from this, and I've said this before and will say it again. If you're already whining about how VCE assessments are done, wait until you get into university. Then you'll know what the meaning of unfair assessment is.
How is it unfair?
Yeah I'm kind of lost with that statement of yours. Uni for me has been incredibly fair so far.
Say if you were to get a good GPA, different subjects dont have the same average mark; e.g. if you took subject 1 it would take 5 hours to study and get a good mark, then if you took subject 2 it would take 15 hours to get a good mark. Since the exam is written by usually a few people, the lecturers, then theres no set study design and they can often put something in there they is unknown or touched on lightly.
Zach Charge, and everyone else, I think I have an answer to that, and Eriny's post about "rote learning"
I think you hit it on the nail without intending to, or noticing!
Okay, teacehrs teach us the subject....they filter the "important" things from the tetxbook, i.e. what we should know, and is relevant to the study design, and what isn't just a repeat of a previous chapter or concept. <<<everyone is arguing this is bad....we are just taught by the syllabus.
Well!!! *I am so hypo at this point* thats just it! the majority of stduents i.e. 90% of the class? Will TAKE this information, merely do the board questions, homework, and read the prescribed chapters to scrape through, get a "good" mark.
WELL, come EXAM TIME, examienrs need to DIFFERENTIATE between those 90% of students who merely follow the rule book, and the SMALL number who do their OWN learning (such as myself).
For example, in English I got my OWN quotes (so did many of u guys on here), ratehr than use the "class handouts".....i read EXTRA context books and movies (rather than the prescribed texts), AND I handed in extra essay questions........well guess what, that put me ABOVE my peers to GET the mark I got =D (40's)
Ladies and gentlemen, from what my teacehrs have told me throughout VCE, is to NOT just do what they have taught us, they always told the class "get your own statsitics (for economics)......learn new words (for english).....do every excersie in the book (for maths).......not just the MINIMUM.
THIS is what makes the difference between a person with an ENTER of 50 and an ENETR of 70+ (i reckon 80).
The system is designed to reward those who are DIFFERENT, and have done their own independent learning.....
I think this has answered a big question in these last 7 or say pages =D