Getting a 'decent' ATAR Score

[Menang]

From personal experience, going to a school with generally weak cohorts makes getting a strong ATAR score immensely difficult.

Being in a strong cohort only has one substantial advantage, really, and that is that there's no pressure to maintain a #1 rank to get a good GA grade for SACs.

Everything else is up to you. We all sit the same exams, marked by the same group of markers, who read a student number and your responses. They [the markers] will have no idea which school you go to (telling them is illegal or something). By the end of the day, we're all at a level playing field.

There's so much more than that. What about the fact that you're surrounded by more driven and generally more academically intellectual students? Going to a 'bad' school exposes you to the detrimental sub-culture of 'who gives a shit about an education' which makes thriving in a school environment really difficult. Not only are you tempted to follow the paths of others, based on peer pressure or whatever, but the overall morale of the teachers is incredibly damaged, leading to poorer quality teaching. I'm certainly not saying students like this don't exist in all schools, I know they do, however there is certainly a lot more of them in the public system.

In addition to this, while there's a fair bit of debate on the topic I think it's fair to say that private or selective schools have a far greater teaching staff than others.


I would never say that those who attend schools with generally weaker cohorts cannot achieve immense success, to say so is ridiculous and would spit in the face off every ounce of effort I've put in my own VCE. However, going to a school with generally stronger cohorts greatly improves your chances.

Nah, you're right, there are definitely psychological advantages of being immersed in an environment of a selective school. I should have phrased what I said better: by 'substantial advantage' I really meant a formally institutionalised advantage. That's the whole point of schools like MacRob and Melbourne High though - not to beat the ATAR system but to enhance students intellectually by placing smart kids in the same classroom.

Regarding teachers, like Ghost said, there's a range of really great and really inept teachers at both selective and public schools. Having never been to a private school, I can't speak for that sector of education, but from what I've heard they seem to get better teachers. I went to a public school before MacRob (a decent cohort, though, so my experience isn't too varied) and I had some amazing, inspiring teachers.

But I still believe in what I said before - there are resources out there (including ATARNotes) available for all VCE students and in the end the exam - which is the ultimate discriminating factor in terms of sorting out study scores - is the same for everyone. Aside from psychological 'nurture' advantages (which is the reason why we have selective schools), VCE really leaves the door for achievement wide open for any student from any school.

[aiming_95]

...make this website your bible...

Just remember AtarNotes can get mightly addictive, so don't (can't think of a better word) waste spend too much time on here when you should be studying.

I see where you are coming from, even great things need to be used in moderation.

[flash36]

In regard to Ghost's comments; that's all dubious rhetoric that I've heard a thousand times before. If you want a good ATAR you don't need your classmates to be 'driven', regardless of the so-called 'sub-culture' you mentioned. I went to a poor school with poor facilities, poor resources (namely the teachers apart from a few) and a poor work ethic collectively as a year level of 75 kids. My year level had 11 people get 90 or above.

I'm sorry, but if you want a high score bad enough and are willing to work for it, it's irrelevant what school you attend. Of course there are always exceptions, but what you've said in the above post is a load of **** in my humble opinion. I'm not attacking you personally, as many people share the same views. I was one of these people until I completed year 12.

[Truck]

In regard to Ghost's comments; that's all dubious rhetoric that I've heard a thousand times before. If you want a good ATAR you don't need your classmates to be 'driven', regardless of the so-called 'sub-culture' you mentioned. I went to a poor school with poor facilities, poor resources (namely the teachers apart from a few) and a poor work ethic collectively as a year level of 75 kids. My year level had 11 people get 90 or above.

I'm sorry, but if you want a high score bad enough and are willing to work for it, it's irrelevant what school you attend. Of course there are always exceptions, but what you've said in the above post is a load of **** in my humble opinion. I'm not attacking you personally, as many people share the same views. I was one of these people until I completed year 12.

Yes you got 11 people who got a score over 90. Do you realize that for a top private school that'd be considered one of the worst results they've had in years? It's by no means a bad result, but look at the scores the top 20 schools for VCE achieve - it is a lot easier to do better at a school near the top then it is in a lowly public school, not to say that it's impossible to do well at a shit school (it isn't), but it's all about odds and there is no doubt in my mind that attending a top school will help you do a lot better (and the statistics agree with me).

[Lasercookie]

Yes you got 11 people who got a score over 90. Do you realize that for a top private school that'd be considered one of the worst results they've had in years? It's by no means a bad result, but look at the scores the top 20 schools for VCE achieve - it is a lot easier to do better at a school near the top then it is in a lowly public school, not to say that it's impossible to do well at a shit school (it isn't), but it's all about odds and there is no doubt in my mind that attending a top school will help you do a lot better (and the statistics agree with me).

I don't mean to disrupt the discussion on whether it is easier or not to achieve a high score at a top school (I wouldn't know), but whether or not it's easier is an irrelevant argument to what generalkorn12 wanted to know. Stuff like "11 people over 90" shows that it is possible to do well at a not-so-great school (and the statistics agree with me ).

[iffets12345]

That being said, you have to push yourself in the crappy school and KNOW that the top schools are potentially kicking your butt. You can't ever be happy with an A+ or a 95% in ur SAC when u go to a crappy school, but if you go to a good school you know that mark is probably going to be transparent across the exam and similar to what you will get. Whereas in a crappy school, they might have an easier SAC, cohort is weak, etc etc. Whilst its not impossible, you'll have to push yourself to know that the odds are against you.

[Truck]

Yes you got 11 people who got a score over 90. Do you realize that for a top private school that'd be considered one of the worst results they've had in years? It's by no means a bad result, but look at the scores the top 20 schools for VCE achieve - it is a lot easier to do better at a school near the top then it is in a lowly public school, not to say that it's impossible to do well at a shit school (it isn't), but it's all about odds and there is no doubt in my mind that attending a top school will help you do a lot better (and the statistics agree with me).

I don't mean to disrupt the discussion on whether it is easier or not to achieve a high score at a top school (I wouldn't know), but whether or not it's easier is an irrelevant argument to what generalkorn12 wanted to know. Stuff like "11 people over 90" shows that it is possible to do well at a not-so-great school (and the statistics agree with me ).

Yes, but the point I'm making is that while you "can" do it, most people will achieve worse ATAR's then they deserve by going to a crap school then if they had gone to a top school. The inequalities in our education system are pretty obvious, hell you go to a private school and you will be SPOON FED information, given incredible extra resources and facilities, the list goes on and on. It's entirely relevant because he's contending it makes no difference what school you go to, and imo the school you go to is one of the biggest differences... there's a reason parents pay $20,000 a year for top private schools, and that's because they produce the best results.

Again, he's completely right in saying you can achieve great results. MANY people do. But the reality is most people won't, and you only need to look at the ATAR rankings to see that schools do in fact make a difference. Whether or not you get a better education - well, we live in a country where there is unfortunately an outcomes based education system, and the "quality" of education is seemingly judged by our ATAR scores, so these schools are doing their job of pumping kids out to go to Melb Uni. And tbh their extra curricular stuff is pretty good too .

[Lasercookie]

Yes, but the point I'm making is that while you "can" do it, most people will achieve worse ATAR's then they deserve by going to a crap school then if they had gone to a top school.

So what you're saying is that if you take one of the poor performing students, that has a very poor attitude to study (as this would most likely be the majority in a poor performing school, and you are referring to most students), from a state school and put them into one of these fancy private schools, they will come out with a nice ATAR score?

In my opinion, studying hard and maintaining a work ethic that works (works meaning it gets you the grades you want) plays the bigger role in VCE. Perhaps these fancy schools manage to convince students of studying hard better (by providing the materials and such).

If you're after a 'decent ATAR score', that would probably mean you have a pretty good worth ethic and that is something a school cannot deprive you of.

[acinod]

The word 'decent' is subjective.
Depending on whichever school you go to, 'decent' could mean a lot of things. In my old school 85+ is considered 'decent', whereas something below 95 in more academic circles  may be considered a fail by some. Heck I even know some kids that consider anything below 99 to be a fail.

But to answer the OP's question: if 'decent' is 80-99 then, no you definitely don't have to go to a good school. However it helps. Not sure about anyone else but for me, working in an environment where the majority of my cohort is also striving for the best academically is incredibly motivation as it challenges me to perform at my utmost best.
Now onto the more statistical factor, a better school I would assume you mean a better cohort. A better cohort certainly boosts your SACs scores higher because SACs are just rankings and if your cohort does well in the exam, then your SAC marks will also go up. With this said, you can drop more marks in a school with a better cohort than one with a weaker cohort. Like at MHS, you would extremely appreciate getting an A+ and know you will still have the chance to get a really high study score but in a weaker cohort, an A+ could mean the difference between getting above or below 40 because you might not have the highest A+ in your year level. If you think about it, the school gives out a lot of A+ and in a weaker cohort, unless you all get A+ in the exam, these A+ from SACs may scale down to an A or B+ if you are not ranked high enough.

[Truck]

Yes, but the point I'm making is that while you "can" do it, most people will achieve worse ATAR's then they deserve by going to a crap school then if they had gone to a top school.

So what you're saying is that if you take one of the poor performing students, that has a very poor attitude to study (as this would most likely be the majority in a poor performing school, and you are referring to most students), from a state school and put them into one of these fancy private schools, they will come out with a nice ATAR score?

In my opinion, studying hard and maintaining a work ethic that works (works meaning it gets you the grades you want) plays the bigger role in VCE. Perhaps these fancy schools manage to convince students of studying hard better (by providing the materials and such).

If you're after a 'decent ATAR score', that would probably mean you have a pretty good worth ethic and that is something a school cannot deprive you of.

My argument would be that if you took one average student, who had gotten average grades through most of primary school, and you put him in one of two different schools - private/selective or public - if he went to the private/selective school he would have a lot more help from tutors, more resources, friends who are already aiming high etc, so it is easier for him to put in the work and achieve higher scores.

Conversely, if you put him in a public school, he's more likely to be in an environment where people are aiming lower, have worse facilities and less resources etc, and thus less likely for him to even be motivated enough to put in the work to get a higher study score.

Again, it's no coincidence that private/selective schools are the top schools of the state. Apart from the aforementioned reasons, if you go to one of these top schools it's easier to study and do well, because it's the type of environment where everyone does it... whereas at MOST public schools people don't care as much, have lower expectations, just a different type of environment. I guess what I'm saying is that the reason these poor students are "poor" and have a bad work ethic isn't just because of some inherent laziness, obviously for some kids school isn't for them, but it's also because the schools they go to breed that kind of "lazy" mentality, whether it's due to the people they study with or simply the institution itself.

[paulsterio]

First of all, can we get some consensus on what a "decent" ATAR Score actually is, I know to some people, that means just passing the damn VCE, to others, it means 80+, to others it means 90+, and to some it's 99+, yet I still know some who would be disappointed with a 99.95

[HarveyD]

disappointed with a 99.95? O_O

[Lasercookie]

First of all, can we get some consensus on what a "decent" ATAR Score actually is, I know to some people, that means just passing the damn VCE, to others, it means 80+, to others it means 90+, and to some it's 99+, yet I still know some who would be disappointed with a 99.95

I was going by the OP's definition:

decent ATAR Score (80-99)

@teewreck: I think I understand what you're getting at, the extra resources and such makes it easier to achieve high scores and that it is less unlikely that a fancy school could kill a student's motivation.

[Truck]

First of all, can we get some consensus on what a "decent" ATAR Score actually is, I know to some people, that means just passing the damn VCE, to others, it means 80+, to others it means 90+, and to some it's 99+, yet I still know some who would be disappointed with a 99.95

I was going by the OP's definition:

decent ATAR Score (80-99)

@teewreck: I think I understand what you're getting at, the extra resources and such makes it easier to achieve high scores and that it is less unlikely that a fancy school could kill a student's motivation.

Yeah pretty much, that's a nice summary .

Also I think "decent" is totally subjective, but I think the fact that it's relative to the school you go to kinda supports my point.

[Lasercookie]

Also I think "decent" is totally subjective, but I think the fact that it's relative to the school you go to kinda supports my point.

Trying to avoid circling back to the debate we just had, but I don't think ATAR goals is relative to the school. That's implying that everyone at a school has the exact same goals. Usually an ATAR goal will relate to what they plan to do after Year 12.

Clearly, everyone has different plans on what they intend to do once they've finished their secondary education.

I think you're placing too much emphasis on the school and too little on the individual.

edit: btw, I am agreeing on the fact that "decent" is totally subjective, just arguing against the second half the sentence.