School Rankings

[pi]

pi, just on points #4 and #5:

#4: I thought the rankings were determined by % of RAW study scores over 40, in which case having lots of kids get low 40's in BM would help, not hinder?
#5: Trust me, the physics department at MacRob is absolutely horrible too. My friend had to basically teach herself the course, since she didn't get a tutor. But in fairness, MHS has a larger physics cohort than MacRob so a crap physics department would affect stats a lot more.

#4 We have more 30s (esp in the 37-39 range), that drags us down. This point was just my opinion, I'm not sure if its even valid tbh

#5 The number of people in mhs doing phsyics is like 4x Mac.Rob's number though.


But these are minor points, poor subject selection is our fault. #3 is far more significant imo

Moderator action: removed real name, sorry for the inconvenience

[Menang]

pi, just on points #4 and #5:

#4: I thought the rankings were determined by % of RAW study scores over 40, in which case having lots of kids get low 40's in BM would help, not hinder?
#5: Trust me, the physics department at MacRob is absolutely horrible too. My friend had to basically teach herself the course, since she didn't get a tutor. But in fairness, MHS has a larger physics cohort than MacRob so a crap physics department would affect stats a lot more.

#4 We have more 30s (esp in the 37-39 range), that drags us down. This point was just my opinion, I'm not sure if its even valid tbh

#5 The number of people in mhs doing phsyics is like 4x Mac.Rob's number though.


But these are minor points, poor subject selection is our fault. #3 is far more significant imo

Ahaha I don't know if you'll win just by cutting off 100 students. We can't really test it, but my hypothesis:

1. If you cut 100 students at random, then it will make minimal difference and MacRob will probably win.
2. If you cut the bottom 100 students then yeah, MHS will win, but that's not really fair, is it? MacRob has a smaller cohort, so if we, hypothetically and purely statistically, cut just the bottom 30-50 people then we'd do much, much better too.

Moderator action: removed real name, sorry for the inconvenience

[pi]

But why would we cut 100 random students? We could cut the bottom hundred wouldn't we, assuming that that is the same bottom 100 from the entrance exam (there would be a lot of similarities between the bottom 100 of the entrance and the bottom 100 of VCE imo).

It's all hypothetical anyway, but I think if we had a smaller cohort from the start, we would probably win.


EVEN IF that is true, there is no doubt that #1 is true, and that is that Mac.Rob deserved their rank, and I don't think my hypothetical rebuttal should stand in the way of that

[pi]

This is interesting, from The Age: http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/compare-school-scores

[Vincezor]

Haha wow... Glen Waverley SC best non-selective government school! Surprising we JUST edged out McKinnon - hats off to them as well!

[funkyducky]

10th/11th up from 27th/28th last year!!! AWESOME.

[Charmz]

I don't know what you guys are complaining about. #4 sounds pretty good when you have my school somewhere at 365. And our average SS was 25.

[thushan]

Did some tinkering and came up with this:

[jane1234]

Did some tinkering and came up with this:

Is this for this years? Coz my school isn't right... don't know about the others...

[Lasercookie]

Did some tinkering and came up with this:

Is this for this years? Coz my school isn't right... don't know about the others...

Yeah, I looked at my school - it's the data for 2010.

edit: from just looking at a few random schools, median seems to be 2011 data, percentage seems to be older data.

[Random_Guy]

What is Melbourne Grammar ranked?

[funkyducky]

Nope it's 2011 data, just ranked by Median SS, not % over 40.

[jane1234]

Nope it's 2011 data, just ranked by Median SS, not % over 40.

But the %40 data is wrong... it's 2010 instead of 2011...

[thushan]

Dunno, I got the data from The Age

[Tobias Funke]

Who cares? Really?
I saw this coming, predicted a low Median ATAR due to a range of things, the fact that we had an increased amount of people in for sport, and kids who didn't really care as much for school. But what's wrong with that? I had a great year and so did all my mates and I truly doubt they'd give a fuck that we were outperformed by two private schools that probably have much less students to deal with, same with MacRob who apparently embrace a much greater focus on academia. I doubt the school does either.