Article about last year methods exams

[Smiley_]

http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/methods-acting-20140131-31rfy.html

It is impossible to cover here all that is wrong with the exams. In brief, the first exam and the first half of the second exam (for which a super-duper calculator is permitted) consist of formulaic, simple-step questions, a number of them contrived to the level of mathematical meaninglessness. The questions offer almost no challenge to a good student, and consequently this testing is akin to an Olympics shooting event, where a nervous misfire or two can mean the difference between a gold medal and an also-ran score.
The second half of the second exam consists of more involved, multi-part questions. Unfortunately, most of these questions are appalling, almost transcendent in their pure, artificial ugliness.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/methods-acting-20140131-31rfy.html#ixzz2sEOTEuPn

I didn't read the rest of it because I don't want to think about methods but others may be interested

[b^3]

http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/methods-acting-20140131-31rfy.html


I didn't read the rest of it because I don't want to think about methods but others may be interested

I didn't even have to open link to guess QEDcat (Marty and Burkard) wrote this

Honestly though, I agree with most of what they're saying. The curriculum needs a change for the better, that is not making the subject harder but rather changing the way the content is approached and assessed, considering that sometimes it comes down to silly mistakes or the ability to press buttons on a calculator separating two students of similar ability, rather than their understanding of the content.

It's a topic that comes up time and time again on AN, in which the debate seems to go around in circles and end up going nowhere unfortunately.

[brightsky]

I'll refrain from lambasting VCE maths here, but I have to say that those guys have hit the nail on the head. Anyone who has had the privilege of witnessing the raw beauty of maths will inevitably be disgusted by what the maths department of the VCAA has to offer. I sincerely hope, for the sake of those yet to enter the vortex that is the VCE, that the new curriculum will do maths some justice, and encourage students to develop genuine problem solving skills rather than memorise prescribed methods and techniques. Kudos to the Maths Masters for writing such a compelling article!

[b^3]

I'll refrain from lambasting VCE maths here, but I have to say that those guys have hit the nail on the head. Anyone who has had the privilege of witnessing the raw beauty of maths will inevitably be disgusted by what the maths department of the VCAA has to offer. I sincerely hope, for the sake of those yet to enter the vortex that is the VCE, that the new curriculum will do maths some justice, and encourage students to develop genuine problem solving skills rather than memorise prescribed methods and techniques. Kudos to the Maths Masters for writing such a compelling article!

While I think the Nat curriculum will be a bit of an improvement, I don't think it'll go far enough in the areas we want it to. In the sense it will still most likely be assessed how we're assessed now, with small mistakes separating students (the content doesn't look like it's changing too much, and other than a small step up in the way calculus is approached and defined, a lot looks a lot similar), we'll see though in time. The other thing I dislike about the nat cirriculum is the amount of statistics they're bringing into methods and spesh.

e.g. http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/SeniorSecondary/Mathematics/Specialist-Mathematics/Curriculum/SeniorSecondary#page=4