James Lu should be happy he got 99.95 and stop dishing out on the VCE

[tristan]

I will tentatively put my hand up and say that I wrote that letter to The Age.  Firstly, congratulations to you James - well done.  

I fear that parts of my letter have been misunderstood.  It was written in haste, and I misread the main thrust of his argument (EDIT: major stuff up - this is certainly the case as I didn't even know there was a letter till now, only knew of the quotes on the front page that must have been taken from his letter.  I thought it was from an interview of some kind) and was probably a little too cutting as well in retrospect.  I understand that scaling is determined by comparing the strength of a cohort in a subject to those in other cohorts.  
But, I'll try and be more articulate.  What I was trying to say in the last few lines was to imagine a system, hypothetically, that didn't use scaling/or resemble what actually exists in the VCE.  If scaling didn't exist, and if you selected a group of high achieving students who would've otherwise performed well in Specialist Maths, for example, and placed them in a less competitive group, you may have a situation where a small select group of students could exploit a lack of competition in other subjects where exams had been written to distribute grades among a group that had been traditionally, less competitive.  (Maybe you would have to assume that their high marks alone are not in such a large number that would cause a skew/banding of marks)  And I suppose the less competitive subjects are perceived to be 'conceptually easier' perhaps.  That was poor wording/explanation.    

I agree with James overall - VCE almost forces students to obsess over exams and mark ranges rather than focusing on learning itself.  I think this tends to subside in university, especially when there isn't the pressure of getting in.  But the obsession with exams may soon return if you're looking at competitive honours programs, for example.  Perhaps it's hard to avoid when there is no ideal system.

Tristan.

[natty]

I am not sure which arguments I agree with for this discussion, I have opinions for both sides.

However as for the argument that most people choose LOTE because of the scaling, I chose to study a language because of my passion for it. They are extremely difficult subjects in VCE and require a lot of hard work to succeed. My class was made up of students who were focused on learning as much as possible and improving our knowledge, rather than worrying about exams. While I'm sure there are students who select a LOTE for the added scaling, for many of us, this is simply an added bonus to a subject that we truly want to study.

[minilunchbox]

I would want to go to a US university to experience ~dorm life and the thrill of moving to the other side of the country (but that would only be if I actually grew up there). From what I've heard undergrad is practically impossible to get in if you did VCE/schooling from Australia.

...Maybe Postgrad.

Also I know teachers and students really emphasise on the study design. Most of the people I know (woo public school) are completely unmotivated to do even a fraction more of what they need to. Subjects are generally chosen because they're a good bludge and they're there to be that extra 5th subject. My friends pretty much looked at me as if I were crazy when I started reading up on extra material irrelevant to the biology study design but for my own interest. However, I do believe that these restrictions are necessary as examinations would be hard to conduct. There was something from Unit 4 that popped in the Unit 3 biology exam and was worth quite a few marks and obviously the teacher didn't teach us and got quite annoyed.

As for scaling, our teachers strongly encourage us to do a LOTE due to it's scaling and for capable maths students to do Further in year 11 because it's easy marks. I dropped my LOTE (Japanese) and refused to do Further which annoyed some of my teachers, but I didn't want to do a subject which I would most likely not enjoy just for a few extra marks.

Honestly, I'm one of those crazy people who likes to learn for the sake of learning.

[m@tty]

It is impossible to remove focus from testing when it means so much. People focus on typical exam questions for their subjects because that is the only thing that matters. VCAA can't examine anything outside the syllabus, so why would someone spend time on such 'useless' material - that is, material which will be of no benefit for their SS and finally their ENTER/ATAR.

As the syllabus is generally fairly narrow, and it must be to accommodate the less 'academic' people studying 4, 5 or even 6 subjects, questions which come up in the exam are very predictable. Furthermore, there are many question which come up every year, students would be stupid to miss out on such marks. Yes, these are generally fairly easy questions, but, I believe that without an exam focus many would have trouble completing even these questions.
VCE must cater for a wide range of students, just as an example, it is now the norm for those looking to get into a trade to complete VCE. Not all of these students will pursue further education as they don't 'need' it.

Many people just want to pass, to scrape in. They don't care for doing well, they don't care for excelling, they don't care for anything... other than moving on from 'boring' school - which robs them of 'life'. Clearly this is where educational 'inertia' is formed - that is, a tendency not to engage with learning. Thus, to rectify this problem we must provoke a desire within students for learning itself. This would best be initiated in early childhood. Though this is only half the dilemma, at the other end of the scale there is those who desire high end scores.

Our tertiary entrance system is based on ranking our entire year 12 population, this is where the problem arises. To obtain a higher ranking you must beat your fellow student, there are many ways to do so, some notable others subversive. A student who focuses entirely on their ranking would utilise any and all such tactics to accomplish a better score for themselves. A smart student would ask themselves. What counts most towards my SS? Hopefully they will realise the exam(s) do. Therefore, the best way to increase their SS would be to better their performance on the exam(s). I am sure you have heard the maxim 'practice makes perfect'. With this in mind, what should the smart student do? Practice for their exam(s). This is the other extreme found in students, a desperate chase for SS and ENTER/ATAR points, these students would devote all their time to the 'demands' of VCE. If we must fit in as much practice for exams as we can, where is the time to pursue content outside the syllabus?

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.

Wow, got abit carried away Anyway now you can all se my failz english skills 568 words!

[Tashi]

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.

Cool analogy. Yeah, it's weird to think your friends are your competitors lol. Sabotage! (no I would never do that hehe)

[Skraal]

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".

i see this point keeps coming up. as bad as it might seem for VCE, this is an important life skill. I'm studying medicine at the moment, doing my final year at melbourne next year. If I did medicine just to learn, i'd probably end up reading all about anatomy... Will that make me a capable doctor when i finish?? HELL NO! when they teach us at the hospitals, they often emphasize points that are worth learning/important points/examinable points because they are actually the absolutely important things we need to learn to succeed in our careers. sure in an ideal world i'd love to learn every facet there is to med, but lets face it, the human mind can only take so much info in (and remembering that study isn't everything), i really don't have time to learn everythign there is to the latest research into the most obscure diseases... so pointing out important things is vital.

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.

as for this point... lol a while ago i would've agreed with you. but having just completed my women's health rotation and exam (the written exam has 30 long answer questions, 25-28 of which are drawn from a bank of previous questions that we have access to), i realised that actually reading up on how to answer those questions in the bank (rather than looking up the pre-written answers i also had access to!), really taught me all the points i actually needed to learn on women's health....

having said all that, congrats to all the people who just got their VCE results!

ps. I graduated in the year 2004, where a student scored perfect 50's in all his subjects (5 in yr 12 and 1 in yr 11), but wasn't the highest aggregate in the state by any means because only 1 subject scaled above 50, he got beaten by a girl, who did i think 3 or 4 subjects that scaled above 50, who didn't get perfect 50's in all her subjects :/ (both of them are insanely smart though!)

pps. bad luck to james for having his article butchered by the age

[chansthename]

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!)

plus even if the exact letter was sent in but he had gotten either something like 90 which is a good score but not the best or even something that i kinda disappointing like 50, then he would have been discredited for simply complaining about his score so it's not like he has much options for not coming off in a bad light to some people.

[xXNovaxX]

Err, why would people or the majority choose subjects merely based on them scaling higher?

All my subjects scaled down lest 2 and i didn't pick up specialist maths, or a LOTE etc all which scale up?

WHY? Not because of the system or trying to get the "best", but because I genuinely wasn't interested in the aforementioned subjects.....I would gladly do a subject which scales down if it is something I enjoy doing and have a desire to learn, and I think it goes for many students.

EDIT: In regards to my first line, what I am trying to say I don't think this is the case where the majority are having their subject choice influenced by scaling...or that the VCE system is to be blamed for stirring up this mentality

[chansthename]

one of the thing that im mixed about is the fact that the majority of our score is totally dependant on what happens in a 3 hour time while we spend the whole year learning. The Exam is the bane of your study scores which in effect shape your enter. the exam also affects your SACs therefore leaving a 3 hour period of time to show what you spent a year learning.

WRT to languages, I did japanese till I dropped it after year 10, I don't believe that I learnt anything new since grade 6 where I finished learning the alphabet. there was no progress at all and I was seeming to just keep getting worse and worse at it. I was doing it plainly for scaling and the fact that I was doing well in the early years. The languages are also more than just 4 units done over two years like all the other subjects are. The languages pull on the basic knowlegde that was instilled from year 7 if not primary school. To do well in a language means putting in the effort from the start rather than at the start of year 12 or 11.

The outcome of your schooling is only based on the one year, since that is the case, I highly do not believe that we are being pushed hard enough from the beginning. We seem to just be going really slowly learning next to nothing in the earlier years (i'm focussing on secondary school). There is a sudden jump in year 11 where you need to pull a bit of weight for a good result, yet to be honest it doesn't take much to pass. then there is a big final year where what you have learnt in the past 5 years of schooling has little benefit compared o what you learn in year 12.

The system uses a focal point for determining the extent of knowledge that a student possesses. Perhaps it should focus more upon a whole rather than this one time when everything counts.

(sorry about the formatting and punctuation (or lack thereof))

[kyzoo]

About doing LOTEs purely for scaling, LOTEs are difficult subjects that require excessive amounts of effort. The average student will achieve a higher SS by diverting that effort to another subject, even after scaling. Take Chinese for example, let's say the average student will score 30 RAW. That scales up to 42. Yet, even a 30 RAW is a gargantuan endeavour for non-background students. If instead, this student applied the same effort to a standard subject like Methods, he/she will get at least 40 RAW which scales up to 45.

[Ilovemathsmeth]

LOL, I was actually doing French 1/2 and was doing above average in it, I just started hating the subject so much towards the end (like all the work it involves, piles of work sheets, heaps of vocab to memorise) that I dropped it. I kind of wish I hadn't, and continued slogging away with it. Perhaps I'd have been at an advantage by all its scaling.

[NE2000]

What we need are ideas to reform the system. OK it has its flaws, but what system doesn't? And how can we improve it?

How about judging a large portion of assessment on sciences on an independent learning project to be undertaken throughout the year. Say after three months of having an overview of the various aspects of the course a student picks a particular area to undertake their independent learning project. The system will be the same as before, except possibly with less SACs, and then at the end of the year, at a specific deadline, you have to hand in a report. This will encourage you to think beyond the course (even if you are only marks-orientated, because in-depth learning and expansion beyond syllabus = better marks) and perhaps even introduce you to the sophisticated nature of higher level research.

[wildareal]

Perhaps I have been a bit hard on James. Well done on his fantastic achievement, however I do believe his sentiments were a bit hyperbolic. In my opinion I do not believe he understands why it is necessary to have scaling in the first place.

Why does Scaling exist?

VCE is unlike most Higher School certificates. Where in the world can students pick subjects at whim, from Bus Man to Spec Maths to Woodwork? Scaling exists because of the wide range of subjects. If we had a generic system of subjects such as with the IB, it would be a different story. All subjects at Standard or at Higher Level are developed to ensure that they involve the same level of difficulty. However with VCE this is not the case. It would be impossible to make Woodwork as hard as Spec, or make Spec the same level as woodwork. There is not a wide range as there is with the VCE, because the IB represents an older style of Education seen in HSC's of Europe whereby people choose generic subjects which cover broad areas of study. The beauty of the VCE lies in the fact that people can choose what they are good at, and in my opinion, this outweighs the "stereotypes of subject selection" so vehemently expounded by Mr. Lu.

In some respects, VCE may not allow people to go beyond the syllabus and develop a genuine love for learning; that's what Uni is for. VCE is a mere passport to University, and is only the very beginning of one's education. If Mr. Lu does not like the broad ways of the VCE, then he would be an excellent candidate for the IB. That said, he would not be able to do 2 Maths (which are scaled) combined with Environmental Science of which he received a perfect score.

If people choose subjects based on scaling that is their problem; VCAA does not encourage that, scaling is there to make the educational experience a level-playing field.

[m@tty]

Scaling was a minor focus of his letter. His contention was "Our education system" churning out "students who are afraid to fail, afraid to go beyond syllabus requirements, and perhaps even afraid to genuinely learn."

[wildareal]

Very true, but I read that this was because people chose subjects based on scaling, not out of genuine interest.