How many students commit suicide from a low ENTER?

[ZachCharge]

Err, I'm in favour of top 4 English because if English wasn't forced on me I would have never learned how to appreciate a novel, or how to appreciate writing as an activity; I would have just hated writing for the rest of my life and doing English has prevented this.

Doesn't work on everyone though. I still dislike most fiction, and did not gain any value from VCE English!

This didn't work on me either, I hate fiction and I got no value from VCE English. 

Maybe English should be made to be more relevant. In all honesty after schooling you rarely have to write essays or respond to texts in essay form (maybe a review though). Also, do we really have to be THAT detailed when figuring out how the media is trying to use us? I would love some sort of English Oratory class, being decent at public speaking and speaking to strangers is always a handy skill to have and relates to a wide variety of careers.

On topic, as been said before, I doubt anyone would kill themselves JUST over their enter/atar. It's just the tip of the iceberg.

[xXNovaxX]

I don't get it exactly

Like is it safe to assume those likely to suicide are those in the 80's-99.95? Like where it's SO much more competitive? And to "move up" is extremely difficult?

Because COME ON, you would be an absolute idiot if you cannot tell you will get an ENTER of 60 or below. Your SACS and coursework are a PERFECT indicator of your performance.

I know a dozen people who got <60 and all scored C's and D's with a one or two E's in SACS. To suicide over something that was decided after your SAC results is beyond me.

However for smart people who get perfect scores, I think they are the main ones to suicide because they are used to getting 100% in everything, so getting a 97 instead of a 99 is  a hit in the gut

[kyzoo]

- to ZachCharge: there's this series of club called ToastMasters where you can practice public speaking.

- to Nova: Maybe SAC scores of Cs, Ds, and Es indicate a low ENTER score, but when you get to the higher range of SAC scores, they don't mean very much. I was ranking 5-10 in SACs and I moved up to rank 2 after study scores were released, whereas a person in my class who was rank 2 in the cohort at the very least moved down to 10-20. Also I know several people who didn't achieve SAC prizes yet still acquired a 50.

[brightsky]

Having English is a mandatory top 4 does have its advantages though...it encourages people to try harder in English and therefore have a good foundation going into an English speaking society (good for future jobs too!). However, it's also unfair that the VCE system coerces you to feel thatbecause you're crap at English, you're crap overall.

[ZachCharge]

- to ZachCharge: there's this series of club called ToastMasters where you can practice public speaking.

Even so, my point was that VCE English isn't really relevant to a lot of people's lives.

Having English is a mandatory top 4 does have its advantages though...it encourages people to try harder in English and therefore have a good foundation going into an English speaking society (good for future jobs too!). However, it's also unfair that the VCE system coerces you to feel thatbecause you're crap at English, you're crap overall.

Isn't living in an English speaking country for 17ish years and doing English for at most 10 years (unless you're an immigrant) good enough foundation? Atm I don't really see how VCE English really can help you that much in the future (unless your job involves making a guide on writing structured VCE English essays for the exam or something lol).

[QuantumJG]

- to ZachCharge: there's this series of club called ToastMasters where you can practice public speaking.

Even so, my point was that VCE English isn't really relevant to a lot of people's lives.

Having English is a mandatory top 4 does have its advantages though...it encourages people to try harder in English and therefore have a good foundation going into an English speaking society (good for future jobs too!). However, it's also unfair that the VCE system coerces you to feel thatbecause you're crap at English, you're crap overall.

Isn't living in an English speaking country for 17ish years and doing English for at most 10 years (unless you're an immigrant) good enough foundation? Atm I don't really see how VCE English really can help you that much in the future (unless your job involves making a guide on writing structured VCE English essays for the exam or something lol).

lol

+1

[kyzoo]

People can live in a foreign country for a decade and still be embarrassingly insuffucient in that country's language.

Here is proof - http://www.antimoon.com/other/myths-country.htm

[xXNovaxX]

Although the following article does not list Education as an apparent reason, I did read once, and it would be common sense that for those who care about their education so much, it has led to suicide. I feel really bad seeing such a high figure, it's way higher than car crashes, and possibly even certain types of illness? 
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/japanese-suicides-top-30000-for-12th-year/story-e6frf7jo-1225813661819

Japanese suicides top 30,000 for 12th year

AFP From: AFP December 25, 2009 8:39PM

THE number of suicides in Japan exceeded 30,000 in 2009 for a 12th consecutive year, police said today.


A total of 30,181 people killed themselves between January and November, the National Police Agency said, despite government efforts including more counselling services to deter people from taking their own lives.

Japan has one of the world's highest suicide rates, behind only a group of former Soviet bloc countries, says the World Health Organization.

The number of suicides a year in Japan hit the 30,000 mark for the first time in 1998, when the world's second-largest economy was struggling with a number of corporate bankruptcies and soaring jobless rates.

Experts have warned more people may commit suicide as the economy has been hit severely by the global financial crisis

[wildareal]

I think the problem with VCE is that, unlike IB, the subjects are not homogenous and broad. There are simply too many subjects of varying difficulties which is IMO why scaling exists. To solve this problem there should be a revamp where there are only like 15 maximum subjects offered: IE: Maths, English, Sciences, LOTE's, Humanities etc-like in the IB. The way IB works is that it solves this problem by making people pick 3 at a Standard level and 3 at a Higher Level, which is very fair, so that good Maths students pick HL Maths and good English students pick HL English.

[akira88]

I think the problem with VCE is that, unlike IB, the subjects are not homogenous and broad. There are simply too many subjects of varying difficulties which is IMO why scaling exists. To solve this problem there should be a revamp where there are only like 15 maximum subjects offered: IE: Maths, English, Sciences, LOTE's, Humanities etc-like in the IB. The way IB works is that it solves this problem by making people pick 3 at a Standard level and 3 at a Higher Level, which is very fair, so that good Maths students pick HL Maths and good English students pick HL English.

But it's the variety of the subjects offered by VCE that makes it different to IB. It's true that you say that there are varying difficulties between subjects, but how would you define "difficulty"? In my opinion subjects like history would be very difficult, whereas chemistry is not as difficult. VCE plays to each individual's strengths, be it arts or science. Despite what I have said though, it does suck for those people who do well in humanities but just miss out on a high 99 ATAR because their subjects do not scale over 50

[kyzoo]

I think the problem with VCE is that, unlike IB, the subjects are not homogenous and broad. There are simply too many subjects of varying difficulties which is IMO why scaling exists. To solve this problem there should be a revamp where there are only like 15 maximum subjects offered: IE: Maths, English, Sciences, LOTE's, Humanities etc-like in the IB. The way IB works is that it solves this problem by making people pick 3 at a Standard level and 3 at a Higher Level, which is very fair, so that good Maths students pick HL Maths and good English students pick HL English.

But it's the variety of the subjects offered by VCE that makes it different to IB. It's true that you say that there are varying difficulties between subjects, but how would you define "difficulty"? In my opinion subjects like history would be very difficult, whereas chemistry is not as difficult. VCE plays to each individual's strengths, be it arts or science. Despite what I have said though, it does suck for those people who do well in humanities but just miss out on a high 99 ATAR because their subjects do not scale over 50

xD that reminds me of this guy from our school last year who would have got 99.95 if any one of his humanities subject scaled over 50 (Lit, Philosophy, National Politics)

[akira88]

I think the problem with VCE is that, unlike IB, the subjects are not homogenous and broad. There are simply too many subjects of varying difficulties which is IMO why scaling exists. To solve this problem there should be a revamp where there are only like 15 maximum subjects offered: IE: Maths, English, Sciences, LOTE's, Humanities etc-like in the IB. The way IB works is that it solves this problem by making people pick 3 at a Standard level and 3 at a Higher Level, which is very fair, so that good Maths students pick HL Maths and good English students pick HL English.

But it's the variety of the subjects offered by VCE that makes it different to IB. It's true that you say that there are varying difficulties between subjects, but how would you define "difficulty"? In my opinion subjects like history would be very difficult, whereas chemistry is not as difficult. VCE plays to each individual's strengths, be it arts or science. Despite what I have said though, it does suck for those people who do well in humanities but just miss out on a high 99 ATAR because their subjects do not scale over 50

xD that reminds me of this guy from our school last year who would have got 99.95 if any one of his humanities subject scaled over 50 (Lit, Philosophy, National Politics)

That would suck Ah well ATAR is only a number anyways...

[ben92]

It's not even a number in effect - it's a Yes/No on whether you can get your 1st preference for most.

[stonecold]

It's not even a number in effect - it's a Yes/No on whether you can get your 1st preference for most.

Nahh, that is the UMAT...

[ben92]

Well in effect our ATAR let's us into our course or it doesn't. It's not like your future degree increments in value the higher you go over the requirement. The only exception I can think of is if you manage to get a scholarship.

Edit: Before someone points it out, there would be considerable bragging rights in getting a score way higher than what your course requires, but this is a supplementary purpose of the ATAR. First and foremost, it's to get you into your course. Thus, it's a more a boolean than a number with regard to its impact on you as an individual.