Ranking in SAC's

[clinton_09]

im a little confused is it more important to rank high in the SAC's when there's more people or not many people

[Eriny]

It's just important to rank high in SACs full stop. I suppose the less people there are, the more important it is to rank highly because the cohort would probably be less competitive. But if your in a class with 6 geniuses, then you'll probably do okay regardless of where you rank. So it depends more on the intelligence of the class than the size of it.

[droodles]

im in an english class with toothpick, now thats what i call competitive.


although i am hardly close to her standard of articulate essay writing

[Nick]

It is pretty confusing but it's probably best to just not delve too much into it. Just aim high and all the numbers will sort themselves out.

[iamdan08]

Just a quick question. Does the person ranked first in the cohort in SACs automatically get the highest study score for the subject, or can somone ranked 3rd or 4th who does better in the exam get a better study score than first?

[dcc]

I dont think the highest ranking in SAC's automatically gets the highest study score as I got second for my SAC's in ITSD, yet the next highest score was a 35ish

[iamdan08]

Yeah its just i dont know why people make such a big deal with rankings! If somone does better in the exam they deserve the better study score.

[Eriny]

Usually the person who does the best in SACs will get the higher exam score anyway. But regardless, it's all a part of the moderation process. If exams were all that mattered, why bother with SACs?

[iamdan08]

Yeah i suppose. Its just say, if the teacher favoured one student over the other and gave them leniant marks, they might outrank you but may not necesarily be better. This isn't happening with me, but i was just curious.

[Eriny]

That would be pretty bad, but I don't think the system itself can do anything about it. I suppose if somebody has suspicions of bias they'd be wise to speak to the co-ordinator. They may not be taken seriously though, heaps of students who complain of bias are really just bad and don't realise it.

[?HI?]

Ranking isn't as important as exam score, when considering the individual. BUT when it comes to school performance, whoever is ranked 1st is important as this guy affects the moderation process for your school's SAC marks. My teacher explained to me previously that the person ranked 1st should theoretically do the best in the exam. If this best scenario occurs, then scores will generally be moderated up higher than if the top ranked guy didn't do as well.

That's why teachers do not usually put people on the same rank (eg. equal 1st), as this can ruin the potential higher moderation if one person does well while the other person doesn't.

[iamdan08]

So wait, my understanding is wrong. The person ranked first doesn't necesarily get the highest exam score regardless of how he performs. And the person ranked second gets the second highest exam score?

[?HI?]

Exam score is absolute - that is, whoever gets highest gets the highest. SAC scores are moderated depending on the student performances of a school.

HOWEVER even after SAC scores are moderated, the ranking remains the SAME. That is why it is essential to get the ranking as 'right' as possible to maximise the chance of the school getting high(er) study scores in the subject (as opposed to getting the rankings 'wrong', eg. rank 1 guy gets crappest exam mark).

[iamdan08]

Ohhhh...so just say I get 90% on the exam, that 90% is mine reguardless of ranking?

[Mao]

yes dan

however, you dont necessarily get to take that 90% for your other GAs, and those GAs dont necessarily take the exact score you get for your SACs, but rather, your ranking exam score.