Is VCE fair?

[Chavi]

Given that one of the best ATAR predictors is one's postcode, I'd say no, it probably isn't fair.

Privilege doesn't guarantee intelligence, just privilege. A smart student will succeed in any school. An affluent student may not.

[Eriny]

Given that one of the best ATAR predictors is one's postcode, I'd say no, it probably isn't fair.

Privilege doesn't guarantee intelligence, just privilege. A smart student will succeed in any school. An affluent student may not.

I agree to an extent, but privilege does make a huge difference, especially to the average student.

[zomgSEAN]

Examinations are a necessary evil. If Albert Einstein fails the VCAA physics exam, it doesn't mean he's an idiot. VCE is just a gauge to help you get into uni. If you screw up your finals because you had a breakdown *bad luck* - it just means you can't cope under pressure or it wasn't your day - it doesn't mean you don't understand the content, or in Einstein's case that you won't still be able to win the Nobel prize or develop the theory of relativity.

The cost and effort you are proposing to reform something which is already functional cannot be justified against the relative (pun intended) unimportance of VCE.

Chavi, I feel that your comments are very naive. The only opportunity for reasonable tertiary study leading on to professional qualifications, is by performing in VCE. There is so much importance placed upon the scores you receive. It is the key point of selection into University. Performance on exams is necessary for near-future success.

The proposed unimportance of VCE is in conflict with the very website which we are now communicating on!
Please reconsider your comments.

VCE marks are not a litmus test for future success - in fact their only purpose is top assist in undergrad rankings for prospective uni students. Getting a 99.95 doesn't guarantee that you won't be out on the street in 10 years. And btw, if you miss out on your dream course, you can always transfer into it at a later date.

I didn't say VCE is unimportant I said it's relatively unimportant - just a technical hurdle to be safely negotiated. The fact only a tiny percentage of students such as you and I use this website just proves how *unimportant* VCE is for most students, and how *unimportant* it will be once you get accepted into uni.

And I don't believe that VCE is conducive for near-future success either. Think of the many tradesmen and blue-collar workers who are fulfilling happy lives without an ENTER score. As has been noted in one of the previous comments - come December time, and you'll give jack * about how you went. The fact that you adhere to the narrow parochialism that VCE is the only purpose of school, and that education for it's own quaint sake is meaningless without a score-ranking highlights your own naivety, not mine.

Should VCE measure ability to perform under strict, stressful conditions? Or should it measure a student's intellect and ability to learn the content of a subject?

When talking of success, I was referring exclusively to that of the academic field. I am fully aware of the fulfilling lives many blue-collar workers live.

But that's just it, we don't get accepted if we don't perform well. We can't reach that point of not-caring until we've spent the previous year caring a shitload.

I adhere to no such thing. I believe that school should PRIMARILY be an inspiring learning experience; one that encourages them to further their education. However, in performing that primary role, it also has to provide some system of ranking so that students may be selected fairly into tertiary education. The most fair way to achieve a coexistence of these roles is to reduce the impact the ranking has on the beauty of the academic experience.

The importance of VCE is decided by one's own wishes. For someone wishing to get into medicine STRAIGHT AFTER HIGH SCHOOL, it is of paramount importance. On the other hand, for someone who wishes to pursue medicine AT SOME STAGE in their life, it isn't of that much importance. The importance of VCE cannot be judged from an objective perspective; it will always be subject to personal goals.

[kyzoo]

Should VCE measure ability to perform under strict, stressful conditions? Or should it measure a student's intellect and ability to learn the content of a subject?

But that's just it, we don't get accepted if we don't perform well. We can't reach that point of not-caring until we've spent the previous year caring a shitload.

Purple text: It measures both? What's the problem with measuring performance under strict, stressful conditions? Isn't life full of that?

[zomgSEAN]

Should VCE measure ability to perform under strict, stressful conditions? Or should it measure a student's intellect and ability to learn the content of a subject?

But that's just it, we don't get accepted if we don't perform well. We can't reach that point of not-caring until we've spent the previous year caring a shitload.

Purple text: It measures both? What's the problem with measuring performance under strict, stressful conditions? Isn't life full of that?

I do not believe it does both in a fair, weighted manner. There is too much emphasis on the stressful situation, and not enough on testing a good proportion of the study design.
Multiple exams would reduce the stress for assessment, as well as allow more topics/concepts to be examined.

[Russ]

not enough on testing a good proportion of the study design.

I don't know, the VCAA are usually pretty good at getting a very broad range of topics into their exams. Even if it's just a minor questions, they usually get most stuff in.

[kyzoo]

Should VCE measure ability to perform under strict, stressful conditions? Or should it measure a student's intellect and ability to learn the content of a subject?

But that's just it, we don't get accepted if we don't perform well. We can't reach that point of not-caring until we've spent the previous year caring a shitload.

Purple text: It measures both? What's the problem with measuring performance under strict, stressful conditions? Isn't life full of that?

I do not believe it does both in a fair, weighted manner. There is too much emphasis on the stressful situation, and not enough on testing a good proportion of the study design.
Multiple exams would reduce the stress for assessment, as well as allow more topics/concepts to be examined.

I may be biased from my own experience, but the stress you experience in exams isn't really severe enough to cripple you if you know the whole course. Besides, overcoming stress is merely a matter of focus and concentration on the task at hand, and I think it's fair that exams test your ability to concentrate.

Question: What 3/4 did you do in Y11?

[iffets12345]

I like VCE. As mentioned previously, I believe an average student will do better in a certain school, but that's another discussion altogether so yes. Saying that it is even all around the state would be utter bullshit. But, VCE tries. we can't get things perfect and I appreciate what they're doing now. better than 100% on exams.
Also, my cousin in malaysia's doing 11 subjects. I'd rather do 6 in-depth that I like rather than 11 haphazardly. Good system overall. Maybe the degree of difficulty in some ways should be increased, I have alot of respect for the IB.

[happyhappyland]

I like VCE. As mentioned previously, I believe an average student will do better in a certain school, but that's another discussion altogether so yes. Saying that it is even all around the state would be utter bullshit. But, VCE tries. we can't get things perfect and I appreciate what they're doing now. better than 100% on exams.
Also, my cousin in malaysia's doing 11 subjects. I'd rather do 6 in-depth that I like rather than 11 haphazardly. Good system overall. Maybe the degree of difficulty in some ways should be increased, I have alot of respect for the IB.

I like how in IB how they make you do a language.

[iffets12345]

^ and philo

[Russ]

EE is the best part of IB I reckon.

[Michael0007]

You guys are a bunch of whining girls.

NOTHING IN THE WORLD IS FAIR. Even being born a female, you have less than a 50/50 chance.

If you really think VCE is that unfair, you would actually do something more about it than just getting your opinion heard in this forum. If you are not willing to change anything, don't complain.

[kyzoo]

You guys are a bunch of whining girls.

NOTHING IN THE WORLD IS FAIR. Even being born a female, you have less than a 50/50 chance.

If you really think VCE is that unfair, you would actually do something more about it than just getting your opinion heard in this forum. If you are not willing to change anything, don't complain.

LOL cool story

[slothpomba]

I think the VCE system is mostly fair but it still has a lot of flaws like any system.

What you get out, is a decent reflection of what you put in most of the time (or occasionally natural talent if you're doing rather well or poor subject choice if you're doing rather bad regardless...). There is a lot of choice so everyone out there can be at least partially satisfied and it gives you a good taste of what a certain subject is like and if you would want to pursue it in uni. I can confidently say, i've learnt more last year or this year than i have in the sum of all my other years of education.

My opinion is VCE is not intended to be an intelligence test (although sometimes it does end up that way; that is not the goal). It tests your capability to work hard and how well you study, which produces an atar score which allows you into uni. People who get rather low atars most likely didnt want to do VCE and want to go to uni, still you need to have a decent amount of study skills and at least do work every once in a while to not make uni a total waste of time.

As for multiple exams, the more times you would take an exam, the closer the result would be to what you deserve. Though, the argument is, how much closer? For most students i doubt it would differ drastically. Sometimes we forget theres a whole other world out there besides this VCE bubble, as someone else previously stated, running 3 extra exams, would cost 3 times as much. Again from a ultilitarian perspective, i dont really think this is the best way to blow a shitload of tax money (the government is pretty good at that though..), we could probably find something else better to spend it on.

If you look at this from the returns it will generate, in essence "what will we get out of this" it also doesn't work. Those 4 extra exams won't really make you much more intelligent or make you much more able to contribute to the economy, building australia and paying taxes in the long run, so for all that extra money, we're getting relatively little out of it.

The education system in general can be bias against those from a lower socioeconomic status or a crappy school but this is a flaw of the education system, not VCE as such. Some schools will always wind up with better teachers or more resources, SEAS does a little to alleviate this problem but not much, better education funding is best way to go about this but thats outside the scope of the article. An intelligent student will do well in any school but they could do so much better in a better equipped or private school, this holds true for the average student as well.

[Mulan]

I may be biased from my own experience, but the stress you experience in exams isn't really severe enough to cripple you if you know the whole course. Besides, overcoming stress is merely a matter of focus and concentration on the task at hand, and I think it's fair that exams test your ability to concentrate.

Question: What 3/4 did you do in Y11?

Does that mean you learnt all the 3 4 material before school started?