Predicted Study Scores

[kyzoo]

Not sure =/ You also have to account for the fact that much fewer people do Spesh than Methods, so there are less 50s, 49s, 48s, etc.

[Nixernator]

If I get an A for my SACS, but I got 39/40 for exam 1 (I think) and from reading others short answer questions I probably only lost marks on MC for exam 2, so maybe 75/80 for exam 2. Would I still be able to get like 45+ for spesh? Does an A for SACs really drag your score down that much?

[mitcharr]

Can i get 40 with 35/40 exam 1, 73/80 exam 2, and average A in sacs

[CharlieW]

guy at our school last year got 37/40 and 80/80 over both exams, top sac marks he got 50

i guess 3 in exam 1 is ok, coz its not weighted as much

if u lost them in exam 2 u might get a 49

depends tho, this year was slightly harder than last year, so maybe 3 marks lost is 50

[sajib_mostofa]

What study score can I expect if I get an A, A+, B+?

[iffets12345]

guy at our school last year got 37/40 and 80/80 over both exams, top sac marks he got 50

i guess 3 in exam 1 is ok, coz its not weighted as much

if u lost them in exam 2 u might get a 49

depends tho, this year was slightly harder than last year, so maybe 3 marks lost is 50

They're weighted the same I think, well at the end of the day all the points count together don't they?

[_avO]

If that were the case then you would have 2 graded assessments as opposed to 3

[taiga]

Exam 1 is worth 22%, Exam 2 44%, SACS 34%

Getting 33/40 in exam 1, and 80/80  in exam 2 would be far better than , 40/40 and 73/80.

[Chavi]

Exam 1 is worth 22%, Exam 2 44%, SACS 34%

Getting 33/40 in exam 1, and 80/80  in exam 2 would be far better than , 40/40 and 73/80.

But that 22% is not a measure of weighting, but rather that Exam 1 has half the marks of exam 2.

I don't believe this is correct - with the external papers, they calculate a total score out of 120.
Getting -3 on Exam 1 is the same as a -3 on Exam 2. You still end up with 117/120 for your external score.

[taiga]

Exam 1 is worth 22%, Exam 2 44%, SACS 34%

Getting 33/40 in exam 1, and 80/80  in exam 2 would be far better than , 40/40 and 73/80.

But that 22% is not a measure of weighting, but rather that Exam 1 has half the marks of exam 2.

I don't believe this is correct - with the external papers, they calculate a total score out of 120.
Getting -3 on Exam 1 is the same as a -3 on Exam 2. You still end up with 117/120 for your external score.

Let's talk hypotheticals then;

For last year's physics unit 3 exam, you could lose 4 marks for an A+ So if you lost about 15, you would get probably a B. But if you full marked the end of year (lets assume it was very difficult and the cutoff was -18 marks), and got an A+, you would get equivalent to about a 42-43 raw?

I'm not sure how it works, but it seems all too easy to make up for it though.

[3Xamz]

Hey guys, my friend wants to know his predictions (goes to same school as me):
- Top of the cohort at school (teacher released a ranking list using our marks, because we have a small cohort and the bastard got first place >< )
- He said lost 10 marks over both exams, 4-5 first one, and 4-5 in second one.

Fire away, (Don't be too lenient in your predictions, his head might blow up 8-) )

[iffets12345]

Exam 1 is worth 22%, Exam 2 44%, SACS 34%

Getting 33/40 in exam 1, and 80/80  in exam 2 would be far better than , 40/40 and 73/80.

but 22% is double 44% and exam 2 is double exam 1...so mathematically isn't it the same.....

[Stormer]

Exam 1 is worth 22%, Exam 2 44%, SACS 34%

Getting 33/40 in exam 1, and 80/80  in exam 2 would be far better than , 40/40 and 73/80.

but 22% is double 44% and exam 2 is double exam 1...so mathematically isn't it the same.....

yeah, the difference would be minimal?

[Chavi]

Exam 1 is worth 22%, Exam 2 44%, SACS 34%

Getting 33/40 in exam 1, and 80/80  in exam 2 would be far better than , 40/40 and 73/80.

But that 22% is not a measure of weighting, but rather that Exam 1 has half the marks of exam 2.

I don't believe this is correct - with the external papers, they calculate a total score out of 120.
Getting -3 on Exam 1 is the same as a -3 on Exam 2. You still end up with 117/120 for your external score.

Let's talk hypotheticals then;

For last year's physics unit 3 exam, you could lose 4 marks for an A+ So if you lost about 15, you would get probably a B. But if you full marked the end of year (lets assume it was very difficult and the cutoff was -18 marks), and got an A+, you would get equivalent to about a 42-43 raw?

I'm not sure how it works, but it seems all too easy to make up for it though.

Right, and I'm aware that the two exams are assessed separately, but the weighting 22%, 44% corresponds exactly to the number of marks on each exam.

I don't think anybody here can definitively say how it works - but judging by some previous stories of freak 50s despite doing crap on exam one (bear in mind, losing 3 marks on exam 1 last year eventuated in an A - http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vcaa/vce/statistics/2009/section3/vce_specialist_maths_ga09.pdf), it seems as if the evidence stacks up toward cumulative marking from 120.
For example, if you were to lose 3 marks in a freakishly easy Exam 1, and score an A, but then receive full on marks on a freakishly hard Exam 2 (with a state average of below 20%), then technically you could score a 50 with an A+ A A+.

[awesome2damax]

39/40
70/80?

About 40?

NO way! Why are you guys being so pessimistic. Someone who got a B plus first exam and a high A plus 2nd exam got a 43 raw. Please be realistic.