A New System Required?

[aznboy50]

@Slumdawg: Very true. Bias is a massive flaw. Conclusion: this system fails

Okay...you guys went a bit overboard...but yes it does fail

...although the system will change, and I will be heavily interested to see what they come up with.

What makes you say the latter, can you find a place in the world we live in with a better system for determining university admission than we have here in Victoria?

[lexitu]

I think the American system balances this by not focusing on so many subjects as we do. I think Harvard requires 3 subject exams to be taken, Yale requires 2 and many universities don't require any. This allows students to take up subjects out of interest without having to consider assessments and such too heavily whilst the GPA will keep students from simply ignoring them. In this way, students can explore more areas of life without the pressure.

That's interesting. I don't know too much about the American system so I might read up on it when I have time (which will be never).

[iNerd]

@Slumdawg: Very true. Bias is a massive flaw. Conclusion: this system fails

Okay...you guys went a bit overboard...but yes it does fail

...although the system will change, and I will be heavily interested to see what they come up with.

What makes you say the latter, can you find a place in the world we live in with a better system for determining university admission than we have here in Victoria?

Off the top of my head, no, although are you seriously telling me VCE is the best system out there? And what makes me say it is is based on several articles and people as you said, a 99.95-er bagging the system, eventually it will change, for the better or the worse, who knows?

[Pixon]

@Slumdawg: Very true. Bias is a massive flaw. Conclusion: this system fails

Okay...you guys went a bit overboard...but yes it does fail

...although the system will change, and I will be heavily interested to see what they come up with.

What makes you say the latter, can you find a place in the world we live in with a better system for determining university admission than we have here in Victoria?

Whilst some may say it's a matter of personal opinion, I find the American system as I discussed in my previous post to be far better. And one cannot deny that their standard of education and the number of outstanding men and women in their various fields is greater than that of Australia.

[IntoTheNewWorld]

^I also think the American system is superior from what I've read on it. Apparently they take into account more than just marks when deciding University admission.

[liv]

^I also think the American system is superior from what I've read on it. Apparently they take into account more than just marks when deciding University admission.

i ahve a lot of friends who applied this year to american colleges. the american system may seem better but honestly there are flaws in every system, and they are all about the same. i studied under the american system for 2 years, and in australia there is much more room for free-thinking. in the american system, you just rote learn everything and you'll do fine.

[echenzi]

Currently VCE has been in for nearly 20 years and DECD will be looking at a change in the system sometime soon. Most people do 13 years of primary +secondary education and it comes down largely to a few exams, to a few days, and a few short moments.

You could seriously just have a terrible day in an exam room and ruin your prospects.

American universities take into account greater performance over high school in general, and personality and characteristics as well as co-curricular involvement, along with performance in final year. They have the luxury of this as they have much greater demand for university placements. Also there is an arguably greater equality shown in Education in America, unlike in Victoria, where only 2 public schools (and also select entry) consistently place in the top 10 based on VCE results.

[Pixon]

^I also think the American system is superior from what I've read on it. Apparently they take into account more than just marks when deciding University admission.

Yeh, there's a lot of focus on who you are as an individual which particularly comes out in the essay you write for your application. Things like co-curricular activities, sports etc are considered and I think by doing so they're avoiding the whole issue of students being purely made up of a number (their ATAR) and more as an actual individual with unique characteristics.

i ahve a lot of friends who applied this year to american colleges. the american system may seem better but honestly there are flaws in every system, and they are all about the same. i studied under the american system for 2 years, and in australia there is much more room for free-thinking. in the american system, you just rote learn everything and you'll do fine.

I've sat SAT I and I'll be taking SAT II for Chemistry and Mathematics II later this year and I have noted that the analytical side is not as emphasised as it is in VCE (perhaps due to the subjects). Because I'm not fully immersed within the system, I haven't really felt the issue of free-thinking, but I've heard similar things. Interestingly, both Chemistry and Mathematics II are far easier than Chemistry 3/4 and Specialist Mathematics.

[ninwa]

Okay, yeah, fair enough. Then how about only include the CORE subjects? English, Maths and Science. Okay now you'll say what about those who take History etc. They can state they won't do Maths and Science and instead be assessed on History and Geography.

In year 9 and half of year 10 I had English teachers who really really disliked my writing for some reason (they liked me as a person so it wasn't personal) and I had a high C+ low B average. I ended up getting 46 for English and 50 on my GAT written communication. Obviously I'm not the only person like this out there. Therefore, system fails.

I think the earlier years should be more about personal development than academic diligence and performance. Aside from the flaws that others have pointed out above (and I know this is just a rough idea to prompt discussion), I think that placing such a big emphasis on results at a young age could be restrictive and exhaustive. Kids should be encouraged to explore all facets of life and there are too many problems with the education system (teachers in particular) for this to be conducted alongside a system with the general purposes that you propose. If kids have this pressure to perform well in their schoolwork - especially in core subjects - they may well ignore other activities that will provide non-immediate benefits intellectually/socially/physically. Also, being classified into a certain group so early can have a damaging affect. Life already has enough classifications, but if we group people by forecasted performance this inequality has psychological implications which could decrease performance in lower groups. The latter has been well researched.

Very true, this is quite a significant issue in Germany (German education system is similar to this idea of "tiers")

[pi]

@Slumdawg: Very true. Bias is a massive flaw. Conclusion: this system fails

Okay...you guys went a bit overboard...but yes it does fail

Most logical thing you've said in this thread.

With regards to the American model, I too believe it is superior to our current Victorian system, but I don't think it will be applicable to our system without some changes at the tertiary level as well. The Americans take into account co-curricular activities such as sporting ability, debating, etc. I think with America's overall 'college-culture' and serous co-curricular competitions taking place between various universities, the system goes well. In Australia, we do not have this sort of overwhelming culture at the tertiary level with sport, etc having such importance.

It will be interesting to see the new system, and how it integrates into the tertiary level.

[Pixon]

@Slumdawg: Very true. Bias is a massive flaw. Conclusion: this system fails

Okay...you guys went a bit overboard...but yes it does fail

Most logical thing you've said in this thread.

With regards to the American model, I too believe it is superior to our current Victorian system, but I don't think it will be applicable to our system without some changes at the tertiary level as well. The Americans take into account co-curricular activities such as sporting ability, debating, etc. I think with America's overall 'college-culture' and serous co-curricular competitions taking place between various universities, the system goes well. In Australia, we do not have this sort of overwhelming culture at the tertiary level with sport, etc having such importance.

It will be interesting to see the new system, and how it integrates into the tertiary level.

This is a really interesting point because the Melbourne Model is an example of a disappointing change which is slightly based around the American tertiary system. Whilst it does improve the education at Melbourne University by exposing students to more areas and almost forcing them to take higher education at graduate level, it doesn't work because other universities haven't taken up a similar model.

Do you think this model is a necessity to accompany a new system for high school, particularly if we were to follow a similar path to American high schools? Personally, I like the idea of the Melbourne Model, but there's a lot of negativity around it and I feel that even with a change to VCE, there may not be much change to the tertiary system for quite some time despite the benefits to Australian education.

[taiga]

tl;dr

Get a system with no rankings and scores, which just tells you whether you got into your course or not. Then that'd be no fun for you competitive bastards

[WonderBunny]

The main problem with the American model is that the emphasis on extra-curricular activities for Uni entrance discriminates against people with disabilities and people in financial difficulty who have to work. I have a medical condition and wouldn't have a hope in hell of getting into a good US uni.
American unis also have four year bachelor degrees. They have to have a year of broad generalist study to make up for the terrible education some students get in their high schools. Our system has standard subjects, which helps to keep things more equal. Yeah some schools are better than others, but at least you know the subjects are the same.
I'm really kind of puzzled by how positive people are about the US system. There are quite a few fantastic Unis there, but their high school system is a shambles.

[pi]

The main problem with the American model is that the emphasis on extra-curricular activities for Uni entrance discriminates against people with disabilities and people in financial difficulty who have to work. I have a medical condition and wouldn't have a hope in hell of getting into a good US uni.

They have scholarships and allowances for these people (ill health, disabled, financially troubled, coming from areas with poorer standard of education, etc.), just like Aussie universities. Things aren't as bad as you describe them to be from what I know.

[aznboy50]

For what it's worth, I have a cousin in America, I asked him if he would have any chance of going to Harvard. He said, "Don't be stupid, I'm from a poor area of America."

NB: He goes to Uni of Berkeley, so that's still pretty prestigious...