Enwiabe's glorious solution to the English problem.

[enwiabe]

Make English count as a subject with study scores out of 25 instead of 50.

Make the primary 4 aggregate out of 175. 3 subjects out of 50 and English counting for 25.

In fact, English should still be out of 50, but when counting towards your aggregate it only counts for 50%. That way, people who suck at English can still do well. A 35 in English now becomes 17.5 out of 25 and so you only lose 7.5 aggregate points, as opposed to 15. And this difference can be more easily made up with subjects that you are good at.

Thoughts, suggestions, comments?

[Daniel15]

Awesome solution, I love it. I agree completely.

[melanie.dee]

what about the people that are good at english and WANT it in their top 4 though?? and want to get full credit for it, not some pissy half points option.

say someone got a 50 in english, and 40 in another 3 subjects.

they'd only get 25 for their enlish plus 120 = 145

but then someone that got 50 for a certain subject, 40 for english and 2 other subjects. they'd have 50+40+40+20 they get a score of 150.

wow that would suck and be terribly unfair.

[enwiabe]

Easy option! Two streams of English like NSW. Have English Standard that EVERYONE must take. And those who want to excel in English can take English Advanced to really show off their mad skillz. Plus Literature and English Language would also be available.

[Toothpaste]

The current system is better than yours.

[___]

what about the people that are good at english and WANT it in their top 4 though?? and want to get full credit for it, not some pissy half points option.

say someone got a 50 in english, and 40 in another 3 subjects.

they'd only get 25 for their enlish plus 120 = 145

but then someone that got 50 for a certain subject, 40 for english and 2 other subjects. they'd have 50+40+40+20 they get a score of 150.

wow that would suck and be terribly unfair.

theyre fucked according to enwiabe's situation.

in my opinion, english should be compulsory for all students; however, it should not be compulsory to be in your top 4 subjects.

that way, students who are fantastic at english are still able to benefit from their high english study score, while those who are less adept at english, but score highly in other subjects, can have it in their bottom two (where only 10% of the score will go to your overall ENTER).

it should be up to the university to set a threshold english score as they see fit (if english language is a prominent skill for that course).

[Collin Li]

what about the people that are good at english and WANT it in their top 4 though?? and want to get full credit for it, not some pissy half points option.

say someone got a 50 in english, and 40 in another 3 subjects.

they'd only get 25 for their enlish plus 120 = 145

but then someone that got 50 for a certain subject, 40 for english and 2 other subjects. they'd have 50+40+40+20 they get a score of 150.

wow that would suck and be terribly unfair.

theyre fucked according to enwiabe's situation.

in my opinion, english should be compulsory for all students; however, it should not be compulsory to be in your top 4 subjects.

that way, students who are fantastic at english are still able to benefit from their high english study score, while those who are less adept at english, but score highly in other subjects, can have it in their bottom two (where only 10% of the score will go to your overall ENTER).

it should be up to the university to set a threshold english score as they see fit (if english language is a prominent skill for that course).

I agree with this 100%!

[brendan]

yeah it shud be up to the university to decide whether how they calculate the enter, in relation to what course and stuff. for example, for engineering degrees, they might place less weight on english and more weight on math and physics, and you would have an "engineering" ENTER

[melanie.dee]

but just because they're good at english doesnt mean they want to waste another subject on it. they just want full credit for that english that they're good at. and you cant say well another stream INSTEAD of that.. because if you made that out of 50 that wouldnt match up with the other people getting one of their scores out of 25.

the only way this could maybe work is saying primary 4 made up of 3 best subjects plus english. the top 3 out of these subjects is out of 50, and the worst out of these 4 (whether it be english or something else) is changed to a score out of 25. so for those good at english, they could have english as one of their full out of 50 scores, and something else as their out of 25 score. and for those bad at english, english would be their out of 25 score

[enwiabe]

That is actually a really good idea, Melanie. I like it better than mine!

[melanie.dee]

i think we should have A levels type scoring, but with more subjects, say 5, because i dont believe in specialising too early.

but i think they should just be A - UG scores. then the uni says what scores are required for certain courses. for a science degree, B or higher for maths plus 2 sciences plus english (any score). therefore, doesnt matter if you fuck somethingnup that is compeltely unrelated to waht you want to do in the uni course.

[Collin Li]

i think we should have A levels type scoring, but with more subjects, say 5, because i dont believe in specialising too early.

but i think they should just be A - UG scores. then the uni says what scores are required for certain courses. for a science degree, B or higher for maths plus 2 sciences plus english (any score). therefore, doesnt matter if you fuck somethingnup that is compeltely unrelated to waht you want to do in the uni course.

I agree with this and I disagree with your top 4 idea (because I disagree with the whole idea of aggregating).

[melanie.dee]

haha no my top 4 idea was just my opinion on the only way enwiabes idea could possibly work, not actually what i think should happen if given the choice of doing anything to the system. idont like the aggregate idea either, or the university entrance based solely on enter, or any of that really

[brendan]

the whole point of ENTER is to select students for university entrance. so the best measure would be one which correlates well with performance at university. so if i was a uni i want to select the people most likely to perform well in the course. in the end you have to aggregate anyway, it might not be perfect, but you have to in order to select people.

[maxleng]

yeah it shud be up to the university to decide whether how they calculate the enter, in relation to what course and stuff. for example, for engineering degrees, they might place less weight on english and more weight on math and physics, and you would have an "engineering" ENTER

this sounds good, and it actually fulfills the purpose of enters = uni selection