Hypothetical question

[Eventful]

Hello forum users,

If you just want to answer my question you can stop reading after the paragraph following "scenario two". If you want to contribute to further discussion, continue reading beyond that point.

The basic premise behind my question is as follows: is there a process to account for significant differences between internal assessment results and external examination. Hopefully I can clarify through an example.

Scenario one:

A student is ranked first and they score full marks on their external exam. Their scaled internal assessment is 100% and with their 100% external exam result they receive a perfect study score.

Scenario two:

A student is not ranked first and they score full marks on their external exam. For the purpose of this example their scaled internal assessment is 60% and with their 100% external exam result they receive a 40 study score.

Lastly a few clarifications, I am aware of the GAT being used to investigate anomalous external exam scores, but have read nothing in regards to anything which can affect the overall study score. Also, since it might be mentioned in the comments, I am obviously aware that drastic changes in marks are not of any great likelihood; hence the word hypothetical in the title.

This question comes from my own thoughts regarding internal assessment and fairness. Obviously in most cases the rigorously obtained school ranking strongly correlates to the end of year results, and because it is the same for everyone, it is fair. But, it just seemed strange to me that two students who score exceptionally well on the external exam can have such drastically different results.

If this were expanded to 5-6 subjects, and depending on the subjects, it could mean that one student, who is ranked first in all subjects, and does not full mark, but scores highly (e.g. 95+), could still potentially achieve a perfect ATAR. Meanwhile, another student, due only to significantly lower scaled internal assessment results, and who scores full marks on all the same exams, might only achieve an ATAR of 98. (A score that is certainly outstanding, but notably distinct.)

This basically leads on to a discussion behind the purpose of internal assessment when the external exam can perform its purpose of ranking students and the subsequent perverse incentives that are created. But perhaps that is suited to another post, my main question outlined at the beginning stands.

Kind regards,

Eventful

[PhoenixxFire]

I don't know if there is a process or not. My thoughts on it are that the ranking part effectively forces people to work the whole year. If only external exams are used then the exam is worth 100% of your study score which is ridiculous. If a person is not rank one then clearly there are others who are better than them, regardless of how much they cram for the exam, those who have studied the whole year are rewarded, which seems fairer to me. Having said that I think the whole VCE/ATAR system is broken.

[Sine]

sacs are just a dodgy system that can be possibly gamed.
I wouldn't be opposed to exam worth 100% tbh - if you are good enough you should be able to overcome it.

someone can 100% the exam and not get an extremely high study score is due to the fact that sacs actual matter and are a portion of your assesment. just because you do well in the most important part of the year (exam) doesn't automatically mean that you were the best overall after sac scores/weightings are taken into account. It's basically like any scoring system doing extermely well in some sections will off-set doing badly elsewhere but you can never undo what you have previously done i.e. bad sac ranks.

If there is a significant difference between sac grades and exam scores (that is according to VCAA 2 letter grades) they will audit your sacs to make sure nothing is too dodgy.