Hi, not sure if this is exactly the right forum but I've been told that "you can only improve your marks from trials". I studied quite hard for trials and I'm studying even harder now so realistically I should do better, but what if my teachers marked easily? we sat the catholic college papers for physic, chemistry, biology and maths so they are standardised marks, but drama and english are up to the teachers. is it safe to assume that i'll get the same or better marks in my HSC?
That is something that is, in more powerful levels, known as paranoia.
Which is good, in ways. It means that you're conscious of your marks and the need for improvement. But it does not govern your life. If you had a chance to check with how, say, your physics paper was marked, and found out where you lost the marks and how you could've gotten them, then it's fine. Whilst some bias is inevitable, teachers are trained so that they never mark on a completely ridiculously different scale.
CSSA papers are, in general, in my honest opinion harder than the HSC. Not by a margin, but definitely noticeably. Some questions in papers are so weird to the point I wonder if they belong there (except maths - most maths papers are ordinary hard).
The only way you can drop marks from the trials is by not studying. If you have, then your marks go up. Studying doesn't exist as a joke; it exists because it is effective.
Assuming marks for the HSC doesn't help either. You may choose to set goals, but going in there and 'expecting' to achieve something is just risky. You go in and count on your efforts, and if you put in the efforts it will pay off. (Even if you come out of an exam feeling shattered, you may find on results day you outperformed yourself.)