Why are vcaa making the methods exams harder each year?

[integrationbyrecognition]

The vcaa exams from 2016-2017 were much easier than yesterday's exam 1. Even some of the company exams were easier than yesterday. Like is it just normal for exams to become harder each year? I went in feeling ready for the exam and was in for a big shock.

[lifeisgood]

i know right.

[Freddie Hg]

  all in the same boat. 

[integrationbyrecognition]

the 2009 vcaa methods exam 1 was one of the easiest ever, nothing compared to yesterday's trainwreck, wish I did vce in 2009 haha

[S200]

Could we say that as a whole society, we're all getting more educated, thus meaning we need harder testing?
Or is it because there is such a large range of capabilities among methods students, meaning VCAA needs to use harder exams to correctly place all the students?

[integrationbyrecognition]

Could we say that as a whole society, we're all getting more educated, thus meaning we need harder testing?
Or is it because there is such a large range of capabilities among methods students, meaning VCAA needs to use harder exams to correctly place all the students?

There's definitely a large range of capabilities among methods studenst, but even then, exam 2 should be the difficult exam to separate students, not exam 1. Exam 1 imo should be a quick, easy exam accessible to students of all capabilities.

[Lear]

Methods, by definition, is a hard subject. You’d be surprised to know that some schools have more methods than English students. I have been a strong believer that methods really isn’t for everyone. Too many students go into methods because ‘everyone else does it’ only to realise it’s not as easy as it seems. I think the methods exam was at an adequate difficulty to test VCAA’s >>Target demographic<< of methods students. Of course, this isn’t in line with the true demographic of methods students.
I wouldn’t expect today’s exam to be any different.

[integrationbyrecognition]

Methods, by definition, is a hard subject. You’d be surprised to know that some schools have more methods than English students. I have been a strong believer that methods really isn’t for everyone. Too many students go into methods because ‘everyone else does it’ only to realise it’s not as easy as it seems. I think the methods exam was at an adequate difficulty to test VCAA’s >>Target demographic<< of methods students. Of course, this isn’t in line with the true demographic of methods students.
I wouldn’t expect today’s exam to be any different.

I'm not trying to be a cherrypick, but bluntly stating your opinion that yesterday's exam 1 was "adequate" when it really was quite bloody challenging, and that a lot of people, including myself, have underperformed, really isn't the best thing for you to say. Also, I don't think you should be saying things like "methods isn't for everyone" isn't very nice either. How does it bother you if someone does methods or not?
I hope i'm not trying to sound rude.
Thanks

[hums_student]

I'm not trying to be a cherrypick, but bluntly stating your opinion that yesterday's exam 1 was "adequate" when it really was quite bloody challenging, and that a lot of people, including myself, have underperformed, really isn't the best thing for you to say. Also, I don't think you should be saying things like "methods isn't for everyone" isn't very nice either. How does it bother you if someone does methods or not?
I hope i'm not trying to sound rude.
Thanks

Well, it's not really about being 'nice', it's just a very basic fact that no VCE subject is for everyone.
I'm sure that the majority of the state found the last question challenging, but it's been like this every year. If you look at the examiner's reports for previous VCAA exams you'll see that generally only ~2% of the state can get full marks on the last couple of questions. It's used by VCAA to separate out the students in the high-40s range.
I agree that it was definitely challenging - but challenging questions are needed. Anyway, the earlier questions were quite accessible for most students.

[Lear]

I'm not trying to be a cherrypick, but bluntly stating your opinion that yesterday's exam 1 was "adequate" when it really was quite bloody challenging, and that a lot of people, including myself, have underperformed, really isn't the best thing for you to say. Also, I don't think you should be saying things like "methods isn't for everyone" isn't very nice either. How does it bother you if someone does methods or not?
I hope i'm not trying to sound rude.
Thanks

Like I said, 'bloody challenging' is literally what it's meant to be. The purpose of an exam is to separate the geniuses, the excellent, the smart, the average and the below average. If VCAA made exams easy literally all of those categories would be clumped around 36-40/40 which does not help in terms of allocating study scores. Study scores are a rank. They HAVE TO separate kids across a bell curve. This means making an exam that gives the geniuses and opportunity to show case their skill while simultaneously offering the mid to low range students and opportunity to show their skills. This is precisely what I mean when I say 'adequate'. It's adequate for VCAA's purposes.

Re: Methods isn't from everyone.
Sure, it may not sound very nice but it's reality. Just as one would say art and design isn't for everyone, or extreme sports aren't for everyone. Specialist maths isn't for everyone either.
Everyone has their own strengths and weaknesses and students should pursue their own interests rather than picking a subject because 'everyone at my school does it' or the 'scaling is great'. I myself know plenty of students who chose methods for such reasons and now strongly regret it.


EDIT: Beaten by a few minutes by a great response from Lsjnzy13

[integrationbyrecognition]

Like I said, 'bloody challenging' is literally what it's meant to be. The purpose of an exam is to separate the geniuses, the excellent, the smart, the average and the below average. If VCAA made exams easy literally all of those categories would be clumped around 36-40/40 which does not help in terms of allocating study scores. Study scores are a rank. They HAVE TO separate kids across a bell curve. This means making an exam that gives the geniuses and opportunity to show case their skill while simultaneously offering the mid to low range students and opportunity to show their skills. This is precisely what I mean when I say 'adequate'. It's adequate for VCAA's purposes.

Re: Methods isn't from everyone.
Sure, it may not sound very nice but it's reality. Just as one would say art and design isn't for everyone, or extreme sports aren't for everyone. Specialist maths isn't for everyone either.
Everyone has their own strengths and weaknesses and students should pursue their own interests rather than picking a subject because 'everyone at my school does it' or the 'scaling is great'. I myself know plenty of students who chose methods for such reasons and now strongly regret it.


EDIT: Beaten by a few minutes by a great response by Lsjnzy13

Both you and Lsjnzy can argue your point, but I'm still allowed to have my opinion that the exam was challenging, and a lot harder than previous years. Last year's exam 1's last question as just about equating 2 tangents together, which was much easier than yesterday's last few questions

[K888]

A contributing factor may be that you likely did past year's exams under less pressure-filled situations than you did this year's exams under. That can skew your perception of "difficulty". Something that you have a heap of time to do or can work out solutions with friends and can troubleshoot makes for easier work than something you have to do independently under the pressure of your final exams.

[Lear]

I'm still allowed to have my opinion that the exam was challenging, and a lot harder than previous years.

Neither of us denied that. My point is making exams 'challenging' is necessary as the upper end of students become more and more capable.

[S_R_K]

Of course the exams get more challenging. Students have more experience answering the sorts of questions VCAA writes, so they need to write more challenging questions to ensure that they still get a decent grade distribution.

Both you and Lsjnzy can argue your point, but I'm still allowed to have my opinion that the exam was challenging, and a lot harder than previous years. Last year's exam 1's last question as just about equating 2 tangents together, which was much easier than yesterday's last few questions

This is such a pointless thing to argue. Yes, there's nothing wrong with saying that you found it challenging – but then it's unfair to complain about other people saying that they found it relatively accessible. You're just trading your subjective responses to the exam.

Objectively speaking, the only way we can judge the difficulty is when VCAA release the grade distribution.

[integrationbyrecognition]

Of course the exams get more challenging. Students have more experience answering the sorts of questions VCAA writes, so they need to write more challenging questions to ensure that they still get a decent grade distribution.

This is such a pointless thing to argue. Yes, there's nothing wrong with saying that you found it challenging – but then it's unfair to complain about other people saying that they found it relatively accessible. You're just trading your subjective responses to the exam.

Objectively speaking, the only way we can judge the difficulty is when VCAA release the grade distribution.

it's arrogant to state that an exam was "accessable" when it really wasn't, that's all i'm trying to say