ATAR Winners and Losers in HSC

Related Stores

Universities Admissions Centre

• 

  scotty on 19/12/2014 - 08:48

  +2

  Does this mean this is the golden Asian century in terms of education outcomes?

  Not sure about golden Asian century because I thought Asians (esp Far East Asians & Indians) have always valued education and academic result due to traditions and competitiveness in their populous countries. China for example have national examination for thousands of years. I am not surprised that people with Asian ethnic background continue to excel in university entrance exams wherever they go in the world.

  However personally I do not believe a 100% correlation between "good ATAR" and "good education outcomes", as education is far more than getting a good ATAR.

  • 

    nightqueen on 19/12/2014 - 11:17

    So would you say that it is the nuture/values/principles of far east asians and indians rather than the nature/ability/intelligence causing these differences?

    • 

      scotty on 19/12/2014 - 11:53

      the nature/ability/intelligence causing these differences…

      Name them? Wouldn't be PC to say it on a public forum, nor do I believe that one ethnic group is more intelligent than the others.

      In my observation and experience it's pretty much the "nurture". The Asians kids get into cram schools very early in life. A few of those schools near where I live (Sydney South-Eastern suburbs), and guess which parents send their under-10 kids to those schools on SATURDAY? Yes, year 3/year 4 kids going to cram school on Saturdays — virtually unheard of 20-30 years ago (or maybe because I spent my junior years in lazy Queensland).

      On the other hand, very few Asian parents picking up their kids from soccer, rugby or netball matches on Saturday. It's just different value that parents imposed onto kids when they are young. Which is why you see some 3rd/4th generation "westernised" migrants, despite having an Asian look, might not have the same view and impose the same value to their kids.

      • 

        nightqueen on 19/12/2014 - 13:18

        http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/top-atar-hsc-perfor…

        The prediction of academic success based on such factors has become a hotly-contested science. Education researcher Gary Marks, of the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, doesn't have a formula, but he is convinced that there's one ingredient that's more powerful than any other.

        "The strongest influence is going to be [cognitive] ability", or intelligence, Marks says.

        "There's a whole lot of factors that affect cognitive development in children. Among them, of course, is … plain old 'nature'."

        Environment plays a role, he says, but it's nowhere near as large as social scientists, policymakers and journalists would have us believe.

        "I know people don't like that much but that's how it seems to be," Marks says.

        "There is something out there called ability, it is important to student achievement and it's influenced by not much."

        Biography

        Gary N. Marks is a Principal Research Fellow with the Melbourne Institute in the Economics of Education research program. He has publications in four main areas: educational outcomes (student achievement, university entrance performance, school completion and early school leaving), labour market outcomes (e.g. employment, unemployment, occupational attainment, occupational mobility, income and wealth), social outcomes (e.g. well-being, leaving home and family formation) and political outcomes (voting behaviour). His work has a particular emphasis on changes over time and cross-national differences in social stratification and social inequality.

      • 

        nightqueen on 19/12/2014 - 13:45

        Nurture vs Nature

        Could also be applied to the Olympics Men's 100m sprint. The majority of finalists have african/Caribbean/african american background and studies have suggested that black athletes have more fast twitch fibres/muscles and more specific proteins to activate these fast twitch fibres for more performance.

        Maybe one day, when neuro science develops, brains can be examined between different cultural backgrounds to see if there are any patterns in neuro-pattern which may lead to more success of cultures in certain subjects/fields of work.

      • 

        mskeggs on 19/12/2014 - 16:17

        @markng89:

        I don't disagree that the strongest influence on an individual's academic performance is their innate intelligence. But what we are seeing in the ATAR results are the average results across a group.
        And cultural influences like pressure to succeed, willingness to attend tutoring etc. show up across these results.

        I am happy to accept that there may be genetic predispositions to enhance academic ability - I understand on American IQ tests asian background test slightly higher than anglo, marginally ahead of hispanic and african american. But it seems reasonable to me to conclude that those results might be influenced by imperfect controls too (poor control for economic differences, parental education level etc.)

        In any case, the results in the article show substantially more deviation. Since there is strong anecdotal evidence that cultural pressure achieves this, and since I can see from my own kids that they get higher marks when they but in higher levels of work, I think Occams Razor suggests much of the difference is cultural "nurture".

        I recognise your quoted source might come to a different conclusion, but as the quote says, "he doesn't have a formula but is convinced". It would be an interesting area to study, but fraught with difficulties as you try to control variables so only racial heritage is tested.

        In studies for other loaded topics they have looked at twins separated at birth and raised differently. Maybe something similar would be similar here.

        Interesting wikipedia article:
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence

      • 

        mskeggs on 19/12/2014 - 16:25

        @mskeggs:

        Oh, and the funniest thing in that article:
        "In modern democracies, your parent's jobs and wealth no longer determine how high you'll climb on the social ladder. In an era of social mobility, people are more or less sorted according to their IQ, rather than their socioeconomic background, Marks argues. "

        HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

        Wander down to Kings or Joey's and suggest to the parents there is no point in spending $30k a year for private schooling as IQ is all that matters.
        My understanding the Gini coefficient in Australia is increasing, and measures like the Shorrock's index suggest social mobility is declining.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Shorrocks#Shorrocks_ind…

      • 

        scotty on 19/12/2014 - 17:48

        @mskeggs:

        But it seems reasonable to me to conclude that those results might be influenced by imperfect controls too

        I'll say bad sample size. If the statement says "2nd generation migrant children are generally more intelligent than the nation-wide average" — I'll consider that. Especially for the skilled or investment migrant, who are from family or culture background that already values hard working, or already have obtained certain social status.

      • 

        nightqueen on 19/12/2014 - 18:21

        @mskeggs:

        They could be paying 30k for the networking and for their children to meet peers and families who are apparently 'high powered' 'white collared' workers which may provide more opportunities in the 'it's who you know not what you know situation'. A good friend of mine who graduated from James ruse agricultural high school mentioned many of his peers who work
        in the commerce and financial sector feel disadvantaged due to the lack of networking obtained during school as most parents of kids were original immigrants to Australia. This is only anecdotal though

      • 

        iridiumstem on 19/12/2014 - 22:36

        @markng89: So a guy who has no background on brain research has a right to say that? I am not going to say that he is wrong, but clearly his conclusions are questionable in this case.

        Economics usually assume rationality and looks away from things like culture, environment influences on human decisions. The models usallly limit the variances in players. Economics always work with models, which is good for its purpose, estimation, but he's using it for different purpose, defining causality.

        I personally have seen nature being the main factor in same environment. My brother and I went to same school, I spent 3 years less than my brother in English speaking environment (being older than he is), he clearly had an advantage. He studied more than I did, but I got better grades than he did. So I know that nature plays a huge role as well.

        But he is assuming one thing, environment being big factor. At top 1% level, even the minute differences make a huge difference. In Korea for example, studying was always seen as a noble thing. Also, Asian countries do have better numbering system, for example, eleven twelve thirteen, they are irregular, whereas in Korea and China, it's pretty much in pattern ten one, ten two, ten three. It gives a small advantage, but they do stack. I am not sure about Africa too much, but I've read how they accredited the differences in muscle fatigue regeneration, from altitude and low oxygen level.

        It's really simple to think race being the core reason behind the differences in those areas, but I think environment still plays a big role. It's really hard to separate those two. Also, what it ought to be doesn't mean what it should be as well.

  • 

    Almost Banned on 19/12/2014 - 12:22

    Interesting thought - if a 'good education' and a good ATAR are not the same thing why so much emphasis on ATAR for almost all further education?
    Someone (almost all universities) obviously considers a good ATAR translates into something.

    • 

      scotty on 19/12/2014 - 13:21

      why so much emphasis on ATAR for almost all further education?

      As I said, it's no 100% correlation. Moreover people need something that's measurable and comparable — a numerical value up to 99.95 sort of "works". Also the term for discussion here is "good education outcome" which does not always translate to further education. "Good" is also a subjective term. Furthermore, what's good in general might not be what's good for that individual.

  • 

    blitz on 19/12/2014 - 12:31

    +1

    education is far more than getting a good ATAR.

• 

  konazz on 19/12/2014 - 08:55

  I think you're jumping the gun on asians v caucasian. Many 'asian' background students would be 2nd or 3rd generation Australian - so they're not landing here last week and taking all our ATARs. I'm technically of eastern european/russian decent, but I was born here (1st generation);even though my dad has minimal english vocabulary (and still have after nearly 30 years)… getting help at home was not an option.

  I have no problem with non-anglo/celtic/european not topping the courses… various cultures put emphasis on different parts of life: my personal experience, dad being a builder in Eastern europe - when i was young, I had to learn how to gyproc (I knew how to insulate and join sheets around 15yo.), help with plumbing, use a chain saw etc. as those were skills my dad wanted me to have and I complied. Wherein I spent my weekends toiling in the sun, other parents who say didn't have those skills, got their kids to study harder as they couldn't pass those skills down and they would be in the future required to pay for a tradesperson to come along.

  That I haven't agreed with, is that languages are allowed to be counted (of which I was a beneficiary during my HSC)… I've spoken my language since I was a kid, went to school in my home country and saturday schools here in Sydney. But… i did look at the Honours role, and saw that 2 fellas actually topped a few of the languages which is pretty good work - they had to learn the languages from scratch.

• 

  plmko on 19/12/2014 - 11:06

  "How on earth are Asians doing better than Caucasians in English?"

  The English exams test reasoning, text construction and text understanding, anyone can do this and realistically the answers could be achieved the same in any language if the exam requirement didn't require English to be written during the test.

  If it involved other skills like interpersonal or presentations components, then there might be a gap.

  • 

    nightqueen on 19/12/2014 - 11:39

    I have edited that comment due to it's loaded assumptions. thanks for the insight

  • 

    Ughhh on 19/12/2014 - 12:57

    -3

    This, and it's almost impossible to have a long convo with them, because they don't understand unless it's written on paper.

• 

  mskeggs on 19/12/2014 - 11:19

  My (anglo background) daughter goes to a selective school. It is predominantly asian and indian background kids.
  On her first day, a teacher asked who went to after school coaching. She was the only one who didn't raise her hand.
  Education is a head start to higher incomes, so it seems unsurprising to me that there is a bit of an arms race to get kids scoring highly.
  Certainly the parents of anglo background kids I work with favour private schools and lots of developmental activities (music, drama, languages).
  Unfortunately, I also know a bunch of people who scored high in the HSC, but then failed, or took a long time to succeed after that. They were burnt out, or found adjusting to a less closely directed Uni life difficult. Mind you, I believe uni is moving more towards a school-style guided learning experience to support the students more.

  As for whether it is a golden asian century? I suspect the next generation of kids, whose grandparents were original immigrants, will score more closely to the average. I see friends who had hard working (Italian/Greek/Lebanese) immigrant parents in the 1060s/70s. They are doctors, lawyers, accountants etc. Their kids smoke pot and study drama and aren't especially interested in working their guts out to please their parents.

  • 

    nightqueen on 19/12/2014 - 11:38

    Generation zero - Original Immigrants of australia
    Generation one - Children of original immigrants
    Generation two - Grandchildren of original immigrants

    Based on the above categories, do you believe that generation one is put under high levels of pressure to succeed in education via after school coaching and drill education?

    And do you believe that generation two will regress towards the norm and those statistics will normalise for all cultural groups until there is a big wave of new immigrants from different cultures/backgrounds which will trigger the generation zero parental style of school marks dominating music, drama, languages and sport?

    • 

      mskeggs on 19/12/2014 - 11:51

      It's probably a bit more nuanced than that, and obviously there are plenty of individual examples, but that is a fair summary.

• 

  Sweetnsour on 19/12/2014 - 22:07

  +1

  I think we can all agree that education gives everyone an opportunity to succeed. What you do with that opportunity will depend on your social skills, networking and confidence. Those skills have nothing to do with your ATAR.

• 

  [Deactivated] on 20/12/2014 - 00:45

  +1

  Any first year psych / education student is at least a little familiar with the nature vs nurture question, and the truth is both factors contribute to some extent (twin studies are most interesting examples of this). Making sweeping generalisations on the IQs of certain races is factually questionable and inappropriate IMO.

  As poster above has alluded to, there are a lot of attributes / competencies that can't be measured by a simple test score.

  A related and more interesting question is to what extent does one's IQ / ATAR predict income / career success? You'll find private school kids who struggle to succeed in the autonomous learning environment of uni, kids who are great at studying but then find the real world isn't such a nice place that you can show someone your high test scores and they'll offer you a job merely on that basis alone.

  I've seen people from all backgrounds succeed or fail. No race has a monopoly on stupid. I strongly believe the suggestion you can't improve your lot by working or studying hard is crap. Most importantly, when you get to my age and end up on the other side of the interview table, you realise something like ATAR is just a number and not the full measure of a person or how capable they'd be at doing the job at hand.