2011 CAO/Leaving Cert discussion thread

soccymonster

Pass maths was nice some little anonying bits but grand overall. Honours paper was a fxcking bitch supposedly. My friend was bawling her eyes out afterwards

Bonkers_xOx

Arghhhhhhhhhhhhh I'm so annoyed! Maths was one of the only exams I thought I could get an A in. That paper was disgusting, everyone came out in tears.

Grindylow

soccymonster wrote: »

Pass maths was nice some little anonying bits but grand overall. Honours paper was a fxcking bitch supposedly. My friend was bawling her eyes out afterwards

Most of the part Cs in pass were horrible! :eek:

jumpguy

The HL 2011 maths paper made the 2010 HL maths paper look like a foundation paper.

Started with integration, glanced at the C part thinking it was to find the rotation of a sphere.

Did A and B grand...then I got a shock when I saw the C.

A disk! How the ****?!?! I didn't know whether to rotate or what considering it wasn't a 3D shape. Sickened.

Q2, Q5, Q6 and Q7 were grand enough. Made a bit of a balls of the C part of Q3 (probably by making a slip multiplying the matrices). Overall, tough paper, but I hope I managed a B1 out of it, B2 if I'm unlucky.

soccymonster

Noel2k9 wrote: »

Most of the part Cs in pass were horrible! :eek:

some werent too bad. HOWEVER, I started question 6 and gave up. Couldnt even answer part B. It wasn't exactly an easy exam but i think i did enough to get a C2 paper two better be nice.

Grindylow

soccymonster wrote: »

some werent too bad. HOWEVER, I started question 6 and gave up. Couldnt even answer part B. It wasn't exactly an easy exam but i think i did enough to get a C2 paper two better be nice.

I did every part of it and got out at 4, but I'm aiming for an A in it..

soccymonster

Noel2k9 wrote: »

I did every part of it and got out at 4, but I'm aiming for an A in it..

not counting it so as long as i pass tbh

Grindylow

soccymonster wrote: »

not counting it so as long as i pass tbh

Aah well my choice is between that and Irish as they're my two pass subjects and I was expecting to do better in Maths >_<

marko93

Awkward moment when i finished an hour early and my teacher was standing outside...
Oh well, went pretty amazing for me

Bottleopener

jumpguy wrote: »

The HL 2011 maths paper made the 2010 HL maths paper look like a foundation paper.

Started with integration, glanced at the C part thinking it was to find the rotation of a sphere.

Did A and B grand...then I got a shock when I saw the C.

A disk! How the ****?!?! I didn't know whether to rotate or what considering it wasn't a 3D shape. Sickened.

Q2, Q5, Q6 and Q7 were grand enough. Made a bit of a balls of the C part of Q3 (probably by making a slip multiplying the matrices). Overall, tough paper, but I hope I managed a B1 out of it, B2 if I'm unlucky.

Aye, it was very difficult. A lot of people seem to be sharing our grievances, so the marking scheme will probably be very kind. Am going to be optimistic about it all

Q1 was OK, b (ii) was tricky, and I messed up c.
Q2 was quite nice - was delighted when I got the part c. [apart from the 3rd bit which I'm not sure about - but I think I got it]
Q3 I actually was delighted with - apart from c (i)
Q5 was perhaps the best question for me.
Q6 I think went well
Q7 Was grand, messed up (c) part 1 though, and a sign in one of the part bs.
Q8 was nice apart from part (c) - but I made a stab at it and got to the circular integral bit.

A lot of people were very upset today. Hopefully Paper 2 will be nicer.

jumpguy

It seems bythewoods' is forever engrained in the minds of LCers, now her legacy is being used to explain bell curves, of all things. With herself on the top. How modest! :P

Bottleopener wrote: »

Aye, it was very difficult. A lot of people seem to be sharing our grievances, so the marking scheme will probably be very kind. Am going to be optimistic about it all

Q1 was OK, b (ii) was tricky, and I messed up c.
Q2 was quite nice - was delighted when I got the part c. [apart from the 3rd bit which I'm not sure about - but I think I got it]
Q3 I actually was delighted with - apart from c (i)
Q5 was perhaps the best question for me.
Q6 I think went well
Q7 Was grand, messed up (c) part 1 though, and a sign in one of the part bs.
Q8 was nice apart from part (c) - but I made a stab at it and got to the circular integral bit.

A lot of people were very upset today. Hopefully Paper 2 will be nicer.

I'm sickened I never did Q1 now, and Q3 instead.

But after all the dust has settled, I think the paper was just more unexpected rather than horrific. You really had to have your head screwed on for it.

soccymonster

WHY IS THERE SO MUCH FXCKIN IRISH TO LEARN?!! I'm just gonna give up. Like i can't do it... *sigh*

jumpguy

Have vectors, probability & stats, and the option (Further Calculus and Series) to get done today. Started at 11:30 and I've only just finished vectors (and 8 years worth of questions on 'em).

Jaaaaayzuz. Gonna be long night...

jumpguy

KnifeWRENCH wrote: »

Blindly memorising stuff and regurgitating it is how you do well in the Leaving Cert. It's only a glorified memory test, at the end of the day.

I'm not saying this because I want to big-up my whole "omg I'm doing the LC thing" - but I hate when people say this.

Aren't most exams the same? For example, how else are you meant to learn biology, or geography? There's not much more to them - they're knowledge based exams.

In English, there was pretty much no part of the paper where you could blindly regurgitate, not even on paper 2. Plenty of caveats to every question. It takes a lot of work to have answers prepared, and once again, the knowledge of your texts (poets, comparatives, single text, etc) are knowledge-based. There's no other way of "learning" them. It's simply that type of exam.

Maths usually is never the same - an A1 student would never get away with only being able to regurgitate. That might get you a B3 at best most years the current course has been examined. I know a lad in my class, can get an A1 in geography or anything that involves learning, but he struggles with chemistry and maths. He knows the stuff, but because the question doesn't tell him "fire out that part of your notes there," he struggles.

Most tests require a memory, of course, except it's usually called "knowledge," which the LC and most exams test. Some subjects require an "intelligence." I know plenty of people who are excellent at maths and struggle at English. Would they be regarded as intelligent just because they're good at maths? No, they only possess one type of intelligence (and unfortunately not everyone is an all-rounder).

/rant

The maths paper wasn't as bad as anybody was saying. It was more about understanding and solving original problems than about slogging through algebra. People shouldn't get irate over being asked to think a bit more in a maths exam.

What was shocking were the maths teachers on the radio saying that they couldn't do some of the questions. Considering I have only half of a degree and one of them had a masters, it's shocking.

I will admit that question 8 was harder than usual, although 8(c) came out in a few seconds with polar coordinates. :P

randylonghorn

randylonghorn wrote: »

Certainly seemed to get a more normal / mixed reaction.
Just start with Noel, and we'll see how you get on with that challenge!!



(Pyg, I know where you're coming from, and there's some of that, but there do seem to have been a couple of bitchy bits which the teachers and even college students doing maths - who are probably more neutral - are raising an eyebrow about. Still, no need for the mass hysteria like ... any bits deemed genuinely OTT will just be dealt with at the marking scheme stage.)

To be fair, I could do it. I think the teachers who are vocal about it are representing their own interests.

The truth is that everything on the paper was answerable using only concepts that are on the syllabus.

marko93

I just realised how fecked I am for getting into college..
Fúck.

Grindylow

marko93 wrote: »

I just realised how fecked I am for getting into college..
Fúck.

Whhhy?

coffeelover

He knows the stuff, but because the question doesn't tell him "fire out that part of your notes there," he struggles.

This is me all over.. If I haven't something learned of word for word I struggle

marko93

Course i want is 325.. For some of you, thats nothing, i know.
I only do 3 higher levels. I've done so little work. I'm banking on a cracin English, 120 points from history and french(OL)
So, betweeen 75-85 on top of that is between 195-205..
My other 2 higher levels are Business and Biology.
I'm just so lost with them.
I'll probably have to repeat
Worst of all, I applied for a PLC in Colaiste Ide and have heard NOTHING back.
If the stress from the exams dont kill me, the thoughts of repeating will.
Future note to anyone wanting to go college.
Study, dont be a bum like me ;_;

**Timbuk2**

Deleted User wrote: »

To be fair, I could do it. I think the teachers who are vocal about it are representing their own interests.

The truth is that everything on the paper was answerable using only concepts that are on the syllabus.

I didn't think it was that bad either, but I didn't do it out or anything - there were a few tricky part (c)s and that may have resulted in me running short on time! In fairness to them, I don't think using integration methods to show that the area of the disc is (pi)*r^2 is on the syllabus - it came up on my 1st year calculus exam, but I can't remember doing it for the LC!

Grindylow

marko93 wrote: »

Course i want is 325.. For some of you, thats nothing, i know.
I only do 3 higher levels. I've done so little work. I'm banking on a cracin English, 120 points from history and french(OL)
So, betweeen 75-85 on top of that is between 195-205..
My other 2 higher levels are Business and Biology.
I'm just so lost with them.
I'll probably have to repeat
Worst of all, I applied for a PLC in Colaiste Ide and have heard NOTHING back.
If the stress from the exams dont kill me, the thoughts of repeating will.
Future note to anyone wanting to go college.
Study, dont be a bum like me ;_;

But sure if you do 6 subjects:

Higher Level 1 - B3 - 75
Higher Level 2 - C2 - 65
Higher Level 3 - C2 - 65
Ordinary Level 1 - A1 - 60
Ordinary Level 2 - A1 - 60
Ordinary Level 3 - B3 - 35

That's 360 points, so give or take some grades and you'd still have enough!

marko93

Noel2k9 wrote: »

But sure if you do 6 subjects:

Higher Level 1 - B3 - 75
Higher Level 2 - C2 - 65
Higher Level 3 - C2 - 65
Ordinary Level 1 - A1 - 60
Ordinary Level 2 - A1 - 60
Ordinary Level 3 - B3 - 35

That's 360 points, so give or take some grades and you'd still have enough!

O.O

This i did not know..
Noel i love you..

Grindylow

marko93 wrote: »

O.O

This i did not know..
Noel i love you..

Have some confidence :P You'll do better than you expected!

marko93

I hope so..
They were the kind of grades i was looking at.. Maybe higher in Bio.. BUT DAYUUUM.
Ahhh, I'm all happy now.
Noel, you sir are a saint.

**Timbuk2**

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

I didn't think it was that bad either, but I didn't do it out or anything - there were a few tricky part (c)s and that may have resulted in me running short on time! In fairness to them, I don't think using integration methods to show that the area of the disc is (pi)*r^2 is on the syllabus - it came up on my 1st year calculus exam, but I can't remember doing it for the LC!

It is! Equation of a circle is on, area under curves is on, trig substitutions are on. Done.

My polar coordinate method obviously isn't on, but that was just showing off.

KnifeWRENCH

jumpguy wrote: »

I'm not saying this because I want to big-up my whole "omg I'm doing the LC thing" - but I hate when people say this.

Aren't most exams the same? For example, how else are you meant to learn biology, or geography? There's not much more to them - they're knowledge based exams.

In English, there was pretty much no part of the paper where you could blindly regurgitate, not even on paper 2. Plenty of caveats to every question. It takes a lot of work to have answers prepared, and once again, the knowledge of your texts (poets, comparatives, single text, etc) are knowledge-based. There's no other way of "learning" them. It's simply that type of exam.

Maths usually is never the same - an A1 student would never get away with only being able to regurgitate. That might get you a B3 at best most years the current course has been examined. I know a lad in my class, can get an A1 in geography or anything that involves learning, but he struggles with chemistry and maths. He knows the stuff, but because the question doesn't tell him "fire out that part of your notes there," he struggles.

Most tests require a memory, of course, except it's usually called "knowledge," which the LC and most exams test. Some subjects require an "intelligence." I know plenty of people who are excellent at maths and struggle at English. Would they be regarded as intelligent just because they're good at maths? No, they only possess one type of intelligence (and unfortunately not everyone is an all-rounder).

/rant

Oh ffs :rolleyes: I never said it didn't take any work to memorise stuff or that it didn't test knowledge. But knowledge =/= intelligence. I "know" plenty from doing the LC but it's fúck all use to me in real life.
Yeah knowledge based exams require learning off spiels of notes. If you can put those notes into some beneficial practice afterwards then all well and good but in how many cases does the LC actually do this?

I'm not slating anyone who does well on the Leaving Cert; if you work hard, you deserve marks. All I was saying is that a lot of it is geared solely towards memory based learning, and sometimes, as with Maths Paper I just showed, that strategy doesn't work.

So yes, in my opinion the LC is a "glorified memory test" and I stand by that. And if you're gonna be all hyper-sensitive about that then ring Joe Duffy or something. It's still great if you do well in it, but in most cases it doesn't prove much beyond your willingness to learn shít off. Don't think it's a true measure of how intelligent you are.

Pygmalion

jumpguy wrote: »

Aren't most exams the same? For example, how else are you meant to learn biology, or geography? There's not much more to them - they're knowledge based exams.

Most tests require a memory, of course, except it's usually called "knowledge," which the LC and most exams test. Some subjects require an "intelligence." I know plenty of people who are excellent at maths and struggle at English. Would they be regarded as intelligent just because they're good at maths? No, they only possess one type of intelligence (and unfortunately not everyone is an all-rounder).

/rant

There's a difference between "knowledge", and blindly memorised facts.
The only things that actually "need" to be memorised are definitions, quotes, and formulae (and not so much formulae with the new tables).

Someone with actual knowledge of a subject will be able to handle a variation in how a question is asked, and be able to approach a problem from a different angle; someone who blindly memorises information will not.
A good exam will seek to differentiate between the two, people who blindly memorise information will probably still be able to pass, but they won't be able to do particularly well.

The Leaving Cert though makes no such effort, and with the exception of a few subjects, gives no incentive to actually learn the material.
The people who complain every year about a question that they didn't expect aren't the people with "knowledge" of the subject, they're people annoyed that their tactic of preparing for a specific question instead of learning has failed them.

I think jumpguy's point is probably a bit annoying when he needs serious points for medicine and he gets told that if shouldn't be rote learning things because of some educational ideals.

KnifeWRENCH

Deleted User wrote: »

I think jumpguy's point is probably a bit annoying when he needs serious points for medicine and he gets told that if shouldn't be rote learning things because of some educational ideals.

And my point was that rote learning things is generally how one does get points. I'm not going to look down on anyone who gets points by rote learning; I had to argue about this to someone else before in the past. It's a flaw in the system, not a flaw in the person involved. It takes a lot of effort, and I'm not going to look down on someone for that.

I mostly got through my LC by rote learning and did fairly well, so it would be rather hypocritical of me to dismiss that as lazy when I fúcking worked my ass off for those points. If anything, that only reinforces in my mind that the LC is a glorified memory test, doesn't mean I didn't work for it. But according to jumpguy I was implying the LC didn't require much work and THAT was what pissed me off about his post.

Anyway, I came here to post another aaaarrrgghhh completely. I didn't think I'd have to respond to anything like this.