* Honours Maths paper 1 * AFTERMATH

J_E · 10-06-2011 10:39pm

Paczini wrote: »

so I emailed Brendan Guildea and in reply got his private number,
Im gonna call him tomorrow to ask him about that paper

He was on radio this evening. Can't remember the exact words he used but he basically said it was dire.

LilMissCiara · 10-06-2011 10:39pm

bren2001 wrote: »

Attempt marks wont be raised, they will always be 2 or 3. The marking scheme has not been made yet, they have to wait on how people do on paper 2.

Though in some cases they are more lenient with attempt marks and give them for the smallest of right steps!

bren2001 · 10-06-2011 10:39pm

BrendaN_f wrote: »

eh, no. do you honestly believe that you managed to accurately predict your score to one decimal place using an unofficial marking scheme with no marks indication, entirely from memory?

Considering they don't know what marks go for each question I'd be surprised if he got that.

The marks are going to be moved around to follow the bell curve i.e. the easier parts will be given more marks. Nobody knows how they did yet.

Patri · 10-06-2011 10:40pm

LilMissCiara wrote: »

Anybody with a simple knowledge of past marking schemes could do it so less of the sarcasm.

I did the exam today, not last year. It wasn't exactly hard to remember what I had done and the answers I had got.

Marking schemes change to cater for the general population. There is no way for sure you can tell what you've gotten, especially with this paper, the marking schemes will be drastically changed or else there will be a serious incline in failures.

Maybe_Memories · 10-06-2011 10:40pm

To put you all at ease, I imagine only like 5 marks going for the second part of the factor theorem and for the graph thing in 7

MikeHough · 10-06-2011 10:41pm

polka dot wrote: »

Oh no, that wasn't me! Someone else (sorry can't remember username!) created a new thread with a poll and one of the mods merged it in.

I love your poll though. Very ... artistic :P

EDIT: it was mtb_kng

oh ok.sorry
haha....thanks!!!:D:D i like it too

oh well......it wont be used now:rolleyes:

so.....damn u mtb_kng

lynchy101 · 10-06-2011 10:42pm

The 2+2 was hard

LilMissCiara · 10-06-2011 10:44pm

LilMissCiara wrote: »

Using the solutions I went and corrected myself..! :P

I got 74.6%..!

bren2001 wrote: »

Considering they don't know what marks go for each question I'd be surprised if he got that.

The marks are going to be moved around to follow the bell curve i.e. the easier parts will be given more marks. Nobody knows how they did yet.

Patri wrote: »

Marking schemes change to cater for the general population. There is no way for sure you can tell what you've gotten, especially with this paper, the marking schemes will be drastically changed or else there will be a serious incline in failures.

I am not stupid and didn't come down in the last shower. However, I did say using the solutions I got 74.6%.

Obviously that is not the exact score that Mr. Examiner will give me using the marking schemes but it is some sort of a guide as to how I performed.

partyatmygaff · 10-06-2011 10:44pm

BrendaN_f wrote: »

eh, no. do you honestly believe that you managed to accurately predict your score to one decimal place using an unofficial marking scheme with no marks indication, entirely from memory?

This may be extremely arbitrary and in no way scientific but the best way to do something like this I think would be to "mark" your answers from memory against the solutions using what you would consider to be harsher marking than standard marking as per previous marking schemes. Then once you get a figure +10/-20 it and create a mark range. It may not be a perfect way of estimating your marks but it's the best we've got without a proper marking scheme.

C14N · 10-06-2011 10:45pm

KoolAidRelic wrote: »

What do you mean "a small part"? That's all of it. Integrate that between (-r) and (r) and you get 1/2*pi*r^2 which you multiply by two. I can remember doing it in class from one of the books and being specifically told that it was likely to come up because it's difficult and not in the tables book.

Because for most people (myself included), we had no way to even get to that part. I had a guess and kind of got it anyway but most people who knew the revolutions perfectly had no idea on how to use it to find area rather than volume.

LilMissCiara · 10-06-2011 10:46pm

partyatmygaff wrote: »

This may be extremely arbitrary and in no way scientific but the best way to do something like this I think would be to "mark" your answers from memory against the solutions using what you would consider to be harsher marking than standard marking as per previous marking schemes. Then once you get a figure +10/-20 it and create a mark range. It may not be a perfect way of estimating your marks but it's the best we've got without a proper marking scheme.

And this is exactly what I did, and I saw you did too..! I believe we both did very well (yes I added your marks! :P ) so although it's not our actual grade I think we can still be proud of ourselves!

bren2001 · 10-06-2011 10:47pm

LilMissCiara wrote: »

I am not stupid and didn't come down in the last shower. However, I did say using the solutions I got 74.6%.

Obviously that is not the exact score that Mr. Examiner will give me using the marking schemes but it is some sort of a guide as to how I performed.

What it tells you is you got above 60, you don't know how to much, how many marks you lost and what not. Don't go in thinking you got 74.6 for paper 2.

C14N · 10-06-2011 10:48pm

LilMissCiara wrote: »

I am not stupid and didn't come down in the last shower. However, I did say using the solutions I got 74.6%.

Obviously that is not the exact score that Mr. Examiner will give me using the marking schemes but it is some sort of a guide as to how I performed.

Where did you get this improvised Marking Scheme? I want to do the same thing.

randylonghorn · 10-06-2011 10:49pm

lynchy101 wrote: »

Our supervisor was sound and let us use our books for a while.
We are all really hopeful for an A now.

Stop trolling!! - R.

lynchy101 wrote: »

The 2+2 was hard

Bye now!

EDIT: Ban lifted following apology.

polka dot wrote: »

Trolls have arrived.

Indeed!

KoolAidRelic · 10-06-2011 10:51pm

C14N wrote: »

Because for most people (myself included), we had no way to even get to that part. I had a guess and kind of got it anyway but most people who knew the revolutions perfectly had no idea on how to use it to find area rather than volume.

You must have had a very bad teacher then... it wasn't a revolution one at all, and came up in a previous paper (99, I think, not sure offhand).

Paczini · 10-06-2011 10:51pm

Cydoniac wrote: »

He was on radio this evening. Can't remember the exact words he used but he basically said it was dire.

I know that he was on the radio and TV but I didn't get a chance to listen to him. As well as that I prefer to ask him personally about his own views.

nommm wrote: »

I was talking to his mate George Humphrey. They're both disgusted by it. Apparently there was a few questions even they couldn't quite get their head around!

Yeah, I was thinkin about George too but I don't have any contact directly to him.

purple27 · 10-06-2011 10:54pm

I thought it was an alright paper when I did it out at home, but if I was in an exam setting I probably would have panicked and ****ed it up!

LilMissCiara · 10-06-2011 10:56pm

C14N wrote: »

Where did you get this improvised Marking Scheme? I want to do the same thing.

The solutions are printed a few pages back on this and then I used the standard 10, 20, 20 scheme.

C14N · 10-06-2011 10:57pm

KoolAidRelic wrote: »

You must have had a very bad teacher then... it wasn't a revolution one at all, and came up in a previous paper (99, I think, not sure offhand).

Perhaps but this doesn't show up in the book either. I also have a few friends who have done grinds in the Institute on Saturdays since September who have never seen it.

Can someone help me out on figuring if this is right?

On Q2c, I worked out the bottom half of the fraction to be

$gif.latex?\frac{1}{(x+3)^2+2^2}$

And used this to show that it is both positive and less than 1. Is this answer valid?

kahf1_01 · 10-06-2011 10:58pm

The people who correct the papers, are they teachers ... will they feel sympathy and understand that this was a very odd and difficult paper?

If you want to re-check and view your scripts in September, who do you view it with? the examiner who corrected your paper? ... or do you alter the marks yourself.

bren2001 · 10-06-2011 10:58pm

purple27 wrote: »

I thought it was an alright paper when I did it out at home, but if I was in an exam setting I probably would have panicked and ****ed it up! The people I was giving grinds too seemed to feel okay afterwards, so I hope they've done well on it.

Shameless plug so someone asks for a grind off you over the weekend :pac: If you arn't booked up already for the weekend then its a sign of the quality of your grinds :pac:

KoolAidRelic · 10-06-2011 11:02pm

C14N wrote: »

Perhaps but this doesn't show up in the book either. I also have a few friends who have done grinds in the Institute on Saturdays since September who have never seen it.

Can someone help me out on figuring if this is right?

On Q2c, I worked out the bottom half of the fraction to be

$gif.latex?%5Cfrac%7B1%7D%7B%28x+3%29%5E2+2%5E2%7D$

And used this to show that it is both positive and less than 1. Is this answer valid?

New Concise Maths 4 page 201 has it.

That's a perfectly valid way of showing 2c.

partyatmygaff · 10-06-2011 11:05pm

kahf1_01 wrote: »

The people who correct the papers, are they teachers ... will they feel sympathy and understand that this was a very odd and difficult paper?

Examiners don't feel sympathy for an exam number. They organise a marking scheme between themselves and apply it.

If you want to re-check and view your scripts in September, who do you view it with? the examiner who corrected your paper? ... or do you alter the marks yourself.

Nice...

PJelly · 10-06-2011 11:05pm

KoolAidRelic wrote: »

New Concise Maths 4 page 201 has it.

That's a perfectly valid way of showing 2c.

I may have accidentally done that as (X-3)^2 + 3 somehow.
Is it still valid though? As it IS still going to always be positive.

purple27 · 10-06-2011 11:06pm

bren2001 wrote: »

-

Fxck, I didn't even realise it'd come across like that. Sorry, I'll take it out of my post.

randylonghorn · 10-06-2011 11:08pm

kahf1_01 wrote: »

The people who correct the papers, are they teachers ... will they feel sympathy and understand that this was a very odd and difficult paper?

The majority will be practising teachers, yes, and they tend to make their views on the papers known at the marking conferences!!

kahf1_01 wrote: »

If you want to re-check and view your scripts in September, who do you view it with? the examiner who corrected your paper? ... or do you alter the marks yourself.

You can bring in your own teacher to view it with you.

You won't be altering anything though ... if there is reason to believe there are errors in the marking, you can send it away for a re-check.

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Examiners don't feel sympathy for an exam number. They organise a marking scheme between themselves and apply it.

True, but they will bring their opinions to the conference, and they know perfectly well that someone will be marking their students using that marking scheme.

Fireball07 · 10-06-2011 11:10pm

C14N wrote: »

Perhaps but this doesn't show up in the book either. I also have a few friends who have done grinds in the Institute on Saturdays since September who have never seen it.

Can someone help me out on figuring if this is right?

On Q2c, I worked out the bottom half of the fraction to be

$gif.latex?\frac{1}{(x+3)^2+2^2}$

And used this to show that it is both positive and less than 1. Is this answer valid?

I did that. But was it not (x-3)^2. I honestly can't remember now.

kahf1_01 · 10-06-2011 11:11pm

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Examiners don't feel sympathy for an exam number. They organise a marking scheme between themselves and apply it.

Nice...

How do you alter your grade? who is there, your own maths teacher? I can see alot of people going back looking for grade changes, plus . . . I reckon all the examiners (correctors) will understand this was a very difficult paper, so they'll pity us

bren2001 · 10-06-2011 11:12pm

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Examiners don't feel sympathy for an exam number. They organise a marking scheme between themselves and apply it.

Nice...

A group of teachers don't just ramble in, do a marking scheme and ramble out. There are 10 selected teachers for paper 1 and paper 2 and are independant of each other (granted Oliver Murphy was on both). The set what they believe it fair for the paper. The then taken a sample number of papers, usually 100. Mark the papers. Draw a bell curve. If it follows the bell curve then the marking scheme is sent out if it doesnt then they adjust it.

The same number of people will get A's, B's , C's and D's this year as every year.

kahf1_01 · 10-06-2011 11:13pm

Ah I see, well I presume your own maths teacher will be helping you go up some marks

* Honours Maths paper 1 * AFTERMATH

Comments