Exam Thoughts & Review

[dh1993]

couldnt we use PET scan for the imaging thing ? PET shows functions too..

[Anon123]

what did you guys do for the three phase model with the kid having a tantrum. i did it wrong i think

s=tantrum
r=parents ignoring him
c=negative punishment

This was one of the things that had me confused for a while, I didn't know whether it was

antecedent condition -> tantrum -> consequence

or

tantrum -> parents response -> consequence

The first seemed to make more sense, but yet another poorly written question was no longer a surprise by that stage

[Camo]

couldnt we use PET scan for the imaging thing ? PET shows functions too..

PET, SPECT AND FMRI.

They should all be awarded.

[dh1993]

THANK GOD. Im starting to doubt ill get an A+ now for some reason but then again unit 3 i legit thought i got a B but it was an A+. Maybe everyone will surprise themselves

[roxannie136]

what was the A+ cut off in unit 3?

[dh1993]

71/90.

[SamiJ]

Do you guys think the A+ cut-off will be low? I'm still having mixed feelings about whether this was an "easy" exam for the state or a "hard" one

I think it will be higher.. many of my classmates said it was 'easy' and 'much easier than mid-years' ... 'killed it'... 'raped it'... and what not.... I thought it was similar difficulty ... maybe it was because i actually prepared for alzheimer's for mid year so i wasn't thrown off.

Words don't always mean much, wait until they see their scores then asked them who 'killed it' or 'raped it'

what did you guys do for the three phase model with the kid having a tantrum. i did it wrong i think

s=tantrum
r=parents ignoring him
c=negative punishment

This was one of the things that had me confused for a while, I didn't know whether it was

antecedent condition -> tantrum -> consequence

or

tantrum -> parents response -> consequence

The first seemed to make more sense, but yet another poorly written question was no longer a surprise by that stage

I had the second one


and i wrote fMRI hope we still get the marks...

THANK GOD. Im starting to doubt ill get an A+ now for some reason but then again unit 3 i legit thought i got a B but it was an A+. Maybe everyone will surprise themselves

This would be nice

[ben_sebastian4]

what did you guys do for the three phase model with the kid having a tantrum. i did it wrong i think

s=tantrum
r=parents ignoring him
c=negative punishment

This was one of the things that had me confused for a while, I didn't know whether it was

antecedent condition -> tantrum -> consequence

or

tantrum -> parents response -> consequence

The first seemed to make more sense, but yet another poorly written question was no longer a surprise by that stage

I went with the latter option cause i thought that they were like asking what would the parent do to manage the child, not the response of a child. So i said basically that the tantrum was the discriminative stimulus, then the operant response was smacking the child and the consequences was that the child would shut up lol.
Hopefully the cut offs stay the same as mid year, i mean geez VCAA couldn't even manage one decent exam. Suppose they think that the ambiguity of the questions is meant to separate us but its really just a pain in the arse.

[choc001]

does anyone have a copy of the exam??

[Camo]

does anyone have a copy of the exam??

Yeah can we get a copy, to take apart, please tell me someone has one.

[Chirpsy]

i really shouldnt be looking at these forums after an exam. it makes me all depressed knowing that i got half the crap wrong

[dh1993]

yeah agreed massive pain. I used positive punishment for the tantrum i think.. the "3 phase model" thing got me confused cos i always practiced operant with just knowing what the reinfocements are and the punishments etc.. i think i said the stimulus was whatever the child desired but perhaps couldnt get, and then response tantrum, and consequence punishment to decrease it. probably wrong fml

[SamiJ]

what did you guys do for the three phase model with the kid having a tantrum. i did it wrong i think

s=tantrum
r=parents ignoring him
c=negative punishment

This was one of the things that had me confused for a while, I didn't know whether it was

antecedent condition -> tantrum -> consequence

or

tantrum -> parents response -> consequence

The first seemed to make more sense, but yet another poorly written question was no longer a surprise by that stage

I went with the latter option cause i thought that they were like asking what would the parent do to manage the child, not the response of a child. So i said basically that the tantrum was the discriminative stimulus, then the operant response was smacking the child and the consequences was that the child would shut up lol.
Hopefully the cut offs stay the same as mid year, i mean geez VCAA couldn't even manage one decent exam. Suppose they think that the ambiguity of the questions is meant to separate us but its really just a pain in the arse.

I did the same! Exactly! so fingers crossed

i really shouldnt be looking at these forums after an exam. it makes me all depressed knowing that i got half the crap wrong

Me too! 

[Zafaraaaa]

THANK GOD. Im starting to doubt ill get an A+ now for some reason but then again unit 3 i legit thought i got a B but it was an A+. Maybe everyone will surprise themselves

So much for not ruminating on the unit 4 exam! hahaha we just can't help ourselves

[Anon123]

I went with the latter option cause i thought that they were like asking what would the parent do to manage the child, not the response of a child. So i said basically that the tantrum was the discriminative stimulus, then the operant response was smacking the child and the consequences was that the child would shut up lol.
Hopefully the cut offs stay the same as mid year, i mean geez VCAA couldn't even manage one decent exam. Suppose they think that the ambiguity of the questions is meant to separate us but its really just a pain in the arse.

See the thing was, or well what I thought - was that the child was supposed to be the learner in this situation; not the parent, so to me
antecedent condition -> tantrum -> consequence made sense, to me at least :x

So that when the child was punished for throwing a tantrum, it would be less likely to throw a tantrum in the future. thats my take anyway