U-substitution of Indefinite Integrals

[thushan]

SACs have different lenience than VCAA exams. And the reason it can't be used is that it is a spesh technique, allowing methods students to use it will inherently disadvantage those not doing spesh and also make it's study design look a bit ludicrous. For the same reason, int by parts isn't allowed in spesh.

The question is do-able solely with Method's knowledge as shown above

(the only exception here is second derivatives - only because VCAA made it an exception in a bulletin one time)

Kinda unfair on the people who aren't aware that using a non-standard method to solve a problem will cost marks.

[FlorianK]

SACs have different lenience than VCAA exams. And the reason it can't be used is that it is a spesh technique, allowing methods students to use it will inherently disadvantage those not doing spesh and also make it's study design look a bit ludicrous. For the same reason, int by parts isn't allowed in spesh.

The question is do-able solely with Method's knowledge as shown above

(the only exception here is second derivatives - only because VCAA made it an exception in a bulletin one time)

Kinda unfair on the people who aren't aware that using a non-standard method to solve a problem will cost marks.

Did you used any non-course-method in your exam?
If you did than it should be ok to use, i mean you got a 50

[pi]

SACs have different lenience than VCAA exams. And the reason it can't be used is that it is a spesh technique, allowing methods students to use it will inherently disadvantage those not doing spesh and also make it's study design look a bit ludicrous. For the same reason, int by parts isn't allowed in spesh.

The question is do-able solely with Method's knowledge as shown above

(the only exception here is second derivatives - only because VCAA made it an exception in a bulletin one time)

Kinda unfair on the people who aren't aware that using a non-standard method to solve a problem will cost marks.

Well, in fairness, most methods students don't do spesh (i think), so using u sub for those students would be highly "non standard" and hence, unfair on the majority of the cohort. Furthermore, the technique used to break fractions isn't an uncommon one.

Every question is designed to be done with solely methods knowledge, I don't see a problem with that tbh.

[thushan]

SACs have different lenience than VCAA exams. And the reason it can't be used is that it is a spesh technique, allowing methods students to use it will inherently disadvantage those not doing spesh and also make it's study design look a bit ludicrous. For the same reason, int by parts isn't allowed in spesh.

The question is do-able solely with Method's knowledge as shown above

(the only exception here is second derivatives - only because VCAA made it an exception in a bulletin one time)

Kinda unfair on the people who aren't aware that using a non-standard method to solve a problem will cost marks.

Did you used any non-course-method in your exam?
If you did than it should be ok to use, i mean you got a 50

I don't know. For the methods exam...I don't think I needed to use a spesh method for anything - as in, the 'methods' method was the quicker method. However, if there were a spesh method that were quicker, i would have used it in the exam.

I don't have a problem with all questions being doable with Methods knowledge in the methods exam, I just find it unfair that using spesh knowledge to solve a methods question quicker is to be penalised. Doesn't stop the methods student next to you using a valid methods method.

[paulsterio]

Well, in fairness, most methods students don't do spesh (i think), so using u sub for those students would be highly "non standard" and hence, unfair on the majority of the cohort. Furthermore, the technique used to break fractions isn't an uncommon one.

Actually, 8100 students do Methods every year and 4500 students do Spesh every year (rough estimates I know) - but if everybody who does Spesh does Methods as well, then there will be more Methods students who do Spesh than those who don't.

[kenhung123]

I think quite some people ask the same thing about using the 2nd derivative in methods.
From what I noticed, in the exam, there shouldn't be any question that will give advantage to those who simply know an advanced technique. So, it wouldn't be any easier/faster than the methods technique.
My teacher answered by saying you can't be penalised for using correct mathematics, but I don't know what the chief says.
But imo, you don't need to worry about this, like I said, it won't be a determining factor in the exam.

[Lasercookie]

Well, in fairness, most methods students don't do spesh (i think), so using u sub for those students would be highly "non standard" and hence, unfair on the majority of the cohort. Furthermore, the technique used to break fractions isn't an uncommon one.

Actually, 8100 students do Methods every year and 4500 students do Spesh every year (rough estimates I know) - but if everybody who does Spesh does Methods as well, then there will be more Methods students who do Spesh than those who don't.

Why estimate when you can look up the actual data on the VCAA site (the data is either in the media document they release and also in the statistics section)?

This is the enrollment data they give for 2011
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/statistics/2011/section2/vce_mathematical_methods_cas_11.pdf
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/statistics/2011/section2/vce_specialist_mathematics_11.pdf

They split the data by each unit and also note down the number that satisfactorily completed it, pretty interesting to see the differences in numbers (especially for unit 1/2 methods to unit 3/4 methods, irrelevant to topic though):

Methods is more around ~15500 (you were a bit off here )
Specialist is more around ~4000

[dinosaur93]

is integration by parts even included in the methods course?

I know that by recognition is certainly in the syllabus..

[kenhung123]

Nope it isn't.