Further Maths Exam 2: Answers + Discussion!

[cwiddicombe]

Updated the main post with solutions for Business Maths!

Lemme know if I've got anything wrong... I haven't touched Further in exactly 1 year.

Thank you!
Now i can stop fretting knowing that I got the same answer as you for the last question. That one totally freaked me out.

[IntelxD]

Updated the main post with solutions for Business Maths!

Lemme know if I've got anything wrong... I haven't touched Further in exactly 1 year.

All your solutions seem to be correct Thank you by the way.

[Han123]

its not a dumb question, it is a greater chance if you full mark exam 2 as each mark in exam 2 is more valuable than exam 1, given exam 1 being worth 22% and exam 2 being worth 44% of study score

I'm pretty sure they are 33% each, so losing one on exam 1 would be worth slightly more than 1 on exam 2

[Marcus191]

Hi guys, what SS will these scores get me:
97/100 SACS ranked number 1
37/40 GA1
55/60 GA2

Thanks.

[Sanguinne]

Do we only lose a maximum of 1 mark for rounding errors??

For the core question, instead of 23000, i wrote 22800 (nearest hundred instead of thousand) and for graphs and relations last question, i wrote 15 instead of 15.2. Do i lose 2 marks or 1?

[Sam_4331]

i think the number of elephants for last question in trig is 47, i could be incorrect but

5000*1.06-47=5253
5253*1.06-47=5521.18

5521.18>5520

so 47 elephants getting removed is still okay, and 48 is not as

5000*1.06-48=5252
5252*1.06-48=5519.12

5519.12<5520
so this doesnt work

[footyal9]

Could some please tell me where I can get the exam

[silverpixeli]

i think the number of elephants for last question in trig is 47, i could be incorrect but

5000*1.06-47=5253
5253*1.06-47=5521.18

5521.18>5520

so 47 elephants getting removed is still okay, and 48 is not as

5000*1.06-48=5252
5252*1.06-48=5519.12

5519.12<5520
so this doesnt work

my understanding is that it wanted the minimum that could be removed so that you get a number less than 5520, if you only take away 47 then that doesn't quite happen but if you take away 48, it does. Taking away 49, 50, etc would also satisfy the 'less than' but 48 is the minimum

[adderz308]

Just out of curiosity what SS am I looking at if I am rank 10 in a really good cohort, 34/40 exam 1 and 55/60 for exam 2

[Semper_Paratus]

my understanding is that it wanted the minimum that could be removed so that you get a number less than 5520, if you only take away 47 then that doesn't quite happen but if you take away 48, it does. Taking away 49, 50, etc would also satisfy the 'less than' but 48 is the minimum

that's also how I understand it

[cevap]

For the core question were we had to draw the regression line on the scatterplot did we have to label the two points, i just drew the line however i did write the points i used in brackets right underneath the question, will i get the mark?

[_ahansen]

isnt core: 4 bii 1?
as 5% times 38 = 1.9
         ~ therefore rounded up to 2 ?
 

[Dan1995]

For the core question were we had to draw the regression line on the scatterplot did we have to label the two points, i just drew the line however i did write the points i used in brackets right underneath the question, will i get the mark?

If you have the points either on the graph or under the question then you should get the mark.

[redcracker]

so is 39/40 and 60/60 from top rank at a stronger cohort good enough for 50??

[Dan1995]

isnt core: 4 bii 1?
as 5% times 38 = 1.9
         ~ therefore rounded up to 2 ?
 

It's 2.5% of 38 =0.95 so round up to 1