2010- sm-exam2 solutions

[a.zirek]

Hmm, for 4.c) you were meant to bring out on the denominator as and then, as , make it and cancel accordingly. I don't think the little "" under the working will be sufficient.

If this is what you did in the exam, assuming you did the exam, you would most likely lose a mark.

He's not a student btw.
He's an assessor, so I think you'd be allowed to do that.

[Chavi]

Hmm, for 4.c) you were meant to bring out on the denominator as and then, as , make it and cancel accordingly. I don't think the little "" under the working will be sufficient.

If this is what you did in the exam, assuming you did the exam, you would most likely lose a mark.

disagree you won't lose the mark, ive done it like a million times and stuff not putting the modulus even though ur supposed to be, but coz x >0 u can leave it out they won't crucify u over it. its better to put it in and then reject it, but i doubt ud lose the mark, it all depends on the examiner i guess.

i remember last year for methods, i forgot to put in plus c and chuck in initial conditions to find that c=0. i just forgot it and i didn't lose marks on both double marking.

For this question, there were two derivatives for both sides of the cusp - the answer doesn't follow on to the next question, unless you account for the Modulus.

[Chavi]

Hmm, for 4.c) you were meant to bring out on the denominator as and then, as , make it and cancel accordingly. I don't think the little "" under the working will be sufficient.

If this is what you did in the exam, assuming you did the exam, you would most likely lose a mark.

He's not a student btw.
He's an assessor, so I think you'd be allowed to do that.

He is a student. . .?

[Martoman]

gah will drop a mark for derivative graph; apart from that all good

[a.zirek]

Hmm, for 4.c) you were meant to bring out on the denominator as and then, as , make it and cancel accordingly. I don't think the little "" under the working will be sufficient.

If this is what you did in the exam, assuming you did the exam, you would most likely lose a mark.

He's not a student btw.
He's an assessor, so I think you'd be allowed to do that.

He is a student. . .?

He's my teacher.

[Chavi]

gah will drop a mark for derivative graph; apart from that all good

Marto, are you sitting on 119/120? 

Hmm, for 4.c) you were meant to bring out on the denominator as and then, as , make it and cancel accordingly. I don't think the little "" under the working will be sufficient.

If this is what you did in the exam, assuming you did the exam, you would most likely lose a mark.

He's not a student btw.
He's an assessor, so I think you'd be allowed to do that.

He is a student. . .?

He's my teacher.

So how do you explain this post:
http://vcenotes.com/forum/index.php/topic,30366.msg311963.html#msg311963
"My teacher made the insight 2010 exam 2 how do people find it???"

[a.zirek]

I explain it because the scanned paper, and not the account, belongs to my teacher.
What's with all the doubt?

[a.zirek]

gah will drop a mark for derivative graph; apart from that all good

That's bloody awesome Martoman.
On a 113/120 so far; I'm hoping it doesn't go down further.

[Elnino_Gerrard]

Well, if it makes you feel better, I'm at 18, not counting the stupid mistakes lying everywhere  :uglystupid2:

So im not the only one 

[m@tty]

Hmm, for 4.c) you were meant to bring out on the denominator as and then, as , make it and cancel accordingly. I don't think the little "" under the working will be sufficient.

If this is what you did in the exam, assuming you did the exam, you would most likely lose a mark.

He's not a student btw.
He's an assessor, so I think you'd be allowed to do that.

Honestly, I think letting that slide is really weak. C'mon assessors, encourage competence in mathematics, not fudging; many people would have had NO IDEA what they were meant to do and would simply skip along from their answer to the given answer, stating the condition, x>0, from the question stem.

I highly doubt that examiners, if they have any level of competence - which of course they should - will require a |x| or at least a shown to get full marks.

[Chavi]

Hmm, for 4.c) you were meant to bring out on the denominator as and then, as , make it and cancel accordingly. I don't think the little "" under the working will be sufficient.

If this is what you did in the exam, assuming you did the exam, you would most likely lose a mark.

He's not a student btw.
He's an assessor, so I think you'd be allowed to do that.

Honestly, I think letting that slide is really weak. 'Cmon assessors, encourage competence in mathematics, not fudging; many people would have had NO IDEA what they were meant to do and would simply skip along from their answer to the given answer, stating the condition, x>0, from the question stem.

I highly doubt that examiners, if they have any level of competence - which of course they should - will require a |x| or at least a shown to get full marks.

It was a three mark question. There's no way they can let this slip. . .

[m@tty]

Yeah, I actually thought while doing this question: "wow three marks, must be a trick that will catch most people" . . Turns out there was a nasty one.

There is extremely little room for omission in working because it is a "show that" question, so there is indeed no way they can let this slip.

[Chavi]

Yeah, I actually thought while doing this question: "wow three marks, must be a trick that will catch most people" . . Turns out there was a nasty one.

There is extremely little room for omission in working because it is a "show that" question, so there is indeed no way they can let this slip.

Right, if VCAA can take off 1 mark for not placing a solution in correct form (last question Exam 1), then they can definitely take off a mark for noMod.

[Nixernator]

Yeah, I actually thought while doing this question: "wow three marks, must be a trick that will catch most people" . . Turns out there was a nasty one.

There is extremely little room for omission in working because it is a "show that" question, so there is indeed no way they can let this slip.

Right, if VCAA can take off 1 mark for not placing a solution in correct form (last question Exam 1), then they can definitely take off a mark for noMod.

wonderful looks like two marks I lost right there...
Edit: And thats where I lost marks in methods last year, ahhh Sqrt(x^2) appears to be my downfall.

[Martoman]

With the large volume of fail over both exams, i doubt they will care.