I would say that there is very little difference betwen about a 46 - 49 in methods except luck on the day...people who get 50 are still pretty freaky cos they just...don't...make...mistakes... 
By inference, my feeling is that to get 46+ is a real achievement because it requires exceptionally solid and firm understanding of the course. To get between 40 - 45, I reckon you need to be good enough to answer all extended response questions confidently, with some slips allowed in the MC...not tooo hard if you keep up to date all the time. I did the methods course in the summer holidays before the school year, which let me use class to reinforce ideas and identify the weak points (where I wasn't expecting the next step shown by the teacher). I did about 45 mins a night (that said, having done the course and quite a number of questions before!), with a lot of extra work near SACs (eg. all relevant checkpoints), which saved me a lot of time 'revising' near the end.
I agree with what has been said about tutors - I feel they're helpful more regularly for students who struggle a little bit. They can be helpful on a one-off basis (in later holidays or closer to the exam for instance) for stronger students too if it is a suitable tutor who knows what you want (eg. maybe some harder questions, or reinforcing some key areas).
This is an accurate analysis. Particularly about scoring 46+. The difference between a 46 and a 50 is usually waking up on the right side of the bed.
Haha, I agree with you for all subjects, except for this years methods exam. XD
As a result of the "cone of death" question in exam 1, the difference between people got 44 and 50 would just be those who woke up on the right side of the bed. Haha.
But yea, I've heard similar stories from my teachers, particularly for maths. Minimising your mistakes is the key, if possible.
Home
Help
Search
Login
