AQA A2 MFP3 Further Pure 3 – 18th May 2016 [Exam Discussion Thread]

Reply 560

jjsnyder

OP

10

Original post by Zacken

c1 skrebs moaning innit

Exactly, don't know about Edexcel but AQA C1 didn't seem too bad at all for a C1 paper.

Reply 561

zetamcfc

19

Original post by Zacken

c1 skrebs moaning innit

Reply 562

jjsnyder

OP

10

Original post by Xzielon

I'm very proud of getting between 93-100% on the past papers and hopefully 70%ish when it actually matters. Pfft, who needs an A* anyway... or an A...B...C

While the quoted post is very direct, there is a point there. The exam was not 'outrageous' by any means, the only thing that I can think of where people have grounds to argue is the limit substitution, which (correct me if I am wrong) does not appear in the textbook or specification but people didn't seem to find it too hard. Other then that, all the questions were perfectly okay, and the marks awarded for some parts were generous. Thing that threw a lot of people was the layout, but really I think that's a good thing as before it was just the same paper pretty much every year, so those that have no idea what they are doing can get a decent grade anyway just by memorising the test format and previous mark schemes.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 563

Qcomber

3

Original post by jjsnyder

While the quoted post is very direct, there is a point there. The exam was not 'outrageous' by any means, the only thing that I can think of where people have grounds to argue is the limit substitution, which (correct me if I am wrong) does not appear in the textbook or specification but people didn't seem to find it too hard. Other then that, all the questions were perfectly okay, and the marks awarded for some parts were generous. Thing that threw a lot of people was the layout, but really I think that's a good thing as before it was just the same paper pretty much every year, so those that have no idea what they are doing can get a decent grade anyway just by memorising the test format and previous mark schemes.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Timing was an issue for many. It felt like each mark took more time than in previous papers.

Reply 564

Anon123hahaha

How many marks was the q2 (qx^5 one) worth (part b) and how many marks was the polar to cartesian thing worth... If possible please. Predictions for the A* boundary?

Reply 565

Qcomber

3

Original post by Anon123hahaha

How many marks was the q2 (qx^5 one) worth (part b) and how many marks was the polar to cartesian thing worth... If possible please. Predictions for the A* boundary?

2)(b) 4 marks
polar to cartesian (a) 5 marks (b) 1 mark
My A* prediction: 66

Reply 566

zetamcfc

19

Original post by jjsnyder

While the quoted post is very direct, there is a point there. The exam was not 'outrageous' by any means, the only thing that I can think of where people have grounds to argue is the limit substitution, which (correct me if I am wrong) does not appear in the textbook or specification but people didn't seem to find it too hard. Other then that, all the questions were perfectly okay, and the marks awarded for some parts were generous. Thing that threw a lot of people was the layout, but really I think that's a good thing as before it was just the same paper pretty much every year, so those that have no idea what they are doing can get a decent grade anyway just by memorising the test format and previous mark schemes.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Do you have a copy of this question?

Reply 567

DEWR98

4

This only started worrying me yesterday(after the exam) but for non-proof questions do examiners give you full marks for an answer if it's correct but you don't show exactly all the working they have in the mark scheme? I ask this because I got all the answers in this unofficial mark scheme (apart from in the real exam I didn't know where to start to prove the (cosα +sinα)^2 so lost 4 marks definitely; I realised how to do it after school). And also I tend to do a lot of arithmetic in my head so skip writing some of the method parts but normally get to the answer, so should I not be worried or?

Reply 568

Hjyu1

2

Original post by DEWR98

This only started worrying me yesterday(after the exam) but for non-proof questions do examiners give you full marks for an answer if it's correct but you don't show exactly all the working they have in the mark scheme? I ask this because I got all the answers in this unofficial mark scheme (apart from in the real exam I didn't know where to start to prove the (cosα +sinα)^2 so lost 4 marks definitely; I realised how to do it after school). And also I tend to do a lot of arithmetic in my head so skip writing some of the method parts but normally get to the answer, so should I not be worried or?

No point being worried just concentrate on your other exams and try max out your scores so even if u get lower than u think in that one exam you can still meet your offer assuming that you are going this year....

Reply 569

DEWR98

4

Original post by Hjyu1

No point being worried just concentrate on your other exams and try max out your scores so even if u get lower than u think in that one exam you can still meet your offer assuming that you are going this year....

Oh sorry no, I'm in year 12 but I'm really hoping to get an A* in FP3 this year so I don't have to resit it next year and can focus on my other modules

Reply 570

Hjyu1

2

Original post by DEWR98

Oh sorry no, I'm in year 12 but I'm really hoping to get an A* in FP3 this year so I don't have to resit it next year and can focus on my other modules

Oh **** well okay I'll shut up now...

Reply 571

DEWR98

4

Original post by Hjyu1

Oh **** well okay I'll shut up now...

I just wanted to know in case I should continue how I was or go for full methods which is much more time-consuming and in this year especially AQA are making each question more unique than in previous years so time is definitely of the essence

uckerz

uckerz

Just wanted to say the hitler video is out
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzmJV2xQHzM

Reply 574

Anon123hahaha

Original post by Qcomber

2)(b) 4 marks
polar to cartesian (a) 5 marks (b) 1 mark
My A* prediction: 66

Thanks for your response mate. Much appreciated.

Reply 575

jjsnyder

OP

10

Original post by zetamcfc

Do you have a copy of this question?

No, think it was find the lim(p->infinity)[lnp/p^n] for n>0. A limit substitution was in the specimen paper, but still I see no scope for it in the specification.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 576

zetamcfc

19

Original post by jjsnyder

No, think it was find the lim(p->infinity)[lnp/p^n] for n>0. A limit substitution was in the specimen paper, but still I see no scope for it in the specification.

Posted from TSR Mobile

\lim_{p \rightarrow \infty} \frac{ln(p)}{p^n}

right?

Reply 577

sam_97

6

For everyone asking about the limit substitution question, I believe this is what they are looking for:

Question
Using the substitution

a = \dfrac{1}{p}

find the value of

\displaystyle\lim_{p\to \infty}\frac{\ln p}{p^k}

where

k > 0

.

Solution
Well, if

p\to \infty

, then

{\dfrac{1}{p}\to 0}

. So, using the substitution given,

a\to 0

.

Noting that

p = \dfrac{1}{a}

the original limit can now be rewritten as:

\displaystyle\lim_{a\to 0}\frac{\ln \frac{1}{a}}{\frac{1}{a^k}} \ = \ \displaystyle\lim_{a\to 0}a^k{\ln \frac{1}{a}} \ = \ \displaystyle\lim_{a\to 0}-a^k{\ln a}

You should recognise this limit as one of the standard limits in the specification (the negative sign has no relevance).

Therefore,

\displaystyle\lim_{p\to \infty}\frac{\ln p}{p^k}= 0

Hope that helps :smile:

If there is anything else you are unsure about let me know!

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 578

IrrationalRoot

20

Original post by jjsnyder

While the quoted post is very direct, there is a point there. The exam was not 'outrageous' by any means, the only thing that I can think of where people have grounds to argue is the limit substitution, which (correct me if I am wrong) does not appear in the textbook or specification but people didn't seem to find it too hard. Other then that, all the questions were perfectly okay, and the marks awarded for some parts were generous. Thing that threw a lot of people was the layout, but really I think that's a good thing as before it was just the same paper pretty much every year, so those that have no idea what they are doing can get a decent grade anyway just by memorising the test format and previous mark schemes.

Posted from TSR Mobile

This is correct. They did very well to really challenge and test students' understanding this year instead of letting them get away with coasting through the paper on account of rote memorisation. It's not unreasonable at all; if you're genuinely good at the topics in the module you should have very few problems.

Btw there are in fact limit substitutions in the textbook (quite a few), so no excuses there.

Reply 579

IrrationalRoot

20

Original post by sam_97

For everyone asking about the limit substitution question, I believe this is what they are looking for:

...

As evidenced here, there is no need for this topic to be on the spec for it to be 'allowed' on papers. Everyone should know how substitution of variables works, and this question is simply a matter of substituting p for a.

AQA A2 MFP3 Further Pure 3 – 18th May 2016 [Exam Discussion Thread]

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you