AQA MM03 8th June 2016 Exam Discussion

Can you post the report?

What BS of a report. Most students didn't even know what to do for most of the questions and they know it. And those who might've figured it ran out of time. That's all there is to it.

i would like to meet those "some people" who got full marks

I don't suppose you also have the mark schemes and reports for physics?

nah i dont know where it is
i want to see them too

The introduction to the Core 3 report was a good read. "lots has been said and written..." I can't help but feel the feedback on M3 didn't really line up with the boundaries. From what was said on the report it seemed a fairly average paper.

The introduction to the Core 3 report was a good read. "lots has been said and written..." I can't help but feel the feedback on M3 didn't really line up with the boundaries. From what was said on the report it seemed a fairly average paper.

Precisely why the report is BS. Maybe if we got a petition going with over 10,000 signatures it might've been more reflective on it's difficulty.

I've heard some teachers did the paper in timed conditions and parts left the last question due to time constraints, as did I (missing part of 8(b)). The boundaries reflect this fact (53/75 for an A* is the lowest I have come across in all the years of this specification, and should raise alarm bells that a paper is too difficult).

If the examiners say it was a fairly average paper, they have access to all the data, I'm pretty sure they mean it was a fairly average paper, they have no reason to sugar coat an examiner's report.

But in this case the data suggests otherwise, with grade boundaries 12 marks lower than the 2015 paper (a paper of average difficulty). My point is, this was not addressed in the report.

Yes the boundaries are low, but why would it ever be fair to raise the boundaries when the difficulty has already been considered against how candidates actually performed in the exam. The grade boundaries are statistical, no arguments can be made to raise or lower them, it would go against the whole point of a grade boundary in the first place. The only subjective area of marking a paper is on a question by question basis where 'pity' marks are rewarded. The grade boundaries themselves are not subjective, but are based on the performance of the whole quota.

Understandable, but I'm not saying they should be lowered or raised. I just find it odd that a report on the examination wouldn't address how difficult the paper was compared to previous ones, and that even the boundaries seem to suggest that it was a difficult paper.

Understandable, but I'm not saying they should be lowered or raised. I just find it odd that a report on the examination wouldn't address how difficult the paper was compared to previous ones, and that even the boundaries seem to suggest that it was a difficult paper.

Yeh I think it should definately be adressed aswell.

It was in the Core 3 paper

"Since the exam, much has been said and written about the perceived difficulty of this MPC3 paper, and indeed it was noticeable that far fewer students achieved high marks."

"As is always the case, grade boundaries are set to maintain standards year on year and this led to lower grade boundaries for this paper, particularly at grade A. The resulting distribution of uniform marks is very similar in nature to that seen in previous years."

I understand that the boundaries are set to make the paper fair, but they could've at least passed some comment on the M3 paper like this