AQA Maths Pure Core 1 MPC1 Jan 13th 2012

Scroll to see replies

In all honesty, I'm usually quite harsh on myself, though I can see it being a high C or a low B, just because the paper was such a spin on the usual. :s-smilie:

Yourself?

- Dan

Hmmmm So far I am waiting for an A But I think somehow Im being quite optimistic =/

Reply 61

CalumE5

Original post by 1platinum

You still have a chance of getting 100 UMS as often you don't need 100% raw marks in order to get maximum UMS.

Ahh yeah, that happened in my GCSE. I really don't understand how the UMS marks work lol, is there a thread anywhere explaining it?

Reply 62

DPowell

Original post by AndyHoughton

What did people get for the surds question? I got 18, 30 and 3-root10 respectively

30 and

3-root10

sounds right (or at least what I got!). And 18 must be right also, considering part b) was a follow-on.

- Dan

Reply 63

1platinum

Original post by CalumE5

Ahh yeah, that happened in my GCSE. I really don't understand how the UMS marks work lol, is there a thread anywhere explaining it?

Well it varies from paper to paper. For example the June 2011 C4 paper only required 65/75 to get 100 UMS, 58/75 to get 90 UMS and 51/75 UMS to get 80 UMS. If the grade boundaries are anywhere near as low as that for this paper then you never know what UMS you could possibly get until results day.

Reply 64

KING2011BOB

Original post by DPowell

Do you mean x<8? Could have sworn the other x value was -12. :redface:

- Dan

The other value was -12 but surely it has to be where the curve was less than 0 i.e where it was greater than 8-I can't remember exactly tho

Reply 65

DPowell

Hmm? I'm confused now, hah.

So the two roots of the graph were -12 and 8. Meaning that if we need less than 0, the inequality would be:

-12 < x < 8

Though Now I know that because you can't have a negative area (although sadly I missed out on this mark, because I couldn't spot it) so it leaves us with x < 8.

- Dan

Reply 66

CalumE5

Original post by DPowell

Yes but the inequality for the perimeter in the earlier part said 2x>11, therefore x>5.5, or that's where I got my 5.5<x<8 from.

Reply 67

Pomponz

Original post by 1platinum

Maybe this will be useful from now on...

http://web.aqa.org.uk/UMS/

Reply 68

KING2011BOB

Original post by DPowell

No because wasn't the inequality like x^2 -mx - 41 and so if x was 0,the bit on the edge would be -ve and so you need to two parts to the right of the middle hense either x>8 or x<-12 maybe im wrong tbh,easy to make those sorta mistakes!

Reply 69

bevans

Guys how many questions were there? I did 7 and now seriously worrying whether I missed a final question or something. -_-

Reply 70

CalumE5

Original post by bevans

Guys how many questions were there? I did 7 and now seriously worrying whether I missed a final question or something. -_-

Don't worry, there were 7!

Reply 71

DPowell

There was seven. :smile:

There's usually seven, though sometimes they add on an eighth if seven was a short question (though in this case it was a bit of a long and hard one!). No innuendo intended. :wink:

- Dan

Reply 72

kirstyy93

I actually didn't find the paper too bad :P although core 1 seems dead easy after having done cores 3 and 4! I made a silly mistake on the last question, I stupidly put k>-4/3 and k<3/4 (something like that) when it should have been equal to as it was at a tangent :frown:

the only other one I think I made a mistake was the width question, I put 0<x<8, which I know is wrong now! Other than that though I think I did alright, I got 92/8 as k which simplifies to 23/2. I got -14 and 37 for the polynomials, and the proof questions were quite easy compared to usual :P I got 73 this time last year, I'm hoping for 90+ this year. What did people get for the last question on the first page? x

Reply 73

DPowell

Original post by kirstyy93

I actually didn't find the paper too bad :P

This paper was filthy !!!!!!!!!!!!

- Dan

Reply 74

AndyHoughton

Original post by DPowell

You're inequality was right - you were asked to just solve the inequality, it was nothing to do with areas, but then 2x > 11, x >5.5 meant the next part was 5.5 < x < 8. The second part was only one mark, but non lost for the solve the inequality question :smile:

Reply 75

f1mad

I thought it was a well known fact that AQA was progressively becoming harder :rolleyes:

?

When I sat C1, it was the first time there was a big difference compared to the past papers (Jan 10). Check out the grade boundaries for that.

Reply 76

looloo59

Don't suppose anyone is willing to put together an unofficial mark scheme for the AQA paper?.. I could really use it, I'm rather worried about it now! :frown:

Reply 77

kirstyy93

Original post by DPowell

This paper was filthy !!!!!!!!!!!!

- Dan

My bad :P I think the wording was tricky, like so e questions seemed hard at first, but once I thought about it, they seemed alright :smile:

Reply 78

AlexIreland

Polynoimial Question : C=-14 D=37

Last question I got K=-3/4 an 4/3

Integration was 8, triangle was 2, so shaded region was 6

Al

Reply 79

AndyHoughton

Original post by looloo59

Don't suppose anyone is willing to put together an unofficial mark scheme for the AQA paper?.. I could really use it, I'm rather worried about it now! :frown:

When I go in on Monday I'll try and remember as much as I can from my college's model solutions, if I'm not too busy revising FP1 I'll put on all I can remember from it :smile: