[Anon 17]

WHAT?

Jesus Christ, I've been worrying over dropping a few marks (like to 68-70ish) and you get 100% UMS at 66?

Haha, that's pretty hopeful news. Maybe it's time to devote more time to STEP.

[wibletg]

In some cases, yeah
Obviously there's some papers where its higher but they're usually around there, from what I've seen

This was posted from The Student Room's Android App on my HTC Desire HD

[Anon 17]

Explaining errors, divergence etc... with the NR method - Anyone got a good explanation for it? I get what happens, but I can't word it properly in the exam and keep consistantly losing a few marks because of it.

EDIT - Just done June 2010, what a ridiculous paper. Still getting pissed off over the fact I've tried to find all this NR information for days now and NOWHERE seems to have anything about it except the obvious stuff.

I understand where I went wrong except for 7ii) - "All three cases" - I have no idea what this means, and the spec, book and other materials are useless in trying to find the right answer to this question.

Anyone else wish the spec actually included everything you needed to know? It's so vague that I'm not even sure what I'm supposed to know out of the book...

[NightBear]

Is it just me or are the mark schemes EXTREMELY vague?! NR and Reduction F. are taking the piss.

[wibletg]

(Original post by NightBear)
Is it just me or are the mark schemes EXTREMELY vague?! NR and Reduction F. are taking the piss.

Yeah - Series of Integrals is another set of vague marking points usually as well

[SecondHand]

(Original post by Anon 17)
Explaining errors, divergence etc... with the NR method - Anyone got a good explanation for it? I get what happens, but I can't word it properly in the exam and keep consistantly losing a few marks because of it.

EDIT - Just done June 2010, what a ridiculous paper. Still getting pissed off over the fact I've tried to find all this NR information for days now and NOWHERE seems to have anything about it except the obvious stuff.

I understand where I went wrong except for 7ii) - "All three cases" - I have no idea what this means, and the spec, book and other materials are useless in trying to find the right answer to this question.

Anyone else wish the spec actually included everything you needed to know? It's so vague that I'm not even sure what I'm supposed to know out of the book...

3 cases as in x < a, a < x < b, x > b.

[corpuscallosum]

I'm going to do so badly :/ I've been focusing on biology and chemistry and kind of resigned myself to a bad mark in FP2

[NightBear]

(Original post by corpuscallosum)
I'm going to do so badly :/ I've been focusing on biology and chemistry and kind of resigned myself to a bad mark in FP2

Haha same (if it's Chem/Bio 4 that you speak of).

[Anon 17]

(Original post by NightBear)
Is it just me or are the mark schemes EXTREMELY vague?! NR and Reduction F. are taking the piss.

Yup, it's doing my head it too. Try posting here if you're unsure and I'm sure someone will be able to help.

(Original post by SecondHand)
3 cases as in x < a, a < x < b, x > b.

Thanks, was thinking about it later on and realised this is probably what they meant.

June 2010 was HARD. Then I realised 62 marks was still waaay above the 90% CP boundary... Still, hard paper.

[Satsui no hado]

For question like FP2 June 07 Question 4 ii) I did the question ok but I never understood why you couldn't just use the reverse chain rule to integrate functions like these? If someone could explain that would be great

[Anon 17]

So January 2011 was relatively easy, but the wording on question 5 meant until I read the examiners report (always do if I'm stuck just before I give up and check the solution, just in case) I couldn't do part i (which was simple). Damn wording is just not up to standard for what's supposed to be a clear maths exam.

^ What's the question? Don't have the paper.

EDIT - Anyone mind uploading the Jan 12 mark scheme to accompany the paper?

[Ree69]

(Original post by Satsui no hado)
For question like FP2 Jan 07 Question 4 ii) I did the question ok but I never understood why you couldn't just use the reverse chain rule to integrate functions like these? If someone could explain that would be great

You can? It's not in the form of . To be honest, without the (given) substitution, I can't see another way of working out the integral of cosech x.

[lifesabeach]

Some of the reduction formulae on the the recent papers take the piss, more than a page of A4 for 3 marks & so much room for errors to creep in!

[Satsui no hado]

(Original post by Ree69)
You can? It's not in the form of . To be honest, without the (given) substitution, I can't see another way of working out the integral of cosech x.

Sorry! I meant June 07

[SecondHand]

Still as Ree said it's in that form.

[Anon 17]

(Original post by lifesabeach)
Some of the reduction formulae on the the recent papers take the piss, more than a page of A4 for 3 marks & so much room for errors to creep in!

Just a tip for this - Most of the time you'll end up substituting something and splitting the integral into two, and this seems to be the stage where you'll get the most errors. Just take it slow and realise that if you check, there is nothing particularly hard about reduction formulas (well, the ones you get on the exams anyway).

June 11, 7iii) was a bitch... Gonna do Jan 12 tommorow and hoping for a nice paper with less than 60 marks for 90 ums on Thursday.

[Satsui no hado]

Ok thanks for clearing that up sorry for the derp moment :P

[Ree69]

The grade boundaries really confuse me. By looking at them for each year, Jan 2008 is supposedly the (joint) second hardest FP2 paper. (Jan 09 being the hardest). Just did the paper now and managed 72. That can't be right.

I think June 2010 or Jan 12 tops it for me - but their boundaries are slightly higher.

[NightBear]

Jan 12 was such a nice paper!

[Ree69]

June 10 Q6ii is ridiculous. Calculating the second derivative of such a function should not be on an A-Level paper!