National 5 maths was brutal

Wow, I'm not sure why that is, but if you really want to see the paper just type it on youtube and there somebody who completed both papers.

EDIT : Check out this page https://twitter.com/libby_maths, papers are posted there too

SQA response to petition:13 MAY 2016 — A spokesperson for the SQA said: "We are confident the National 5 Maths exam provided candidates with a fair opportunity to show their understanding of the subject. It was designed in line with past and exemplar papers and according to our course and assessment specifications. "We know the exams period can be a stressful time for young people and their families and are aware of the concerns which have been raised."

The paper was designed to show your understanding throughout the n5 course, there was really nothing heavily wrong with the paper in fact if you look at it again it does require more problem solving and application skills than the specimen. I do agree that some questions like sector area and Pythagoras 3D knocked most people speechless as they had expected that to be in the calculator paper; it was a challenge but not impossible.

I made tons of silly mistakes myself on both papers but that doesn't change the fact that some people are exaggerating it a bit :/

Ok, after having a look at the paper, I'll concede that some of those questions could be seen as challenging (for N5). Question 5 was reliant on understanding of context, which is a core concept of Curriculum for Excellence - the curriculum all (not so) new N5, CfE H & CfE AH courses have been designed to follow - in that candidates are expected to apply their knowledge to every day problems (dunno about you guys but I'm always making school costumes). Question 3 is maybe something expected more in paper 2, but the angles and radii involved (and that it is well known that pi = 3.14) made it much much simpler than it would have been in paper 2, so it balances out there. Question 11 is trig identities, which again rarely comes up so some teachers take the risk as they run out of time.
This paper was not as bad as some make people make it out to be though, all of the questions remained well within the National 5 Mathematics Course Specification. The paper is of a similar standard of that of Specimen, Model, Practice & Past Papers.
This was an exam which some found challenging, which is what an exam should be - there is greater reward for doing well in a challenging exam than an easy one.

I agree people are exaggerating a bit. However, when you have studied and revised for months using past/specimen papers as instructed by teachers, only to see a paper with a completely differant layout and question style it knocks your confidence the minute you open the paper. Students who had achieved A's or B's in their prelim and hoped to do the same in the final exam might now even have to sit N5 again next year..

With regard to the trig identities question, who is to blame if it is not taught? Is it the teacher's fault entirely for choosing to leave out that section of the course? The question itself is only worth 2 marks but as we know, 2 marks could be the difference between a pass or a fail.

My dog could get an A in national 5. You all need to get a hold of yourselves. It's bloody national 5, it means **** all!

Sorry to make it look like your the only person Aidan, but you were the latest post saying this: "Completely different layout" seems to be a popular excuse this year for students not doing too well. Point out what part of the paper was completely different to the usual template. In terms of the actual design of the paper the best I can give you is that the page numbers are in number form this year rather than being written out in plain English (03 vs three). If you mean in terms of different questions I still don't see what people mean by this, of course questions are going to be different year on year, different to the Specimen & Model Papers. People were making the "different layout" excuse for H English as well but there wasn't one there. Did having 2016 on the front cover rather than 2015 and numerical page numbers really make that much of a difference?
You have to remember that this is only the third year of N5 (exam wise), there are going to be differences as SQA react to feedback year on year, however this should not affect your ability to answer the questions placed in front of you.




Are you seriously trying to suggest here that it is the SQA's fault that your teacher - more than likely due to poor planning of the delivery of the course - ran out of time, or simply chose not to teach it? The SQA tell teachers what's in the course, beyond unit assessments it is entirely up to schools & teachers to decide how they deliver it.

Thanks for your reply.
I was referring to the questions being differant, however the more I think about it, the more I agree with your statement saying that this should not affect our ability to answer the questions.

Regarding my question about the trig identities, I am in no way blaming the SQA for this. I just feel disappointed that I have lost 2, possibly crucial, marks due to - as you said - probably bad preparation and planning of the teaching of the course. How can a school/teacher choose not to teach an entire section of the course for the reason that it 'probably won't come up'😒.

Again, thanks for your response

I'm gonna get raped for this but you nat 5 kids are so stupid.

Higher matters not nat 5. Universities actually prefer if you make up in higher because they see your progress.

You're stupid petition is worthless. Higher English exam was altered.

We got told less than 48 hours away from the paper. This exam can determine your next 5 years of a course. Nat 5 simply tells you to work harder. We had stress therefore going into the exam as our predictions were out the window only hours before the exam. Not only that but a paper which people at my school scored 97% in 2015 higher English was completely different to ours. Even the bloody first question!!! Even the last question!!!! We have a reason. Our paper was noticably harder, it was very different to specimen and exemplar papers which we noticed. Your stupid exam was very similar. Open your textbook and revise. Try revising for English when many have university conditions and we are told 48 hours before that the sqa changed the exam and then on the day see how different it was.

Does anyone know the grade boundaries of last years NAT 5 Exam ?

Does anyone know the grade boundaries of last years NAT 5 Exam ?