Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A Slice of Pi)
    Can you post the report?
    https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...U5zclEtTjlfX2c
    • Community Assistant
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Welcome Squad
    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.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RDKGames)
    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
    • Community Assistant
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by C0balt)
    i would like to meet those "some people" who got full marks
    I'd like to slap them.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Your relative motion question was wonderful.
    Id rather have this then edexcel stuff which is way too easy and sky high boundaries.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I don't suppose you also have the mark schemes and reports for physics?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A Slice of Pi)
    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
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by C0balt)
    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.
    • Community Assistant
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by A Slice of Pi)
    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.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A Slice of Pi)
    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.
    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.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RDKGames)
    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).
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A Slice of Pi)
    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).
    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.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Protoxylic)
    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.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A Slice of Pi)
    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.
    The absolute marks for boundaries is absolutely irrelevant. What IS relevant is the relative number of candidates who scored in EACH boundary. Clearly, this year it was fair, hence the fair paper.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Protoxylic)
    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.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A Slice of Pi)
    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.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A Slice of Pi)
    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.
    The boundaries only suggest how candidates generally scored in absolute marks. It says nothing about the spread. By fair, they mean a suitable number of candidates scored in each boundary, similar to past years. That is what they aim for in papers to be 'fair'.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by physicsmaths)
    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
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A Slice of Pi)
    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
    And in the M3 paper the opposite was said, stating that many students got full marks, what's the problem? I'm 100% sure they would have mentioned it, if it was a clear problem.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    I like how the positive the report starts with is 'the MAJORITY of students showed SOME understanding of MOST of the topics'
    They mention 'few very low marks' but I suspect they were few very high marks too, we'll see.

    They use 'some' because it means anything from 3 to 3 billion people.

    'Apparently very few lacking the time to complete their work' - I suspect this isn't based on the fraction of the paper completed, but some sort of poll of students, or not considering unattempted questions as due to lack of time, or brief preliminary working as a whole attempt.

    For a maths exam the report isn't very specific. :s
 
 
 
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.