Join TSR now and get all your revision questions answeredSign up now

ANSWERS: OCR Physics B(Advancing Physics) G491~ 20th May 2014~ AS Physics Watch

  • View Poll Results: Opinion of the paper
    Hard
    67.07%
    Medium
    10.98%
    Easy
    3.66%
    >55
    7.32%
    50-45
    14.63%
    44-49
    14.63%
    40-43
    10.98%
    35-39
    15.85%
    30-34
    9.76%
    25-29
    3.66%
    20-24
    4.88%
    <24
    2.44%
    I managed to finish all of the paper and check
    13.41%
    I managed to finish the paper but didn't check
    26.83%
    I missed off a few of the questions
    37.80%
    I missed >half of the questions
    3.66%

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DomStaff)
    I put 1 too but no the answer was 10^3.
    Oh was it in kg then?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mutleybm1996)
    Oh was it in kg then?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    And i think you mean 10^-3


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hi everyone I have just joined TSR and I have been looking at this thread for a days now and I have to say most of you are spot on with the fact that this was the most ridiculous exam ever. I may not be the most advanced student in the world and I was only predicted a C overall anyone but this exam was just beyond belief. Having just checked the OCR site they have confirmed that they have changed the spec for 2015.

    http://www.ocr.org.uk/qualifications...557-from-2015/

    Oh and another thing, I thought I'd make a little video as well because OCR have annoyed me that much, hats off to the guy that made the 'Saving Private Ryan' parody it was absolutely brilliant. Anyway here is the link to the video, hope you enjoy!

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIkSSqr1gfc
    • Reporter Team
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Guys, just to clarify, the QR code in the paper doesn't go anywhere, it only comes up with text that says it's a Version 4 QR code up to 50 characters - sad face
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Knowing)
    Bet that QR code leads to the Ostrich Appreciation Society webpage.
    Bet it leads to 420.com
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mutleybm1996)
    Oh was it in kg then?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    nah man it was in grams standard doob measurements:eek::eek:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I was just looking on twitter, and this lady is trying to get the Daily Mail to do an investigation into our paper as so many people are complaining!!!!!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by frank12365)
    I was just looking on twitter, and this lady is trying to get the Daily Mail to do an investigation into our paper as so many people are complaining!!!!!
    I really hope a broadsheet newspaper investigates - I don't really want to read the Daily Fail to find out the result of their 'investigation'.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by frank12365)
    I was just looking on twitter, and this lady is trying to get the Daily Mail to do an investigation into our paper as so many people are complaining!!!!!
    Good. The more publicity and pressure that OCR receive, the better. I'm not saying we should make a petition or go and protest or anything as exteme as that (it's not like they've committed a war crime or something!) - but if any of you feel that the paper was unfair, then please email OCR with a POLITE email, just so they know that there are many students (and also teachers, it seems, judging by some of the comments) that feel OCR have made a misjudgment about this paper.

    And for those of you who did well - fine. Great. What we are saying shouldn't affect you. No need to be smug about it (although I'm sure many of these people are just trolls). The questions may seem simple and easy when discussing it on a forum, but in an exam hall with (in my opinion) idiotic time limits, it becomes a lot more challenging. And if anything, lower grade boundaries will increase your chances of getting 100% UMS.

    And also, I would like to wish everyone the best of luck in their G492 exams - and if you were resiting that G491, then also in your G494 and G495 exams.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clai)
    Good. The more publicity and pressure that OCR receive, the better. I'm not saying we should make a petition or go and protest or anything as exteme as that - but if any of you feel that the paper was unfair, then please email OCR with a POLITE email, just so they know that there are many students (and also teachers, it seems, judging by some of the comments) that feel OCR have made a misjudgment about this paper.

    And for those of you who did well - fine. Great. What we are saying shouldn't affect you. No need to be smug about it (although I'm sure many of these people are just trolls). The questions may seem simple and easy when discussing it on a forum, but in an exam hall with (in my opinion) idiotic time limits, it becomes a lot more challenging. And if anything, lower grade boundaries will increase your chances of getting 100% UMS.

    And also, I would like to wish everyone the best of luck in their G492 exams - and if you were resiting that G491, then also in your G494 and G495 exams.
    I agree Yesterday, Ofqual said that they had received no complaints about the paper yet on twitter - but hopefully they will become aware of the issue soon! There is also this one person on twitter who has started a petition but has no signatures yet!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I wrote a letter to OCR and received this letter back:

    Thank you for your comments about the recent examination paper for OCR Unit G491, Physics in Action. We are sorry you feel that this paper provided a negative experience, either in terms of its difficulty, or the perception that questions were not clearly linked to the content of the specification. We are also particularly concerned that many of you struggled to complete the paper in the time allowed.

    We place a very high value on feedback received from students or their parents and schools or colleges about OCR examinations. Any comments received about particular assessments are always brought to the attention of the Principal and Chief Examiner responsible for the paper, the Chair of Examiners and the Subject Specialists that support the specification. They ensure that all this information is considered carefully when the mark scheme for the paper is finalised, during the awarding process when grade thresholds are agreed, and in the setting of examinations for future years.

    We hope you can appreciate that it is not possible for us to respond to all the individual points that you have raised but we can assure you that your comments have been passed on to those responsible for Unit G491. We would however like to respond to some of the common issues raised.

    Question 1: there is a clear reference to charge carrier density in the specification in Module 2.2(ii) of the Physics in Action unit.

    The ‘making estimates’ aspect of Question 4 is an assessable learning outcome (no. 3) which is mentioned in all units of the of the AS and A level course.

    In question 9 candidates were not expected to recall applications of graphene from prior knowledge, but to use the mechanical and electrical properties of graphene given in the question to suggest possible applications.

    Likewise question 10(a), ‘Suggest an advantage of QR codes…’ is based on the information given in the diagrams of the codes rather than being reliant on candidates prior knowledge.

    These ‘suggest’ questions in 9 and 10 are testing Assessment Objective 2 (section 4.7 of the specification) ie application of scientific knowledge and process to unfamiliar situations.

    To help us to address any further issues you have raised, we recommend that you discuss them with your teacher or lecturer who may wish make a more formal submission to us.

    Thank you very much indeed for taking the time to provide us with your feedback.

    Yours sincerely

    Karen Mottram
    Senior Manager Assessment Standards (Chair of Examiners)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Can anyone remember the questions?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by frank12365)
    I wrote a letter to OCR and received this letter back:

    Thank you for your comments about the recent examination paper for OCR Unit G491, Physics in Action. We are sorry you feel that this paper provided a negative experience, either in terms of its difficulty, or the perception that questions were not clearly linked to the content of the specification. We are also particularly concerned that many of you struggled to complete the paper in the time allowed.

    We place a very high value on feedback received from students or their parents and schools or colleges about OCR examinations. Any comments received about particular assessments are always brought to the attention of the Principal and Chief Examiner responsible for the paper, the Chair of Examiners and the Subject Specialists that support the specification. They ensure that all this information is considered carefully when the mark scheme for the paper is finalised, during the awarding process when grade thresholds are agreed, and in the setting of examinations for future years.

    We hope you can appreciate that it is not possible for us to respond to all the individual points that you have raised but we can assure you that your comments have been passed on to those responsible for Unit G491. We would however like to respond to some of the common issues raised.

    Question 1: there is a clear reference to charge carrier density in the specification in Module 2.2(ii) of the Physics in Action unit.

    The ‘making estimates’ aspect of Question 4 is an assessable learning outcome (no. 3) which is mentioned in all units of the of the AS and A level course.

    In question 9 candidates were not expected to recall applications of graphene from prior knowledge, but to use the mechanical and electrical properties of graphene given in the question to suggest possible applications.

    Likewise question 10(a), ‘Suggest an advantage of QR codes…’ is based on the information given in the diagrams of the codes rather than being reliant on candidates prior knowledge.

    These ‘suggest’ questions in 9 and 10 are testing Assessment Objective 2 (section 4.7 of the specification) ie application of scientific knowledge and process to unfamiliar situations.

    To help us to address any further issues you have raised, we recommend that you discuss them with your teacher or lecturer who may wish make a more formal submission to us.

    Thank you very much indeed for taking the time to provide us with your feedback.

    Yours sincerely

    Karen Mottram
    Senior Manager Assessment Standards (Chair of Examiners)
    I think that's fair enough. My issue was not with the questions themselves but just with the amount they wanted you to do in one hour. I just think it was unreasonable, and the amount of people who are saying that they had difficult with finishing/did not finish the paper seem to support my opinion.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mutleybm1996)
    Can anyone remember the questions?
    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I don't. But I hope someone will try and piece together a draft markscheme soon.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clai)
    I think that's fair enough. My issue was not with the questions themselves but just with the amount they wanted you to do in one hour. I just think it was unreasonable, and the amount of people who are saying that they had difficult with finishing/did not finish the paper seem to support my opinion.
    It was a Standard response. I received the same one


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yep, I received the exam same reply from OCR.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:


    It might cheer you up. If its any consolation, virtually I spoke to at our college, bar one or two, found it very difficult. You'll most likely get some nice UMS boundary shifts to compensate.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Hi, everyone who hasn't done so already (and if you have, sorry to keep posting), could you please answer this poll which is trying to guess the raw marks needed for 100% UMS?
    Thanks http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=2686534
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lilypear)
    Guys, just to clarify, the QR code in the paper doesn't go anywhere, it only comes up with text that says it's a Version 4 QR code up to 50 characters - sad face
    Do you have a copy of the paper?

    Can you put it up please?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    What i sent to OCR:

    I sat the Physics in Action Paper set by your exam board on the 20th of May 2014. This email is to voice the consensus opinion of those who sat the physics exam at my school and also others around the country who wrote about their response on social websites such as the student room. I fee the paper was extremely unfair and has seriously affected the dreams, aspirations, futures and very much the confidence of students sitting the exam all over the world. Primarily, the exam was far too time pressured to be able to answer questions effectively with a full though out process and then to be able to check it through. People struggled to complete the paper and those who were able to had to rush through the paper writing poor undeveloped answers. This is not fair as the speed of writing is most definitely not in the specification. Also, the exam did not test the understanding of Physics in Action by students, it simply tested the bits and pieces of information they could recall in vague context to the question in order to possibly have the slightest hope of being able to scrounge marks as this was the most time efficient method of gaining marks due to the ridiculous time pressure. Consequently, a lot of students felt that the questions required knowledge not in the specification and that it was unfair to deem it a true test of a students understanding of physics. I hope OCR decide to take astute and rapid actions in order to address this issue. Not only to ensure this problem does not happen in future papers, but also to mend the problems caused by this exam. I ask that the grade boundaries reflect the ridiculous difficulty of this paper, or more reasonably, a retest be announced that gives students a much more fair paper. Shattering the lives of students is serious problem and needs to be resolved with an equally serious solution.
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?

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

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