Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Edexcel FP3 - 27th June, 2016 watch

  • View Poll Results: How did you find the Edexcel FP3 exam?
    Very hard
    41
    8.40%
    Hard
    69
    14.14%
    Normal
    156
    31.97%
    Easy
    165
    33.81%
    Very easy
    57
    11.68%

    • Community Assistant
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by Armpits)
    I assume you got 90+ in some other modules?
    I have two other 90s I think but definitely not 270 in my top A2s. 94 in Fp1 but that's irrelevant.

    Hence A. Ah well.

    I meant 60s raw btw.

    Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Guys, do you remember the first cartesian equation given in the question?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Insight314)
    It depends on when the person has started working hard. Do I seriously have to explain this to you? If someone started working through STEP earlier, but put the same amount of work than another person, then on average the person who started earlier would have put in more work.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You don't even know what I am saying.
    I have seen people personally put tons of work in. more then you and i and still get 2;3 2;2 etc. I have seen people put hardly any work into step and SS and then here is the middle bunch.
    It is stupid to suggest people who got SS could have 0 talent and still get that through hard work all the people I have seen have bundles of it. you still need 'something' to get SS.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ewanclementson)
    The question was the integral between 3 and 5 of 1/root(15+2x-x^2) if I remember correctly which integrated to arcsin((x-1)/4) with those bounds which went to pi/2 - pi/6 which is pi/3.
    Do you remember the cartesian equation that was given in the vectors question?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DesignPredator)
    I knew the values but I said 'Just in case, they'll never know' 😂😂
    Yeah same but knowing me I'd have spent an extra 5 minutes trying to get my head to convert degrees into radians 😂😂
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Insight314)
    I am not talking about people with learning difficulties though, I disagree with physicsmaths on the statement that an S grade requires natural ability. Not taking into account people with learning difficulties, any person who puts enough work into STEP would see that they can easily get the S grade on the real exam. This also requires work to be put into getting used to exam pressure or exam technique; this year quite a few excellent S grade mathematicians missed their S grades due to exam pressure and poor choice of questions (they know who they are).

    If we were debating about the necessity of natural ability in mathematics to make influential contributions in research, I would have neutral views on this argument (since I am not at that level yet) but through my work in STEP I have realised that the problem-solving and the "tricks" needed for each STEP question are quite similar from each other. Therefore, by working sensibly through past paper questions, any mathematician would easily be able to get an S grade in STEP. It all depends on how much work a person puts in; this is the deciding factor.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Surely if you were right there would be way more students gaining S grades on step then? Since I imagine the majority doing step tries hard for it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by target21859)
    I got (0,-1/5,?). Can't remember what I got for z
    thats correct it's (0,-1/5,-1)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    67/75 in ums?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Insight314)
    Those people who struggle getting Cs in Foundation Mathematics had more to do with extenuating circumstances than 'natural ability'. I do agree that analytical prowess may differ between people, but this difference is not enough to account for a person failing foundation maths and another getting an A* in higher maths. I study in a school which used to be categorised as one of the lowest performing schools in London, and has over 80% of the students under free-school meals. After it became an academy last year, the percentage of 5 A*-C at GCSE nearly doubled, you can't seriously tell me that those children were gifted a mathematical prowess and natural ability by David Cameron's academisation in order for them to pass their GCSE Maths. They were finally brought into an academically stimulating environment which emphasised academic work over anything.

    Now, back to STEP, due to the fact that you took STEP I two years ago, you must agree that there are quite a few tricks for each type of question that are accessible to an ordinary A-level Mathematician through hard work. It is simply not true that the trick of using symmetry between trigonometric functions (Q4 STEP II 2016) and the adding zero creatively trick, cannot be learnt solely by working through past paper questions.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Maybe. Maybe if we improved the education system sufficiently for everyone then everyone who worked hard would get top grades. But that seems at this point to just be conjecture. Obviously standard of education makes a huge difference but I really think that some people may just have to work harder than others to achieve the same results, and for some people some results are simply unlikely to be obtained. How come in my year there were people who worked hard and got Cs in Maths, and people who did absolutely nothing and got high A*s? They were learning in the same environments. Keep in mind that I think hard work is tremendously significant, and moreso the further you get in education. I wish it were the unique deciding factor but I don't think it is.

    One year ago but I guess that's not too important..yes I do agree but one still may not see when it is appropriate to use these techniques. I know all about substitutions and stuff but I couldn't figure out how to do STEP I 2015 Q2c (or iii, the third part anyway..) which just required a substitution.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Which one was question 3
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by physicsmaths)
    You don't even know what I am saying.
    I have seen people personally put tons of work in. more then you and i and still get 2;3 2;2 etc. I have seen people put hardly any work into step and SS and then here is the middle bunch.
    It is stupid to suggest people who got SS could have 0 talent and still get that through hard work all the people I have seen have bundles of it. you still need 'something' to get SS.
    I am sorry but there is no way those people you were talking about put more work than me. And, it is also impossible for them to get 2:3, 2:2 as a result of putting a lot of work, UNLESS there have been other extenuating circumstances.

    Also, don't forget what we are debating. I never said that SS people had no talent, I did agree at the start that there is some natural ability involved at a higher level of mathematics (research). I am currently arguing that natural ability is NOT a requirement to get an S in STEP. It may help, but it is NOT a requirement.

    Are you keeping up with this argument just because you can't realise that you not getting S in STEP may be due to not putting enough work in?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 13 1 20 8 42)
    Maybe. Maybe if we improved the education system sufficiently for everyone then everyone who worked hard would get top grades. But that seems at this point to just be conjecture. Obviously standard of education makes a huge difference but I really think that some people may just have to work harder than others to achieve the same results, and for some people some results are simply unlikely to be obtained. How come in my year there were people who worked hard and got Cs in Maths, and people who did absolutely nothing and got high A*s? They were learning in the same environments. Keep in mind that I think hard work is tremendously significant, and moreso the further you get in education. I wish it were the unique deciding factor but I don't think it is.

    One year ago but I guess that's not too important..yes I do agree but one still may not see when it is appropriate to use these techniques. I know all about substitutions and stuff but I couldn't figure out how to do STEP I 2015 Q2c (or iii, the third part anyway..) which just required a substitution.
    I guess I may start to agree with you to a certain extent.

    However, this is not what our debate is based on, I was initially arguing Physicsmaths' statement that natural ability is a requirement for an S grade in STEP. I completely disagree with this. (Btw, I am talking about the view that the difference between a grade 1 student and a grade S student is natural ability)


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    That integration function on the Casio 991 tho, just checking my answers and go happier as I got through that paper. 😂
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snasher350)
    Surely if you were right there would be way more students gaining S grades on step then? Since I imagine the majority doing step tries hard for it.
    No. Majority think that STEP is just like A-level so they don't put enough (or even any) work into it, which is why most Cambridge Maths offer-holders end up with grade 2 or 3.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Guest234)
    I had z as -1 for those x and y values
    That's correct
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    What sort of ums do you think for 70 marks??
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Insight314)
    I guess I may start to agree with you to a certain extent.

    However, this is not what our debate is based on, I was initially arguing Physicsmaths' statement that natural ability is a requirement for an S grade in STEP. I completely disagree with this. (Btw, I am talking about the view that the difference between a grade 1 student and a grade S student is natural ability)


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Hmm well I can sort of see where he's coming from because I'm pretty crap at maths compared to loads of people on here in all honesty (in terms of any ingenuity, creativity, persistence, algebraic accuracy, numeric accuracy, etc.), and I got myself to a 1 by sheer hard work, but an S seemed a step too far for me. But someone of my calibre could have a perfect storm and get an S if they simply get enough questions they like in a paper I guess.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kvothe the arcane)
    Ran out of time. Low 60s probably for Fp3 and S2.

    A overall. Sigh.

    what grade did you need for uni? im concerned about my A in maths. pretty sure got A* in further maths tho...this is so weird...i need 2 A* 1 A :O
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Vector equation

    (r-(0,-1/5,-1))x(11,-1,8)=0 ?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    So annoyed all you nerds will probably pull up grade boundaries, so my 60s will be a B!
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: August 20, 2016
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?

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.