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

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by danielhx)
    hey guys, just wondering should i be checking out old step papers or like the recent years to prep for the paper tomorrow?
    Recent years. No doubt.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zacken)
    Recent years. No doubt.
    thank you!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What would a an estimate for grade 2 for this year's STEP 1?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lol456)
    What would a an estimate for grade 2 for this year's STEP 1?
    I reckon it'd be 65-ish.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Remind that the STEP I 2016 paper can be found here and the solutions thread here.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Damn. I tried for 4 fulls 2 partials (technically 3 partials as I began a question and promptly dropped it) but my 2 partials were rubbish and now it seems I screwed up part of one of the fulls. How much do you think this has cost me?
    Spoiler:
    Show

    Q1) Copied Pn(x) down wrong for the final part. I did identify the correct values of n and x though.
    Q2) Pretty sure this was correct.
    Q3) Think this is correct, assuming my relative magnitudes of sin (-4), sin (-3),.. etc were correct.
    Q4) I gave up after integrating the first time, thinking there had to be some neat trick I was not seeing.
    Q7) I did only parts (i) (ii) (iii).
    Q8) Correct.
    Q10) I began hoping to make up for one of the disappointing partials in (4) and (7). I somehow got e = - intended answer. I did show that e < 1/3 (assuming the correct sign of e) but ran out of time.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Oh my word. Looking at the solutions to the STEP I thread... I didn't even get 1 question right.

    Might as well give up on life now.

    On a 100x easier note, anyone do the S2 MEI OCR Paper today?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 16Characters....)
    Damn. I tried for 4 fulls 2 partials (technically 3 partials as I began a question and promptly dropped it) but my 2 partials were rubbish and now it seems I screwed up part of one of the fulls. How much do you think this has cost me?
    Spoiler:
    Show

    Q1) Copied Pn(x) down wrong for the final part. I did identify the correct values of n and x though.
    Q2) Pretty sure this was correct.
    Q3) Think this is correct, assuming my relative magnitudes of sin (-4), sin (-3),.. etc were correct.
    Q4) I gave up after integrating the first time, thinking there had to be some neat trick I was not seeing.
    Q7) I did only parts (i) (ii) (iii).
    Q8) Correct.
    Q10) I began hoping to make up for one of the disappointing partials in (4) and (7). I somehow got e = - intended answer. I did show that e < 1/3 (assuming the correct sign of e) but ran out of time.
    18, 20, 20, 10, 10(?), 20, 13.

    Looks like ~101. Question mark indicates completely uncertainty (i.e: no clue what I'm talking about)

    I did slightly worse than you.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 16Characters....)
    Damn. I tried for 4 fulls 2 partials (technically 3 partials as I began a question and promptly dropped it) but my 2 partials were rubbish and now it seems I screwed up part of one of the fulls. How much do you think this has cost me?
    Spoiler:
    Show

    Q1) Copied Pn(x) down wrong for the final part. I did identify the correct values of n and x though.
    Q2) Pretty sure this was correct.
    Q3) Think this is correct, assuming my relative magnitudes of sin (-4), sin (-3),.. etc were correct.
    Q4) I gave up after integrating the first time, thinking there had to be some neat trick I was not seeing.
    Q7) I did only parts (i) (ii) (iii).
    Q8) Correct.
    Q10) I began hoping to make up for one of the disappointing partials in (4) and (7). I somehow got e = - intended answer. I did show that e < 1/3 (assuming the correct sign of e) but ran out of time.
    I didn't do the exam, but earlier today I had a go at Q 7. Pretty interesting, the first parts were easy, but (iv) was hard (I'm still pondering (b)). Definitely wouldn't have liked (iv) (a) under exam conditions, trying to write convincing proofs under pressure is not fun.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    Oh my word. Looking at the solutions to the STEP I thread... I didn't even get 1 question right.

    Might as well give up on life now.

    On a 100x easier note, anyone do the S2 MEI OCR Paper today?
    Yeah, I did what did you think of it?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bruhh)
    Yeah, I did what did you think of it?
    I'm actually a little annoyed tbh, I found it incredibly easy. Which to me means any mistakes I made would be hugely amplified. I had 20 minutes spare to check my answers - something I've never had in an exam. Except C1 last year of course. But I always take my time. Tbf this is the first exam I took revision incredibly seriously.

    There was nothing out of the ordinary apart from the question about the assumptions of spearmans test, but it was pretty easy to figure out.

    How about you mate?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    I'm actually a little annoyed tbh, I found it incredibly easy. Which to me means any mistakes I made would be hugely amplified. I had 20 minutes spare to check my answers - something I've never had in an exam. Except C1 last year of course. But I always take my time. Tbf this is the first exam I took revision incredibly seriously.

    There was nothing out of the ordinary apart from the question about the assumptions of spearmans test, but it was pretty easy to figure out.

    How about you mate?
    Yeah I thought it was a pretty standard S2 paper, although wasn't a fan of the drawing a scatter diagram since the scales were awful. Yeah I actually saw that spearmans thing yesterday when going through some stuff thankfully, but it was only 1 mark anyways.

    I finished with 35 mins spare which I never normally do in stats, at least I had plenty of time to check though.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    My performance yesterday:
    Q1 Full
    Q2 Full
    Q3 Assuming Full
    Q8 Full
    Q10 Full
    Q13 Screwed it up big time. Maybe like 8 marks (just did the first part)


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bruhh)
    Yeah I thought it was a pretty standard S2 paper, although wasn't a fan of the drawing a scatter diagram since the scales were awful. Yeah I actually saw that spearmans thing yesterday when going through some stuff thankfully, but it was only 1 mark anyways.

    I finished with 35 mins spare which I never normally do in stats, at least I had plenty of time to check though.
    I keep hearing people mention the scales being awful - I didn't have any issues? One scale was jumps in 20 and the other jumps in 10 right? Maybe I missed something oops lol
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    Oh my word. Looking at the solutions to the STEP I thread... I didn't even get 1 question right.

    Might as well give up on life now.

    On a 100x easier note, anyone do the S2 MEI OCR Paper today?
    what did you write for spearman's rank assumption?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    I keep hearing people mention the scales being awful - I didn't have any issues? One scale was jumps in 20 and the other jumps in 10 right? Maybe I missed something oops lol
    Yeah thats exactly what I did just found it awkward since half the numbers were odd and so some you had to do a quarter of a square for. I can't imagine they'll be too precise with it as long as it's roughly correct though. What other modules are you doing?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Ok so I might as well put mine out there for some pro judging for step I:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Q1- shouldve been all correct but a little messy when showing the n=4 case doesnt hold/didnt expand my powers of 7s at the end (although I dont think it specifically asked u to). 19ish?
    Q2- Pretty sure that was a full after I stopped my self from being a fool and doing it wrong 20.
    Q3- Being an idiot I wrote "arcsin ..." instead of interms of pi on my axes and may have (although cant remember) missed off the domain from 3 until pi on a couple of graphs, but all rest being correct and clearly labelled. 16/17?
    Q4-Got the correct unsimplified form for f(x) but didnt rearrange or get geometrical interp. (Im guessing they just wanted to state it was a semicircle etc?) 14 ish? but not sure.
    Q5- Full
    Q6- Full except a little messy in finding one of the intersection points and may have given the wrong range of values for one of the constants/bad description at the beginning. 17/18?
    Q7-Ran out of time so probably wont count
    Q8- Completed all except the Fibonacci generating sequence as a rearranging error at the beginning of that part made my workings incorrect. Maybe 1 mark for trying correct method for that bit. How many marks would that part be worth?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zacken)
    18, 20, 20, 10, 10(?), 20, 13.

    Looks like ~101. Question mark indicates completely uncertainty (i.e: no clue what I'm talking about)

    I did slightly worse than you.
    Cheers. Given the roughness of these estimates and of our descriptions of the answers, we probably did quite similarly.

    (Original post by sweeneyrod)
    I didn't do the exam, but earlier today I had a go at Q 7. Pretty interesting, the first parts were easy, but (iv) was hard (I'm still pondering (b)). Definitely wouldn't have liked (iv) (a) under exam conditions, trying to write convincing proofs under pressure is not fun.
    Yeah it is a nice question. But after going to town with the proofs in (i) (ii) and (iii) I didn't really have the energy or the time to bother with it so went in search of easier marks from the mechanics section.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by porridgepie)
    what did you write for spearman's rank assumption?
    It's that there's no assumption as it's done on ranks not actual values so there's no worry for the distribution of the actual data.

    (Says in on page 5:
    http://www.mei.org.uk/files/pdf/spearmanrcc.pdf)

    (Original post by Bruhh)
    Yeah thats exactly what I did just found it awkward since half the numbers were odd and so some you had to do a quarter of a square for. I can't imagine they'll be too precise with it as long as it's roughly correct though. What other modules are you doing?
    Oh I get what you mean, yeah lots of half way between one of the small squares - but that's pretty normal. I did M2 last year (got 91) and this year I'm doing D2, S2 and FP2. D2 went quite bad (i.e defo not an A*), I think S2 went really well, so I should just need around an A* in FP2 to get my A* in FM. You?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    It's that there's no assumption as it's done on ranks not actual values so there's no worry for the distribution of the actual data.

    (Says in on page 5:
    http://www.mei.org.uk/files/pdf/spearmanrcc.pdf)



    Oh I get what you mean, yeah lots of half way between one of the small squares - but that's pretty normal. I did M2 last year (got 91) and this year I'm doing D2, S2 and FP2. D2 went quite bad (i.e defo not an A*), I think S2 went really well, so I should just need around an A* in FP2 to get my A* in FM. You?
    Just M2 and FP2, I'm unsure on how M2 went but should hopefully be 90+ still, so need fairly good A*'s in S2 and FP2 to secure my FM A*.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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.