Can anybody explain it to me? Do they only use it to decide grade boundaries, or do they actually multiply the marks for complete questions?
Section I questions get you a beta for 8/10 or more. Section II questions get a beta for 10/20 and an alpha for 15/20 or more. If I interpreted what my DoS was saying the other day correctly, class lists are drawn up according to raw mark. Then, people on the boundaries are promoted or demoted according to the number of alpha and betas they recieve (so, if you are initially in the 2i list but have lots and lots of alphas, you may get promoted to a first, whereas if you get a very high raw mark but not many alphas and are on the borderline, you will be demoted.)
ah I see, so they're not *that* critical. i was kind of under the impression that getting an alpha would suddenly throw you into the hundreds and that without alphas you'd be cast unto third-dom.
Well having lots of alphas tends to be correlated to having lots of marks. As I understood it, if a question is not worthy of a beta or alpha, it will get very few marks (ie. you're unlikely to get 9/20 for a question).
Generally I am under the impression that for a mathmo, it is far more productive to answer a question fully then to start lots of questions and leave them half done. I think that's the whole idea with the Alpha Beta Gamma system - if anyone can finish a question then that's worth much more then doing lots of questions. So if the last part of a question looks long, but you think you know how to do it....it's far better you finish that question then start another one!
See, that's why you should do CompSci. We use straight forward bit patterns.
I'd rather goto Oxford than do compsci =P
71 80 20 65 88 65 90
GP AXAZ??? Are we sure we are speaking American here?