Thats because at Part III, the "Distinction" and "Merit" grades are equivalent to 1st's at Part II (difficulty-wise), "Pass" is a high 2-1 and "Fail" is equivalent to a low 2-1 or below.
Luck helps at times, but its nothing compared to ability and memory.
My tutor and several supervisors mentioned during my time at Cambridge that a first can often owe a lot to luck, as very few people can answer all questions at an equally high level and can thus benefit from which questions come up, how they're worded and so on. I got a first in my degree, but I'm really not sure whether I would have managed a first in at least one of the exams if presented with the previous year's papers.
Other than luck, though, I guess I'd attribute my first just to plodding away throughout the year. I tried to work quite steadily throughout each term so that I wouldn't panic right at the end, and worked to prepare decent essays and sets of notes that would actually be useful to revise from, rather than dashing them off. Ahead of finals I was doing 6-7 hours a day of revision, excluding breaks, which wasn't really excessive in Cambridge terms, and that's when I really appreciated the word I'd done before. I think it was more that consistency that benefited me, rather than me flogging myself, although I did work pretty hard.
Perhaps I'm tainted by being a mathmo. Its a subject where its much more "You've got it or you don't". The people who get high 1st don't do so on luck, they were going to get such a mark inevitably. Luck would be a factor in my results. Depending on what comes up I can swing from a medium 2:2 to a decent 1st. Unfortunatly my Part II exams planted me towards the upper end of the 2:1's
By the way, a mate of mine just reminded me that our engineers got a lot of 1sts between them and none of them are geeks... I was basing my statement earlier mainly on my subject. So i guess it does very a lot from course to course.
Perhaps I'm tainted by being a mathmo. Its a subject where its much more "You've got it or you don't". The people who get high 1st don't do so on luck, they were going to get such a mark inevitably. Luck would be a factor in my results. Depending on what comes up I can swing from a medium 2:2 to a decent 1st. Unfortunatly my Part II exams planted me towards the upper end of the 2:1's
I've heard that doing lots of past papers can improve your performance considerably in Maths because they recycle questions. Did you not find that?
Yes, it definitely does. But the point is that all the other mathmos are doing the same thing so in the end it's really ability (and, of course, luck).
AlphaNumeric
Perhaps I'm tainted by being a mathmo. Its a subject where its much more "You've got it or you don't".
DAMN. Ah well, at least the non-prodigies can earn shitloads of money if not going into academia.
Not word for word but there are sometimes questions that are similar probably because of the limitations of the syllabus. For example, last year in Physics there was a question involving linear and angular momentum to which the answer is always "2/3 of the distance from the other end" which had come up in a previous paper. In chemistry there's only so many different ways they can ask about the same reactions/trends/etc.
people who do Nat Sci: of the following, which do you think would be the easiest to get a first in, for whatever reason. Chemistry, geology, cells, physiology, E and B
people who do Nat Sci: of the following, which do you think would be the easiest to get a first in, for whatever reason. Chemistry, geology, cells, physiology, E and B
Surely it depends on what subjects you think you're good at? If the top x% of students get a 1st, you need to pick subjects you think you can outperform [100-x]% other people in.
Correct me if I'm wrong but the lucky peoples doing medicine don't have to worry about getting a certain degree 'cause it's not mentioned on their diploma?
people who do Nat Sci: of the following, which do you think would be the easiest to get a first in, for whatever reason. Chemistry, geology, cells, physiology, E and B
what a bizarre question? they're all just as hard as each other to someone who is equally good at all of them.
Correct me if I'm wrong but the lucky peoples doing medicine don't have to worry about getting a certain degree 'cause it's not mentioned on their diploma?
No, we get classed BAs like everyone else in Cambridge. Even the MB BChir, which you get after clinical school, is effectively classed - it is possible to get a Pass, Merit or Distinction.
The essay questions in many cases are repeated with slightly different wording/targetting. I'm afraid I don't know about the physnatsci exams.
Maths is scary because it has some people who are just absolute prodigies and can do EVERYTHING, then there are some normal people who are very good who still get firsts.
As an example; their marking system includes giving you an "alpha" if you complete more than 75% of a question (I think you get a beta if you complete 50%) and you have to get a certain number of alphas to get each grade. In first year, my friend's bf got 18 alphas out of a possibly 54 (I think) - which was enough for a first, it's THAT hard! There was a guy in his year who got ALL 54
18 alphas will then be like 4-5 solved questions per paper? (Although I read the first year borderline is usually at 12 alphas and some betas) Heh, just like STEP then where 4 completely solved questions will definitely get you a 1.
crikey, don't remind me about STEP! i did ok in the end, but it has 2 b the hardest thing I've ever done. though i spose it's gonna b good practice 4 my course. also, at least if there's enuff choice, chances r u'll recognise how 2 do something on the paper.