S1 Jan 2012 Edexcel Post Exam Discussion Thread - Solutions in the first postWatch

Announcements
Poll: Having seen the solutions, how many marks do you think you got?
71-75 (54)
29.51%
66-70 (31)
16.94%
61-65 (35)
19.13%
56-60 (23)
12.57%
51-55 (13)
7.1%
46-50 (9)
4.92%
41-45 (2)
1.09%
36-40 (4)
2.19%
31-35 (2)
1.09%
26-30 (1)
0.55%
21-25 (0)
0%
20 or less (9)
4.92%
#1
Other than Q2 I thought this was quite an easy paper, marks seem quite generous too.

Q1. Fairly easy histogram question (7)

Q2. Pretty tricky Venn diagram (9)

Q3. Standard DRV question (11)

Q4. Pretty easy/standard measures of location/spread question (11)

Q5. Pretty easy correlation/regression (issues with part f) (15)

Q6. Very easy Venn

Q7. Pretty simple normal distribution

I would expect fairly high boundaries for this paper

My guess would be

100UMS = 75
90 UMS = 70
80 UMS = 65
70 UMS = 58
60 UMS = 51
50 UMS = 45
40 UMS = 38

EDIT - This has been corrected on V2 of the solutions

EDIT - error on 4e)

I used the calculated mean and s.d. from earlier in the qu. For some reason, new values of the mean and s.d were given for part e)

scaled mean = 45
scaled sd = 9

(if you have made the same error, it is almost certainly 2 marks gone).

Edit 5f)

This question is very naughty.

From the calculations it would appear that the fake 5 year old coin weighing 20g is an outlier. Statistically, removing an outlier from a data set should increase the correlation between the two sets of data (It should make any formula generated more reliable).

So we would say PMCC increases, hence my solution.

However, given that the value of PMCC was -0.908, it would get closer to -1. So the value of the negative number should decrease. That said, you can understand why someone would say it is getting bigger, the negative number is getting bigger....

I have no idea how they will mark this one.

Furthermore, the data given is not possible. I appreciate it states 'without further calculation' but if you were to remove the fake coin, reduce your data set to 9 coins, calculate new values of Stt, Sww, Stw.

Stw changes to a positive value, meaning that there is now evidence of positive correlation, so PMCC WOULD INCREASE Numerically (if not statistically)

Sww is negative, which is impossible.

With such a small data set, 1 extreme piece of data will have a massive impact, so having an original PMCC so close to -1 doesn't make any sense in the first place.
7
7 years ago
#2
4 e) it asks for the mean of all the students which is given in the question, you seem to have done it for the calculated one?
1
7 years ago
#3
(Original post by swagge)
4 e) it asks for the mean of all the students which is given in the question, you seem to have done it for the calculated one?
lol, i made the same mistake !
0
#4
(Original post by swagge)
4 e) it asks for the mean of all the students which is given in the question, you seem to have done it for the calculated one?

missed that, it is a bit of an odd thing to put in the qu

in that case,

scaled mean = 45
scaled sd = 9
0
7 years ago
#5
Decent paper i thought actually made up for a few silly mistakes in C2
0
7 years ago
#6
(Original post by swagge)
4 e) it asks for the mean of all the students which is given in the question, you seem to have done it for the calculated one?
So what would the answer be?

Thanks.
0
7 years ago
#7
(Original post by Arsey)

missed that, it is a bit of an odd thing to put in the qu

in that case,

scaled mean = 45
scaled sd = 9
For standard deviation, I divided by 0.9

0
7 years ago
#8
Thanks for the solutions but you worked out the mean question wrong your meant to use 50 and 10 other than that 75/75 D1 is next
0
7 years ago
#9
I agree the paper this time was easier than normal.
If I am right, my raw marks would be around 73 (+/- 1).
0
7 years ago
#10
This has been harder for me then the other papers. :l Counted 65 :l
0
7 years ago
#11
(Original post by POWW!)
This has been harder for me then the other papers. :l Counted 65 :l
Same here. Weird

I found it to be more difficult than past papers...
4
7 years ago
#12
(Original post by IAmTheChosenOne)
Same here. Weird

I found it to be more difficult than past papers...
YES ! esp 1b lol sat there staring at it for 5mins
1
7 years ago
#13
for the pmcc increasing/decreasing question - if as time goes by, weirght decreases shouldn't the outlier mean there is a decrease in the PMCC and a stronger negative correlation?
1
7 years ago
#14
(Original post by vishalb)
for the pmcc increasing/decreasing question - if as time goes by, weirght decreases shouldn't the outlier mean there is a decrease in the PMCC and a stronger negative correlation?
This is what I put!
2
7 years ago
#15
(Original post by vishalb)
for the pmcc increasing/decreasing question - if as time goes by, weirght decreases shouldn't the outlier mean there is a decrease in the PMCC and a stronger negative correlation?
LOL Vishal!! Remember, the pmcc is negative, so decreasing means stronger correlation..
0
7 years ago
#16
(Original post by Fardip)
LOL Vishal!! Remember, the pmcc is negative, so decreasing means stronger correlation..
I know! I agree with you. So doesn't that mean that the PMCC decreases rather than increases as written in the markscheme by Arsey?
0
7 years ago
#17
(Original post by vishalb)
I know! I agree with you. So doesn't that mean that the PMCC decreases rather than increases as written in the markscheme by Arsey?
Nah, it increases, 'cause if the correlation is closer to -1. meaning stronger correlation.. For that, it's only if the pmcc was positive, but it was negative, so decreasing pmcc means stronger correlation..
0
7 years ago
#18
(Original post by vishalb)
I know! I agree with you. So doesn't that mean that the PMCC decreases rather than increases as written in the markscheme by Arsey?
Yeh! That's what I thought... isn't it?
0
7 years ago
#19
(Original post by vishalb)
I know! I agree with you. So doesn't that mean that the PMCC decreases rather than increases as written in the markscheme by Arsey?
Increases in the sense that the correlation increases, but decreases in the numerical sense.
I answered the Q just like arsey did, better get the marks !!!
0
7 years ago
#20
(Original post by Fardip)
Nah, it increases, 'cause if the correlation is closer to -1. meaning stronger correlation.. For that, it's only if the pmcc was positive, but it was negative, so decreasing pmcc means stronger correlation..
I'm getting confused now.. So decrease -> stronger correlation, right?
0
X

new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

Oops, nobody has postedin the last few hours.

Why not re-start the conversation?

see more

See more of what you like onThe Student Room

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

University open days

• Cardiff Metropolitan University
Sat, 19 Oct '19
• Coventry University
Sat, 19 Oct '19
• University of Birmingham
Sat, 19 Oct '19

Poll

Join the discussion

Why wouldn't you turn to teachers if you were being bullied?

They might tell my parents (16)
6.93%
They might tell the bully (25)
10.82%
I don't think they'd understand (39)
16.88%
It might lead to more bullying (80)
34.63%
There's nothing they could do (71)
30.74%