University 2015 Entry Maths Applicants

Who told you that? It isn't true.

Yes it is; it's stated in every Mechanics markscheme, on the "general rules for marking Mechanics" page. For example, see page 5 of this markscheme

Marking is a bit more sophisticated than you might think by reading instructions like that. It is not reasonable to suffer this level of detriment for repeatedly failing to apply a trivial skill. You would have to check with an Edexcel A Level Mechanics examiner (I am OCR) but I suspect the first occurrence will be penalised and subsequent ones ignored.

Marking is a bit more sophisticated than you might think by reading instructions like that. It is not reasonable to suffer this level of detriment for repeatedly failing to apply a trivial skill. You would have to check with an Edexcel A Level Mechanics examiner (I am OCR) but I suspect the first occurrence will be penalised and subsequent ones ignored.

N.B. Over-accuracy or under-accuracy of correct answers should only be penalised ONCE per complete question

Or you could just read the link I gave you?

I don't agree with the policy, but it's there in black and white.

I read the link. If you don't want to benefit from my knowledge and experience that's fine but there is no need to be rude.

I'm not trying to be an arse, I'm trying to clarify Edexcel's policy. The rule is unambiguous, and it seems like it was applied in physicsmaths's case.

We might disagree with the policy, but we can't argue with the mark, since all the marker has done is follow said policy. The reason I keep going on about this is to avoid other people making the same mistake.

You are assuming the instructions written on the mark scheme is the totality of all the instructions to examiners. This won't be the case. At OCR there is a plethora of additional documentation and verbal advice and none of it is in the public domain.

The OCR exam papers state that all non-exact answers must be given to 3 s.f. If you read the mark schemes and examiner's reports you would believe that this would result in candidates losing multiple accuracy marks on a paper. I used to drum it in to my students that failing to follow this instruction could cost them one grade. Imagine my surprise when I became an examiner and found that in practice we do not deduct any marks for over-specification and only dock one mark the first time a student gives a less accurate answer. At all times examiners seek to reward candidates for their correct work and steps are taken to prevent detriment that might be deemed unreasonable.

Marking is a bit more sophisticated than you might think by reading instructions like that. It is not reasonable to suffer this level of detriment for repeatedly failing to apply a trivial skill. You would have to check with an Edexcel A Level Mechanics examiner (I am OCR) but I suspect the first occurrence will be penalised and subsequent ones ignored.

You aren't expected to read all of the book for the module it's recommended for; you are only supposed to read the sections relating to that module. I have textbooks that are 600 pages long and I only understand around 30 pages after completing first year mathematics.

Anyway, if anyone is interested in studying at Newcastle, feel free to ask me questions. (But hardly anyone on TSR studies maths at Newcastle )

MEE! I wanna study maths at newcastle. Are you a 1st/2nd etc. year student? What AS grades did you get and in what subjects and what A2 grades? Also, did you do any kind of extra reading and if so what did you do?

Seriously, sort out your attitude. (For the record I got 1200/1200 UMS in maths and FM when I took my A-Levels.)

Damnnnnnn. That's sick! I originally thought I was going to get that but D2 ****ed it up by being a **** module (hated it) and I messed up FP1 getting 96/100 because I panicked so badly.
588/600 - 98% - is commendable, however, it isn't 600/600, which annoys me. 300/300 in core though, which I will accept.

What were your STEP marks? May I ask?

Yes. They're 0 in STEP I, 0 in STEP II and 0 in STEP III - I was too scared to take them and so turned down my Cambridge offer (which was the only place to require STEP at the time).

Full UMS doesn't mean anything more than the fact that I was accurate in the exams. I took the exams at a time when grade boundaries were shockingly low (I did P1-P6, M1-M6 instead of the C and FP modules), and in my M4 am fairly sure I didn't even complete the paper. What I'm trying to say is, no one cares if you get 98 instead of 100, and neither should you. Care more about doing well in STEP. I get the focus on UMS given A-level results just came out, but seriously you will realise it just doesn't matter. I can't even remember what GCSE subjects I took, or half of my degree options, let alone what marks I got!

Don't bother resitting FP1. Imperial now ask you to sit the MAT around November. If you're doing well in STEP already that's a great sign, but your offer is almost certainly dependent on how well you do in MAT.

You've got great scores by the way. Have you thought about Oxbridge or Warwick? You'll also have to take STEP for Cambridge and Warwick, but you seem to have looked at STEP already, and they're amazing unis for Maths.

imperial do not look at modules ums just grades so ur alright mate.


Posted from TSR Mobile