This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Edexcel A-level Biology B Paper 2 - 13th June 2025 [Exam Chat]

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20

imstressed5748

Original post

by StrawberryDreams

How did it go everyone? :smile:

Spoiler

Did anyone get a negative spearman’s rank correlation coefficient 😭😭

Reply 21

Markos8666

Original post

by imstressed5748

Did anyone get a negative spearman’s rank correlation coefficient 😭😭

Yes but that only tells you if it’s positive or negative correlation

Reply 22

Markos8666

Original post

by Markos8666

Yes but that only tells you if it’s positive or negative correlation

when comparing you forget about the - or plus

Reply 23

Nagio

That paper was so much better compared to paper 1

Reply 24

Aditum

What did people get for Spearman's? I got -49/55, but had to do last minute so won't be shocked if I'm wrong

Reply 25

Nagio

Original post

by Aditum

What did people get for Spearman's? I got -49/55, but had to do last minute so won't be shocked if I'm wrong

-0.89

Reply 26

Anjalinair..

It was better than paper1, still not gonna say it was the best or the worse!! It was alr

Reply 27

Aditum

Original post

by Nagio

-0.89

YESSSS basically the same thing thank GOD. did anyone say it was statistically significant to its degrees of freedom on the part after?

Reply 28

Markos8666

Original post

by Nagio

-0.89

Same but I didn’t mention it In the next question 😭 I js wrote it was higher

Reply 29

Nagio

Original post

by Aditum

YESSSS basically the same thing thank GOD. did anyone say it was statistically significant to its degrees of freedom on the part after?

Yeah, significant correlation

Reply 30

Markos8666

Original post

by Aditum

YESSSS basically the same thing thank GOD. did anyone say it was statistically significant to its degrees of freedom on the part after?

I wrote of how you accept the null and state there was significance and I wrote a hypothesis

Reply 31

woody-spume

Did anyone else get 33 for Hardy Weinberg??

Reply 32

Nagio

What did you guys get for the hardy weinberg, i got 84 😭😭😭 it was apparently 34 or something similar

Reply 33

Markos8666

Original post

by woody-spume

Did anyone else get 33 for Hardy Weinberg??

I missed that out assuming I’ll get 1 m for writing the other eq

Reply 34

Markos8666

Guys was there a question on like lizards I feel like I glimpsed at one or am I tripping I feel like it was 6 m but I double checked in missed not qs

Reply 35

Nagio

I dont think so

Reply 36

woody-spume

Original post

by Markos8666

Guys was there a question on like lizards I feel like I glimpsed at one or am I tripping I feel like it was 6 m but I double checked in missed not qs

Ummm not that I can remember?😭

Reply 37

imstressed5748

The 6 marker was on the heather moors and the other one was on the retina and eye so there was no six marker on this

Reply 38

Aditum

Ah I forgot to mention the null, at least that's 1 or 2 marks plus the 5 before, really can't complain. Paperwise that was definitely nicer than Paper 1. Felt like a very standard Biology Paper 2 tbh, happy with it.

What did people say for the 6 marker on vision and the 6 marker at the end? For the former I basically just said that humans were more suited for daytime given more cones, cats were more suited for nighttime given rods, lower energy vs higher energy photoreceptors or whatever they're called, that sort of thing, then repeated for table 2 and said a few were more or less equal because of some activity during other times/in low light day.

For the latter I said basically just wrote for or against burning moors on the side of each point and then just said "Burning good because [POINT 1] which means that, and [POINT 2]..." and so on.