2025 ext 1 and ext 2 hsc exams need corrections (1 Viewer)

[tywebb]

e1 q12d, e2 q13a and e2 q16b require corrections

i did this one to make the corrections: https://4unitmaths.com/correcting-2025-hsc-exams.pdf

 

[bobjess]

Wait thats crazy

 

[vuhung]

An easy fix for hsc math ext 2 2025 q13a.

Adding a question: "..., and find k in terms of m"

If we turn it into a multiple-choice question, it won't be 3 marks anymore.

 

[vuhung]

For hsc math ext 2 2025 q16b.

The question is just fine, no fix required.

Apply sin(theta) = 3/5 to the initial conditions.
Considering 2 signs costs students 1 or 2 more lines.

 

[coolcat6778]

Clearly HSC exam ppl don't care about precision. Look at what they do with their shitty physics exams as well.

Also why are you using tildes? at UNSW and pretty much everywhere else, they only use arrows above vectors. HSC is special

 

[coolcat6778]

The dogshit HSC syllabus doesn't even introduce stuff like " x∈R∖{0}" or a formal way of expressing functions unlike VCE.

VCE genuinely looks like way better preparation for MATH1131/1141 I just realised

.

Like who the fuck cares the HSC has "harder questions", VCE spec and methods is genuinely a much nicer syllabus than the dogshit outdated HSC syllabus.

VCE math syllabus covers EVERYTHING in the HSC syllabus and EVEN MORE

Also there's literally nothing stopping the VCE examiners from asking questions of "hsc difficulty".

VCE is superior in everyway, from science to math to english. HSC sucks more than you think.

Stuff that VCE spec and methods cover that the HSC DOESN'T

- Cross product - Formal function notation - Implicit Differentiation - Planes - Confidence interval - Sample mean - Euler's method

Stuff that HSC ext 2,1 and advanced cover that the vce doesn't

- "hard questions" that's it , i'm pretty sure atleast 90% of people would want to learn more university content, than be stuck on useless impossible questions (that only favour private tutoring businesses with fucking question banks for rich people)

 

[coolcat6778]

@tywebb Apparently NSW was gonna add Matricies into the HSC syllabus a few years ago, but some fucking cunt (Bill Pender) had to ruin it by yapping about how it's too hand waving or some bs reason

 

[tywebb]

An easy fix for hsc math ext 2 2025 q13a. Adding a question: "..., and find k in terms of m"

that's what i did

 

[tywebb]

If we turn it into a multiple-choice question, it won't be 3 marks anymore.

yeah that's right. BUT .... that was the original intent of the question

"turning into" actually happened the other way around.

in other words it started off being a mc then they turned it into free response without due consideration to the wording in such a way that conveyed the intent of the question (i.e., find k in terms of m)

 

[tywebb]

For hsc math ext 2 2025 q16b. The question is just fine, no fix required.

there will be a recording coming out soon made by a senior hsc marker from nesa for this question in which he explains this in more detail working through all 3 cases. it is however clear from the marking guidelines that this is not the intent of the question.

i don't really want to put that into my document because it would be too distracting from the point of the article

even though the unedited version of the question can be done by doing all 3 cases, it still needs to be modified to more accurately reflect the intent of the question.

 

[tywebb]

Clearly HSC exam ppl don't care about precision.

their checking processes were somewhat wanting in this case. i'm gonna add a reference later today to the stacey review to address this issue.

 

[tywebb]

Look at what they do with their shitty physics exams as well.

i am aware similar issues occur in other subjects and if i expand the article to include those it would likely grow to several thousand pages.

so unfortunately i have to reject this idea.

it's quite rare in maths but not entirely unprecedented.

so one thing i might consider is expanding it to include other questions from hsc maths exams from other years. then it might grow to a few more pages but not thousands

 

[tywebb]

why are you using tildes? at UNSW and pretty much everywhere else, they only use arrows above vectors. HSC is special

agreed.

bold and arrows are more standard notations

tildes are hard to do in latex and in word - for a reason - it is not standard notation. so i'm happy that it is hard to do in latex and word.

i've been telling them this for years but of course they ignored me.

now nesa have finally woken up and changed this in the new syllabus which has bold and arrows and makes it clear that the tilde notation is to be reserved only for handwritten vectors not typed.

doesn't fix the problem of countless trial papers online now contaminated with the bad notation. anyone overseas seeing these would likely think nsw are a bunch of idiots ..... all because they didn't listen to me in the first place. well pardon me for trying to save them from such embarrassment. now they think i'm the villain. go figure.

 

[tywebb]

VCE is superior in everyway

it'd be great if nsw did cross product, scalar triple product, matrices, determinants, properties of beta functions, etc.

such things greatly improves efficiency of solutions

although vce has some of this in their content the hsc processes are still superior to vce notwithstanding the opposite impression one may get from my article.

so i'm gonna say no not in everyway. it even got so bad there they had to sack the vcaa. well that's never happened to nesa. at least not yet anyway.

marty ross has a website called https://mathematicalcrap.com where he takes the mickey out of the vce bigtime. some people think i'm overly feisty and dramatising. but my feistiness and dramatising pales in comparison to marty ross.

i've actually met him once. he had a bucket full of calculators and smashed them all with a hammer.

 

[tywebb]

i don't always agree with marty ross. he takes the mickey out of kaye stacey too. whilst i agree she loves calculators a little too much, nevertheless i have tremendous respect for kaye stacey. you'll see why later today when i put the reference in my article.

 

[tywebb]

I have added the Stacey Review reference replete with comment: The 110 year history of excellence in external final examinations in NSW behoves one to uphold the recommendation of the Stacey Review [1] that the NSW syllabus maintains rigour. It seems this has gone awry with some questions in the 2025 HSC exams. This document has gone some way towards bringing this rigour back and it is hoped that NESA will adjust their processes so that this kind of document will not be necessary in the future.

[1] Stacey, K., Dowsey, J., McCrae, B., & Stephens, M. (1998). Review of senior secondary mathematics curriculum. (“Stacey Review”) Sydney: NSW Board of Studies.

 

[tywebb]

there will be a recording coming out soon made by a senior hsc marker from nesa for this question in which he explains this in more detail working through all 3 cases. it is however clear from the marking guidelines that this is not the intent of the question.

i don't really want to put that into my document because it would be too distracting from the point of the article

even though the unedited version of the question can be done by doing all 3 cases, it still needs to be modified to more accurately reflect the intent of the question.

recording came out on the yt

where he also says there is mistake in question

 

[tywebb]

attached are the 16b slides, transcript and edited transcript.

the edited transcript is easier to read

 

[Flatuitous]

VCE math syllabus covers EVERYTHING in the HSC syllabus and EVEN MORE

ts not even true

vce doesn't cover algebraic inequalities, weierstrass substitution, trigonometric solutions to polynomials, etc

mfs rly js sayn anythn to play the victim card
"nooo i swear my state is worse than yours"