Search results

Just double check Q29 (a). Should be total amount repaid, not just one monthly repayment.

Quite right. No I just rushed my work. I think my brain changed "found" to "used".

Here's another version. Error fixed.

I used the four lines to try to deconstruct the sentence. And then it still didn't make sense. ... is greater than 0.3 is equal to 0.3821. Honestly? The last question was ok for a last question, but why do they have to word things in such a complicated way. It is possible to ask hard...

Anyone's guess. First there's the marking. Maybe they'll be a bit generous, or maybe they'll continue the hard line from the exam. Then there's the judging where they decide the cut-offs. My fear is for the students that were just spooked by the complexity of a question and didn't write...

That's a pretty good solution too. I think that was where I was trying to go at first, but just stuffed up the compounding.

Paper up on NESA site now. Standard 2 HSC Paper

Cracked it. Answer is $34486. Short explanation. Imagine if you were making withdrawals of $3000 for the whole 30 years. PV = 3000 x 22.396 = $67188 But we're not. So now remember that the first 20 are only $1000, which is $2000 less. For this difference, PV = 2000 x 16.351 = $32702 So total...

I worked through this one on a spreadsheet. I know the answer is $34 486.50. But who knows how to get there using the PV table? It's doable for the Advanced guys with GPs, but this was in the Standard paper only.

Wow. That's quick.

Thanks for this. You're right on Q30. I drew a new diagram and left out the track CG as well as the track CH which was the one that was closed. In Q42, you're right in that interest is only paid in 5 of the first 6 years, but the annuity table takes care of all that, so you still have to choose...

Q1 = 185, Q3 = 194, IQR = 194-185 = 9 Lower outlier < Q1 - 1.5 x IQR < 185 - 1.5 x 9 < 171.5

Exam paper My quick answers were: 1. A 2. B 3. B 4. C 5. D 6. C 7. D 8. B 9. A 10. A 11. C 12. D 13. C 14. B 15. A 16. 1072 cm3 17. 16 cm 18. (a) 6:5:8 (b) 180 runs 19. Yes, an outlier 20. 500 times 21. 8% 22. 41°5’ 23. (a) 0.98 (b) Strong positive correlation (c) 147 cm 24. 6.5 km 25. 8/17...

The golden rule is not to round off until the final answer. I kept the BAC to 10 sig figs, ended up with a final answer of 6:23 am. But in that question early rounding will probably be accepted if all the working is shown.

Nothing too controversial on this paper. Students who learned their course could answer every question. Interesting to see if people found it tight with time. Q18 might have tricked a few people if they added the 19 and 36 to try to find the total score. Yes, I had to think about the receipt...

For your reference. Enjoy!

And worked solutions are here. Usual disclaimer - all care taken, no responsibility for errors, but I will try to correct them if you spot any.

Yeah, I did it that way too, but it wasn't as much fun. By the way, the method of expanding xn - cn IS part of the 2 unit course. It's part of the introduction to calculus and is usually done with limits and differentiating from first principles. Questions on first principles are rare, and so...

... and here are some worked solutions. The usual disclaimer applies. It would great if you could point out any errors.

The scaling changes every year. If the paper is relatively easy (as last year's was), then it's naturally harder to get a higher scaled mark. If the paper is harder, then less people will get the high raw marks, so scaling isn't so harsh (so to speak). Look. The bottom line is that you have to...