Maths Ext 2 Predictions (5 Viewers)

[ringading]

itd be such a flex though to do all of q16

those insane people who get basically 100 in ext 2

 

[femboys4life]

q16 lowkey easier than q14 maybe 15 those r the hardest

 

[kendricklamarlover101]

I'm gonna offer an alternative angle - given the syllabus revision coming up in 2026 - NESA is realising the lack of clarity in the original syllabus and will play by the books this year and until the new syllabus is released - meaning they will stick to tried and true questions, or am I coping hard?

are you going to be streaming your reaction to the test again this year?

 

[Armon]

Honestly I don't see vector planes, I'm not sure if they're explicitly in syllabus?

Fizzysoda emailed a few years back to clarify. Planes, Octets, Cross Product are all OOS.

 

[femboys4life]

Fizzysoda emailed a few years back to clarify. Planes, Octets, Cross Product are all OOS.

what are octets

 

[Armon]

what are octets

sorry, octants.

 

[femboys4life]

are mech questions on resistance proportional to square of velocity in syllabus? ik its mathematically wrong to separate squares into x and y components but wondering if hsc could ask?

 

[Armon]

I'm gonna offer an alternative angle - given the syllabus revision coming up in 2026 - NESA is realising the lack of clarity in the original syllabus and will play by the books this year and until the new syllabus is released - meaning they will stick to tried and true questions, or am I coping hard?

Dude, syllabus is merely a suggestion, see Q14a 2022 3u exam for proof

 

[Armon]

are mech questions on resistance proportional to square of velocity in syllabus? ik its mathematically wrong to separate squares into x and y components but wondering if hsc could ask?

Yeah they're in syllabus, but you will not be asked to derive the equations because thats bad exam design; since it's so much bash, it would have to be worth a fair few marks and it would be later on in the paper. No way NESA would give 6 q15 marks to rote. Theres a reason they were removed in the latest syllabus revision.

 

[buckminsterfullerene]

Yeah they're in syllabus, but you will not be asked to derive the equations because thats bad exam design; since it's so much bash, it would have to be worth a fair few marks and it would be later on in the paper. No way NESA would give 6 q15 marks to rote. Theres a reason they were removed in the latest syllabus revision.

but eg a q like "given the velocity of impact, find the time of impact" would be in syllabus? as youd have to wrangle with partial fractions, and conceptual understanding about resetting bounds etc all the while not making algebraic errors with usually very ugly numbers and roots

 

[Armon]

but eg a q like "given the velocity of impact, find the time of impact" would be in syllabus? as youd have to wrangle with partial fractions, and conceptual understanding about resetting bounds etc all the while not making algebraic errors with usually very ugly numbers and roots

The topic is in syllabus and can be assessed. All I'm telling you is they are unlikely to make you derive the x and y values here.

 

[potpal]

hi sorry for the dumb question but if my raw marks for 21,22,23 papers in order are 78,54,72 (don't know what happened with 22 ), then realistically can I get an aligned exam mark that's an e4 this year?

 

[Armon]

hi sorry for the dumb question but if my raw marks for 21,22,23 papers in order are 78,54,72 (don't know what happened with 22 ), then realistically can I get an aligned exam mark that's an e4 this year?

yeah you only needed 61 raw for e4 in 22 and 23. my stats were similar in the leadup

 

[potpal]

yeah you only needed 61 raw for e4 in 22 and 23

but in 22 I got 54 which I think is an e3, so I'm not sure..

 

[Armon]

but in 22 I got 54 which I think is an e3, so I'm not sure..

Just don't get that on the HSC. Hope this helps.

 

[buckminsterfullerene]

what raw do you need for 95+?

 

[Armon]

what raw do you need for 95+?

80ish +- a few marks?

 

[kendricklamarlover101]

The topic is in syllabus and can be assessed. All I'm telling you is they are unlikely to make you derive the x and y values here.
View attachment 45002

those equations will most likely not be examined as they are not accurate to "square" resistance

 

[epicmaths]

Yes square of velocity as resistance should only apply for motion in 1 dimension. For projectiles its explicitly ruled out in the 2026 update as certain current textbooks that try to treat it actually do it wrong. I believe the HSC writers know better than put a quadratic drag projectile into the exam.

 

[epicmaths]

are you going to be streaming your reaction to the test again this year?

Yes I will hang around at work on Monday and try to get a copy of the paper and aim for a 6pm start - might go for a more clickbait title this year.

I'll be upfront I have not officially taught a cohort with this new syllabus, so my working out for the vectors and newer projectile stuff might be a bit scuffed, but yes a blind non-backseated playthrough in exam conditions upcoming!