Was that a Maths exam? (1 Viewer)

[youngminii]

You know, it's always been like this
I still remember when I first began posting on BoS
I think on the Maths/Physics threads jm would post as well
He would post something absolutely ridiculous and everyone would argue with him, including Trebla and other teachers, yet he'd continue to 'argue' and he'd actually think he won

Stupid fuck

 

[biopia]

I think this argument has developed beyond what it was originally...

This is no longer about calculators, or 'godly' physics teachers, it is about the blatantly derogatory arrogance you have. How about you admit you are not 100% correct on this one...

People people, it's OKAY to be wrong for once

Take your own conceited advice for once...

 

[cutemouse]

Since the argument has reverted back to the original topic I shall comment on this bit. I'm ignoring other comments.

here


hmm the official marking guidlines Vs your opinion... yep all the evidence supports y... everyone else

2008 Q17 a) From the graph, what is the gravitational potential energy of the mass when it is one Earth radius above Earth’s surface? [1 mark]

Where the hell do you have to make any calculations here? Hence, question was taking out of context, ie. useless in terms of this argument. Are you telling me that you cannot read off a graph without using a calculator???

 

[helper]

The other thing is with 17a, is that a range of numbers were accepted as the correct value. There wasn't one specificc value looked for.

 

[addikaye03]

far out, how big a fukn loser are you?!?!?!?!?!?!

btw u think someone's gonna get arrested cos they punch you in the face???? grow the fuck up!

Haha +1, but i'm still trying to work out how he knew about someone running into my car!! It's not as if it's a friend through a friend thing because i live like 6 hrs from sydney lol and don't believe 6 degrees of separation is that incredible lol. I only posted it on Facebook, def not BOS, soo... are you stalking my fb jm01?

Also should i take it as a threat, cause that's kinda a direct threat. Maybe i should report it and hopefully that will be enough to get him kicked off the site.

I think this argument has developed beyond what it was originally...

This is no longer about calculators, or 'godly' physics teachers, it is about the blatantly derogatory arrogance you have. How about you admit you are not 100% correct on this one...

Take your own conceited advice for once...

Perfect comment

The other thing is with 17a, is that a range of numbers were accepted as the correct value. There wasn't one specificc value looked for.

I think that was one of many examples, i don't think he looked at the paper, just the marking guide lines. Look through various other past papers and you'll find the exact same guideline applied to calculation specific Q's.

 

[cutemouse]

soo... are you stalking my fb jm01?

Here are the facts:

1) Unless I know you in person (do I?), how would I know your name... your username here is just jibberish.

2) I'd have to be friends with you on FB, after somehow finding out your name. (Maybe I am... )

 

[shady145]

Since the argument has reverted back to the original topic I shall comment on this bit. I'm ignoring other comments.



2008 Q17 a) From the graph, what is the gravitational potential energy of the mass when it is one Earth radius above Earth’s surface? [1 mark]

Where the hell do you have to make any calculations here? Hence, question was taking out of context, ie. useless in terms of this argument. Are you telling me that you cannot read off a graph without using a calculator???

wasnt there an argument whether you get the marks for substituting the vaules in or if you get the marks for having the correct answer... you were saying if you sub it in u always get the marks, and they never ask for the answer or somehting like that... and then you went on about your teacher =/
i didnt read that example above =| but here is one that wants the answer. 2007 question 21 b... here is some of the marking criteria :

Calculates correct value of torque​

​

other mark was for identifying the correct formula

What Aerath was saying was exactly this, you are wrong in that you may not always get full marks for just substituing the information in, use a calculator or your brain to work it out... this came from the argument that its easier to use a calculator than work it out in your head or something ( i havnt read this thread from the begining so i dnt know whats been said =/)
anywho, aerath was right, you get marks for evaluating and substituing depending on the question

 

[helper]

I think that was one of many examples, i don't think he looked at the paper, just the marking guide lines. Look through various other past papers and you'll find the exact same guideline applied to calculation specific Q's.

In my time marking, i wouldn't need one hand to see when it was marked on the final answer rather than substitution.

I have seen more cases of where the right answer has been given zero without working than being marked wrong on a calculator error.

 

[study-freak]

Since the argument has reverted back to the original topic I shall comment on this bit. I'm ignoring other comments.



2008 Q17 a) From the graph, what is the gravitational potential energy of the mass when it is one Earth radius above Earth’s surface? [1 mark]

Where the hell do you have to make any calculations here? Hence, question was taking out of context, ie. useless in terms of this argument. Are you telling me that you cannot read off a graph without using a calculator???

Now that we are using some real data and arguing objectively, I decided to comment on this.

2007 HSC
Question 16 (b) (ii)Calculate the horizontal velocity of the ball bearing released from a height of 80 cm above point P. 2marks
Calculates correct velocity for range chosen 2

Question 21 (b) What is the magnitude of the torque provided by a mass of 0.2 kg suspended from either point X or point Y? 2 marks
Identifies correct equation
Calculates correct value of torque 2

Question 21 (c) If the motor is just stopped by a mass of 0.2 kg, how many turns does the coil have? 2 marks
Identifies correct equation
Manipulates to calculate the number of turns 2

Question 26 (c) Calculate the energy lost by the transformer in eight hours. 2 marks
Correctly states the input and output power.
Calculates the power loss and the energy lost in 8 hours 2

These don't conform to your claim that substitution is enough. (Correct me if I'm wrong because I didn't read your previous posts (cbb) but I assumed that you are arguing substitution Vs correct calculation.)

Edit: lol
I took to long to extract these information from the boardofstudies website... Shady145 already gave some evidence.

 

[helper]

Calculates correct value of torque

other mark was for identifying the correct formula

Which meant correct substitution because a correctly substituted formula, with the letter as the subject is taken as a number

I'm finding it very funny about the questions you are quoting.

Just clarifying Physics is one of the subjects that has a marking scheme and a marking guideline. The marking scheme is where it states that only substitution is required.

 

[shady145]

Which meant correct substitution because a correctly substituted formula, with the letter as the subject is taken as a number

I'm finding it very funny about the questions you are quoting.

yea but the mark isnt given for substitution

 

[helper]

yea but the mark isnt given for substitution

It was, I am not going to go into anymore detail but can guarantee it was.

 

[study-freak]

Which meant correct substitution because a correctly substituted formula, with the letter as the subject is taken as a number

I'm finding it very funny about the questions you are quoting.

Just clarifying Physics is one of the subjects that has a marking scheme and a marking guideline. The marking scheme is where it states that only substitution is required.

Hmm... I see
So even if they don't say 'substitution,' it means just substitution?

 

[helper]

Hmm... I see
So even if they don't say 'substitution,' it means just substitution?

Most times it means correct substitution, a value but the value doesn't have to be correct.

 

[cutemouse]

wasnt there an argument whether you get the marks for substituting the vaules in or if you get the marks for having the correct answer... you were saying if you sub it in u always get the marks

Here's what I was saying:

1) I find it easier to mental calculate things, contrary to using a calculator and that I get the same answers as everyone else that uses a calculator in an exam. eg. If the unrounded value of an answer is, say 10.089123 m/s^2, then you can write 10 m/s^2 or 10.1 m/s^2 and still get full marks. I was illustrating that I round like the earlier when possible.

Another example, if the unrounded answer is, say 12839.209288 Newtons, then you can write 12839 N, or 1.3 * 10^4 N and still get full marks. I would take the latter approach (since it would be too difficult to mentally calculate the latter digits) and people using calculators would obviously may or may not take the earlier approach. But regardless, both answers would get full marks in HSC Physics.

2) If a question involves 2 parts, say calculating force and then calculating acceleration, you can still use the rounded value for force and then divide it by the mass given by the question (showing all working) to find the accel and get full marks, or you could use the calculator display (and memory) for the force and then divide it by the mass and still get full marks. The difference in these answers are often off by one or two decimal places anyway.

This is what I've been saying all along.

 

[shady145]

It was, I am not going to go into anymore detail but can guarantee it was.

unless you marked it or knew someone who marked it how can you guarantee, if the criteria says correct value meaning evaluated, then how do you get the mark for not meeting criteria.

 

[helper]

unless you marked it or knew someone who marked it how can you guarantee, if the criteria says correct value meaning evaluated, then how do you get the mark for not meeting criteria.

As I said the interpretation is in the marking schemes. An equated value but not calculated is taken as a correct value, if there is some value written, even if it is incorrect.

If the marking guidelines were taken literally as people are here, then in you had part a wrong, then carry over errors would mean you couldn't obtain the correct value for later questions and receive zero.

Just like in other older questions a formula with no substitution has been taken as numerical data.

It takes a bout a full day to train people each year to read 6 marks of marking guidelines, so don't think they can be read straight off. That is for people who have been marking for years.

 

[shady145]

As I said the interpretation is in the marking schemes. An equated value but not calculated is taken as a correct value, if there is some value written, even if it is incorrect.

If the marking guidelines were taken literally as people are here, then in you had part a wrong, then carry over errors would mean you couldn't obtain the correct value for later questions and receive zero.

Just like in other older questions a formula with no substitution has been taken as numerical data.

It takes a bout a full day to train people each year to read 6 marks of marking guidelines, so don't think they can be read straight off. That is for people who have been marking for years.

aight

 

[nikilily]

aww frig, im not looking forward to my physics hsc exam next year now that ive read this forum, i do general math so physics is a struggle for me. why oh why didnt i drop it

 

[khorne]

gg...like 4 pages of debate with jm01...You guys know you are wasting your time...

And jm, shame on you, pulling the same cards you did in that maths thread...Well, if you can go without a calculator, then go ahead. But if makes no sense what so ever to me, as to why you'd disregard a calculator for some stuff (eg. 45 degree angles, etc) but use it for other (eg, 33 degree angle)...While 45 is an exact value, would it not be easier to just use a calculator for both?

Additionally, your point about people being too dependant on calculators is stupid, to say the least. Maths isn't about "calculations"...computers can do calculations...maths is about ideas, theories and concepts...

So really...I guess what i'm trying to say is, shut the fuck up, cause no one gives a shit.