Thoughts on Bio exam?? (1 Viewer)

[muhahahahahaha]

IN my opinion, the biology exam was a fair test. It covered most aspects of the hsc course. The questions gave all students an opportunity as the test itself was not as difficult as the 2009 biology exam. The communication section this year was harder than previous years. I think this was the first year that they actually asked about action potential. Luckily, I was able to answer all questions in the exam confidently, however, many people from my school complained that the communication section was more difficult as they were not able to grasp what the question was asking them.

How did everyone else find the biology exam?

 

[blackratpoo]

mixed opinions. actually they asked about action potentials last yr too. to me there was too much drawing involved. like the larynx thing and the xylem longitudinal thing. communication was v.diff but manageable. i hated the 7 marks on analysing the sources (i feel this is a waste of content space. i.e. giving people who havnt studied as much easy marks). pretty standard test though.

 

[ruchira2122]

hated that exam so bad. i donno about you guys but i personally thought the questions limited what u could talk about cause they gave us specific examples to use in the questions. so that annoyed me greatly.
also thought that a lot of the content was missed out and the source work was pretty bullshit...hardly what i'd call biology...it was more comprehension. *end of rant*

but yeh thats probably just my take on it

 

[Jonneeh]

I dont remember what question it was but it was in communication, it was something about sound and the larynx where two diagrams had to be drawn.

Anyways what were we suppose to draw? It was like a 4 marker

 

[blackratpoo]

a person can sing a high pitch sound or a low pitch sound. draw two labelled diagrams of the larynx in each of these states. something like that. you had to draw a vagina looking thing (representing larynx) where the vocal cords are relaxed then taut. why do you ask this questions specifically? there was a random question on the differing structures of cones or something...that was bs.

 

[blackratpoo]

here is exam link: http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/hsc_exams/hsc2010exams/pdf_doc/2010-hsc-exam-biology.pdf

 

[ibbi00]

That exam was not even remotely fair. Communications was nothing like I've done before. Having attained a mark of 95 in my trials (Independent paper), one would think I earned my bragging rights xD. For instance:

(ii) Explain why the structure of cones varies depending on their location in the retina.

Even if this question was scientifically valid, which I highly doubt, under what particular dot-point was this addressed? I guarantee you none of the HSC textbooks covered something of this sort.

Explain TWO possible causes for the lack of action potentials in region X.

... Talk about being anymore vague. Yet I guarantee you the marking guidelines won't be so broad thanks to wording rivaling that of a six year old.

That's all I remember for now.
/end rant.

 

[hscmathstutor10]

That exam was not even remotely fair. Communications was nothing like I've done before. For instance:

Even if this question was scientifically valid, which I highly doubt, under what particular dot point was this addressed. I guarantee you none of the HSC textbooks covered something of this sort.

... Talk about being anymore vague. Yet I guarantee you the marking guidelines won't be so broad thanks to poor wording.

That's all I remember for now.
/end rant.

ha u gona fail

 

[Jonneeh]

a person can sing a high pitch sound or a low pitch sound. draw two labelled diagrams of the larynx in each of these states. something like that. you had to draw a vagina looking thing (representing larynx) where the vocal cords are relaxed then taut. why do you ask this questions specifically? there was a random question on the differing structures of cones or something...that was bs.

Honestly i thought whole Communication section was a wtf.

I Mean like did we learn or were we even suppose to learn how the larynx looks like under different vocal situations. I mean the only thing close to that was the graph of what high and low pitch sounds looked like on a CRO. I Pretty much drew 2 vaginas one bigger then the other =.=

The cones structure one was also wtf and the action potential was even more wtf, were we suppose to refer to specifically where region x was?

There my Rant, its all done anyways 6 days til results

 

[ibbi00]

You were supposed to draw something like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjRsa77u6OU
I happened to come across this video whilst studying for communications

 

[Jonneeh]

You were supposed to draw something like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjRsa77u6OU
I happened to come across this video whilst studying for communications

At first i drew two graphs of different pitches, but then afterwoods at the end i read the question again and realised what i did was wrong and had no idea how to asnwer it anyways.

Ended drawing very minimalistic picture in my panic that looked like this:

() = vocal chord high pitch
( ) = Vocal Chords low pitch

Oh Well =(

 

[blackratpoo]

That exam was not even remotely fair. Communications was nothing like I've done before. Having attained a mark of 95 in my trials (Independent paper), one would think I earned my bragging rights xD. For instance:


Even if this question was scientifically valid, which I highly doubt, under what particular dot-point was this addressed? I guarantee you none of the HSC textbooks covered something of this sort.

... Talk about being anymore vague. Yet I guarantee you the marking guidelines won't be so broad thanks to wording rivaling that of a six year old.

That's all I remember for now.
/end rant.

im with you completley. the cones structure is not on the syllabus nor does the q make sense thus not allowing any student to logically deduce an answer.

as for the action potential one - it was more about the cerebrum and knowing that the visual cortex and auditory cortex are two localities where action potentials are processed and thus a fall would prevent any interpretation. is this the approach others took?

larynx - the bos would've gotten a lot of fucking ugly vag's this yr. i just dont get why it was 4 marks? like wtf. should have been 2.

and the 7 marker has never not been on fucking cochlear/hearing aids or cataracts/accomodation. it was on like a fucking range of shit.

and lol at hscmathstutour...u funny shitface

 

[alexx-12]

ahhh biology was very different this year!
i thought that the marks were not fairly allocated and the questions were either too broad or too specific :s.

communication killed me!!!
the vocal fold drawing question was stupid and i had absolutely no idea what to draw so i just drew some scribbles, one scribble being more 'relaxed' than the other. I know its wrong but i had no idea :/. I also didnt like the communication question with the animal and region X, i talked about the wernikes area as i beleived that the X could cover the occipital lobe or the wernikes area... stupid!

 

[hscmathstutor10]

and lol at hscmathstutour...u funny shitface

im not the one that is going to fail

 

[blackratpoo]

im not the one that is going to fail

ok dude. keep telling yaself that

 

[ibbi00]

im not the one that is going to fail

Point to me one person on these forums that actually likes you - This excludes your mirror accounts of course.












































That's what I thought.

 

[hscmathstutor10]

Point to me one person on these forums that actually likes you - This excludes your mirror accounts of course.












































That's what I thought.

im actually bit disappointed the maths papers werent harder, i would have loved to see you and newijapper fail hard but they gave you the easiest paper in 15yrs, no jokes

 

[ibbi00]

as for the action potential one - it was more about the cerebrum and knowing that the visual cortex and auditory cortex are two localities where action potentials are processed and thus a fall would prevent any interpretation. is this the approach others took?

Yea I think my bullocks answer constitiued something of this sort. I did also mention a lack of sodium ions defusing in and as a result the threshold point was not reached bla bla bla...

 

[Ishynooshy]

That exam was not even remotely fair. Communications was nothing like I've done before. Having attained a mark of 95 in my trials (Independent paper), one would think I earned my bragging rights xD. For instance:


Even if this question was scientifically valid, which I highly doubt, under what particular dot-point was this addressed? I guarantee you none of the HSC textbooks covered something of this sort.

... Talk about being anymore vague. Yet I guarantee you the marking guidelines won't be so broad thanks to wording rivaling that of a six year old.

Your first question addresses this dot point:
describe the differences in distribution, structure and function of the photoreceptor cells in the human eye

Without seeing the actual diagram, I would think that your other question would be testing either:
Identify neurones as nerve cells that are the transmitters of signals byelectrochemical changes in their membranes
OR
identify those areas of the cerebrum involved in the perception and interpretation of light and sound

Therefore, I shout shennanigans at your 95% trial results. Pretty simple and obvious dotpoints no one can miss.

 

[ibbi00]

Your first question addresses this dot point:
describe the differences in distribution, structure and function of the photoreceptor cells in the human eye

Without seeing the actual diagram, I would think that your other question would be testing either:
Identify neurones as nerve cells that are the transmitters of signals byelectrochemical changes in their membranes
OR
identify those areas of the cerebrum involved in the perception and interpretation of light and sound

Therefore, I shout shennanigans at your 95% trial results. Pretty simple and obvious dotpoints no one can miss.

Now did the first dot-point continue to say depending on their location in the retina.? I didn't think so. Anyone can describe the structure of the cones but that clearly is not the issue. As an Advanced Science Honours student why don't you shed some light as to what the answer would look like?

As for the second question, I don't believe the dot-points you mentioned suffice seeing as it's an 'explain' 4 marker question as opposed to the 'idenfity' dot points you raised.