Search results

yh you can! One of my friends went to parra, and is now doing 4u after being in a 5.2 in year 10. But he had to work really hard and had to get above a certain cutoff or something in yearlies for 5.3 test that was optional for him. Also edit: whilst actuarial is perfectly doable with 3u maths...

yh lol it seemed simple when I looked at it first for practice, but became quickly hard when I landed at that expression

True. Recursive integration is relaxing ngl .

fax

Assuming above average is what 30 or so students get in your cohort, I would say about mid band 5 (possibly high b5 in the case your cohort is way better) internally would be safe to assume. But again, I think the way this turns out is out of our hands. I face trouble with this as well, but like...

yh that would be good

fair. I am 100% sure I put the student no, centre no as well as the paper I was doing. Thanks!

I realised that I forgot to tick the extra writing booklet for paper 2 English, but the supervisor signed me off on the fact that I used extra writing booklets in the blue form they gave. It's just that I forgot to tick that I used extra booklets on the actual writing booklet. Am I screwed?

solid...

I mean, ig some people could say the close up shot of the scholar speaking, but I thought it does not add any value. They probs included the image to show what scholar it was, since LFR had quite a few different academia voicing their opinions

Can't really remember lol, but I think I explored Act 1 scene 1 and 2 of Richard, and then implemented the diegetic conversation about Pacino saying to have a right to an opinion, along with the Scholar's testimony on why he didn't know why Richard married Anna historically. Then I demonstrated...

Richard

As long as your thesis agrees or disagrees I think it's fine (that's what I did in mine by agreeing how the collisions are really prominent). It only gets intricate when you disagree and agree at the same time, in which you need to have an even clearer evaluation...

Same here sorta, the ideas I discussed in my essays were completely based off the implied concepts in the extract. I would say about 40% of my analysis were off the extract and my remaining quotes for the other text so as to speak, matched the concepts discussed in the extract ...

just curious, how many times did you guys refer to the extract. I remember thoroughly referencing it, in addition to analysing the quotes like about 4-5 ish times. Felt like that was a bit too less however...

omg it feels like I just started year 12, yet here I am in the climax of this journey !

AND they did this year (2022) lmao.....

yh I reckon this one, since they haven't really asked titration or conductometry curves in section 2...

nah dw, it said "atleast one" and when NESA say that, they mean that its possible with one. Tbf many ppl did like a common mod unseen, but I felt depth was more important than plain TEE sentences. Thas why I did two as well I think, to accommodate the justification of the composer's creative...

yh