BoS Trials Maths, Physics and Business Studies 2023 (1 Viewer)

[unofficiallyred12]

i don't

 

[TrueAlpha]

Ahhh these maths results are making me anxious for the business ones.

 

[scaryshark09]

Ahhh these maths results are making me anxious for the business ones.

hopefully the top for mc is 15, iykyk

 

[tbrowne055]

does anyone know when the solutions for 3u will be going up?

 

[Trebla]

does anyone know when the solutions for 3u will be going up?

Almost ready to go.

Is there any particular question(s), you want an answer for right now?

 

[Trebla]

Here are the solutions and marks for the 2023 Mathematics Extension 1 BoS trials!

Similar to Mathematics Extension 2, please note that the question paper has been updated (which the solutions are aligned to) with some minor adjustments to a few questions (e.g. split into parts, fixed the mark allocation, edited some wordings). The updated file is attached in my original post of the papers to replace the older version.

...and that wraps up the Maths BoS Trials for another year!

I just want to use this opportunity to thank everyone who helped out for both the Maths exams, including @Paradoxica (for helping with questions and marking), @sharky564 (for helping with questions), @1039213 (for marking), @yanujw (for marking) and @one eight seven (for marking). Also massive thanks to @Carrotsticks for allowing us to hold the events at the Sydney Centre of Mathematics venue.

Watch this space for news on Business Studies and Physics...

 

[carrotsss]

Here are the solutions and marks for the 2023 Mathematics Extension 1 BoS trials!

Similar to Mathematics Extension 2, please note that the question paper has been updated (which the solutions are aligned to) with some minor adjustments to a few questions (e.g. split into parts, fixed the mark allocation, edited some wordings). The updated file is attached in my original post of the papers to replace the older version.

...and that wraps up the Maths BoS Trials for another year!

I just want to use this opportunity to thank everyone who helped out for both the Maths exams, including @Paradoxica (for helping with questions and marking), @sharky564 (for helping with questions), @1039213 (for marking), @yanujw (for marking) and @one eight seven (for marking). Also massive thanks to @Carrotsticks for allowing us to hold the events at the Sydney Centre of Mathematics venue.

Watch this space for news on Business Studies and Physics...

thank you!

can’t wait for physics solutions

 

[scaryshark09]

can’t wait for physics solutions

business first tho!!

 

[yanujw]

Comments for Extension 1, Question 12

(a) (i) I would say about 1/2 of students got this right, the rest would need to revise binomial probability as it was a fairly standard question, and also write out the simultaneous equations to be solved for to avoid silly mistakes.

(ii) There was a surprisingly high amount of non-attempts. For those that gave it a go, a majority didn't understand how to calculate the parameters of each bernoulli trial, and only considered the case where a question was attempted seriously.

Tip: If a question requires the use of the normal approximation and does not give you z-score data, the z-score value that you calculate should always be one that can be solved for with the empirical rule. If you don't get a z-score close to one of the integers -3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3, recheck your working. The exception is when there is some extra info in the question from which you can derive the values, for example in Question 26 of the 2022 Advanced HSC.

(b) (i) Answer successfully by almost everyone. There was a variety of vector computations used that all worked, such as AP - AB, BO + OP and even a few students that used BC + CP.

(ii) Very, very few marks were awarded across the cohort for this part. Almost every student attempted to use the point Q (i.e. to find BQ or OQ in component form so that they could get the result from dot products) and this was extremely unsuccessful. Only 1 student that used the point Q in this way got 2/2 - but they used 3 pages to complete it! The sophisticated method is to use the geometrical data to your advantage and write POQ in terms of OPQ, noting that the triangle is isosceles, and finding OPQ easily using the dot product of AP and BP, which should be easy from the previous question. In other words, it's worth looking at roundabout geometrical methods that might be easier in the long-run rather than just aiming straight at the result to prove.

(c) (i) Mostly answered successfully, however avoid silly mistakes such as trying to find the cartesian equation of the path - which was redundant in this question, or deriving the displacement vector when it is already provided.

(ii) Only a few students reached 2/2 - most of the others got bogged down in working out and abandoned the process. Try to leave everything in parameters until you need to evaluate it i.e. don't find an expression for R first and sub it in to get a mess of algebra, keep everything as simple as possible.

(d) (i) Most students did the algebra and got the result, nothing more to say here.

(ii) Almost everyone was able to use the previous part, but a common mistake was that the last 3 roots were sin(4pi/7), sin(5pi/7) and sin(6pi/7), implying that there are 3 double roots rather than the negatives of the first 3 roots. A quick sanity check you could've done during the test is to see that the polynomial is even and thus any root that is positive must also be negative, rather than being a double root.

(iii) Done well, with about half the students getting some progress and half of those getting 2/2.


Best of luck for tomorrow's exam!

 

[thomas mcnamee]

Comments for Extension 1, Question 12

(a) (i) I would say about 1/2 of students got this right, the rest would need to revise binomial probability as it was a fairly standard question, and also write out the simultaneous equations to be solved for to avoid silly mistakes.

(ii) There was a surprisingly high amount of non-attempts. For those that gave it a go, a majority didn't understand how to calculate the parameters of each bernoulli trial, and only considered the case where a question was attempted seriously.

Tip: If a question requires the use of the normal approximation and does not give you z-score data, the z-score value that you calculate should always be one that can be solved for with the empirical rule. If you don't get a z-score close to one of the integers -3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3, recheck your working. The exception is when there is some extra info in the question from which you can derive the values, for example in Question 26 of the 2022 Advanced HSC.

(b) (i) Answer successfully by almost everyone. There was a variety of vector computations used that all worked, such as AP - AB, BO + OP and even a few students that used BC + CP.

(ii) Very, very few marks were awarded across the cohort for this part. Almost every student attempted to use the point Q (i.e. to find BQ or OQ in component form so that they could get the result from dot products) and this was extremely unsuccessful. Only 1 student that used the point Q in this way got 2/2 - but they used 3 pages to complete it! The sophisticated method is to use the geometrical data to your advantage and write POQ in terms of OPQ, noting that the triangle is isosceles, and finding OPQ easily using the dot product of AP and BP, which should be easy from the previous question. In other words, it's worth looking at roundabout geometrical methods that might be easier in the long-run rather than just aiming straight at the result to prove.

(c) (i) Mostly answered successfully, however avoid silly mistakes such as trying to find the cartesian equation of the path - which was redundant in this question, or deriving the displacement vector when it is already provided.

(ii) Only a few students reached 2/2 - most of the others got bogged down in working out and abandoned the process. Try to leave everything in parameters until you need to evaluate it i.e. don't find an expression for R first and sub it in to get a mess of algebra, keep everything as simple as possible.

(d) (i) Most students did the algebra and got the result, nothing more to say here.

(ii) Almost everyone was able to use the previous part, but a common mistake was that the last 3 roots were sin(4pi/7), sin(5pi/7) and sin(6pi/7), implying that there are 3 double roots rather than the negatives of the first 3 roots. A quick sanity check you could've done during the test is to see that the polynomial is even and thus any root that is positive must also be negative, rather than being a double root.

(iii) Done well, with about half the students getting some progress and half of those getting 2/2.


Best of luck for tomorrow's exam!

Hey mate,
Are you releasing the physics solutions soon?

 

[yanujw]

Hey mate,
Are you releasing the physics solutions soon?

No. @Trebla will do that at some point so keep an eye out for this thread.

 

[Confused student 1462]

Surely you guys will have a physics one next year as well

 

[thomas mcnamee]

No. @Trebla will do that at some point so keep an eye out for this thread.

cheers mate

 

[Trebla]

Surely you guys will have a physics one next year as well

It depends on whether we (still) have people who are prepared to write and mark them. These events are supported by large volunteer efforts. As long as that is sustained and there is student demand for it then we can keep this going in future years.

 

[thomas mcnamee]

It depends on whether we (still) have people who are prepared to write and mark them. These events are supported by large volunteer efforts. As long as that is sustained and there is student demand for it then we can keep this going in future years.

hey mate, whens the physics solutions dropping? just finished 3u and would love to sit the paper

 

[carrotsss]

hey mate, whens the physics solutions dropping? just finished 3u and would love to sit the paper

usually they come out a couple days before the hsc, I’d wait to do the paper until then

 

[Trebla]

Boom! Business Studies results and the marking criteria/sample answers are attached below!

Thank you to everyone who attended to the event and attempted the paper. Congrats to the top student who scored 88 in the paper!

Thanks heaps to @jimmysmith560 for helping to write the paper and marking the student responses.

Please note that the question paper has been updated mainly to remove some ambiguities in the question structures (which were taken into account when marking). The updated file is attached in my original post of the papers to replace the older version.

We're still working on Physics so please watch this space...

 

[TrueAlpha]

Thanks so much for these results!! I was just wondering if there was any possible way I could get the specific marks I received for each SA question and individual feedback? If not that’s all good!

 

[jimmysmith560]

A big thank you once again to those who sat the Business Studies paper in person! I sincerely hope that you found this an enriching experience. I also hope that everyone else who uses the paper as practice finds it beneficial in terms of their preparations. Hopefully some of you also recognised some references scattered throughout the paper

Below are my comments following the marking:

Section I:

It is important to carefully read the stimulus that may accompany a particular question. This will help with identifying the main concept(s) being assessed and determine any key words that may be important in terms of choosing the correct answer. Some stimuli may contain elements that are intended to "trick" students into choosing an incorrect option. These must be considered when carefully reading stimuli and questions in order to minimise the chances of choosing an incorrect option.

Section II:

An issue that occurred was responding to particular questions with reference to concepts/syllabus dot points other than the ones that they target. While effort may still be rewarded (although certainly with a significantly lower mark), it is important to ensure a thorough knowledge of the syllabus in order to avoid discussing concepts that are not relevant to the question.

Higher-quality responses addressed the questions correctly and in great depth, whereas lower-quality responses did not refer to the intended concepts, contained inaccuracies and/or did not address the questions in sufficient depth.

Section III:

Similar to Section II, the issue of discussing a concept other than the one(s) required by the question also occurred in this section. This is therefore a reminder to ensure thorough knowledge of the syllabus. At times, some aspects, while correctly presented, were somewhat lacking in depth.

In terms of the stimulus, it is important to note that assumptions should not be made about the business. Instead, responses should use the given information. For example, since it was not specified whether the business was public or private, any aspects of equity could essentially be discussed.

Additionally, while diagrams can assist in presenting a particular point more clearly and effectively (and in turn contributing to better overall quality), they should be avoided when they do not make a clear contribution to the response.

Section IV:

My thoughts here are also similar to those regarding Section III.

Some responses were incomplete, which indicates a potential time management problem. The reason it is a potential problem (rather than a certain problem) is the difficulty and length of this paper compared to Business Studies HSC exams, meaning that this problem may not occur in the HSC exam. However, I still want to take this opportunity to remind everyone of the importance of ensuring effective time management. This is not only applicable to Business Studies, but also to every other subject.

Best of luck with your Business Studies HSC exam!

 

[AJ7]

Yo, have the phy solutions come out yet?