Search results

The exam has to separate the best of the best. Not everyone should be able to do it. It needs to rank the people from first to last. So it does its job. And that is why it scales so well.

50 who knows 60 approx 90 70 apporx 95 75 approx 97 THey are my guesses

I have 2 things. 1 where i had the 2 different equations and still managed to stuff it up amplitude and period of motion one out of 3. Another one is an integral one i had it right then for some stupid reason i thought it was odd so i put 0 out of 2. What will i get for each ??

I think you really did misinterpret that badly as less marks make a change in HSC mark when you are getting less percent and when you get higher the gaps between HSC marks get higher. 75-77 i reckon would get probably 97-98 in 2006. Especially if 64-66 gets a 92. As the gap in raw between 98 and...

English: An absolute legend i love the chick. Chem: Not a very good teacher but heaps nice and fun. Maths: Not a great teacher but enthusiastic and it rubs off. PDHPE: Pretty good teachers.

Its only if it doesnt make it easier.

I should of applied for special consideration with my dodgy handwriting :).

I got that and still got it wrong :(

Im thinking between 78 and 80 after seeing the answers. What would that scale to ??

And Ext 2 was right out of left field and probably the hardest since 2000. What is going on this year.

What do you determine to be HSC exam conditions. I have a major problems in exams with not reading questions properly and doin stupid stuff.

Low if it is as hard as people say. All my year found it pretty hard but then im not at a good school or anything.

I went well and i still cant say it was an easy test becasue comparitively it was hard.

I am from a school that has got about 2 top bands in maths Ext 1 and 2 in the past 10 years and one of them was my brother. This year we should get atleast 2 for both.

Anyone know how James Ruse and Sydney boys found the test ??

Re: How did you guys go? Same here.

You clearly made it to hard then. If you differentiated WRT x and then just subbed in the parts from b and c it was right there.

Yea but i wanted to go back and redo a couple of things and didnt really get 2. I did one of the things again and did the same thing wrong stupid me.

Anyone else prove the MK = ML or whatever it was by congruent triangles ?? Also i had one of the answers and then put a line through it and changed it, will i still get 1 out of 2 ??

Yea 7e was good you had to differentiate the intitial things after making it only x's and y's and then sub in the stuff from b and c.