HL Maths Harder in Recent Years?

md99

Is it just me or... Has the HL Maths paper become a good deal more difficult in recent years?

I mean the 2006 paper was just an (unfunny) joke, my grinds teacher is friends with the man who set it and apparently there was uproar over it, ie it was marked far easier to make up for the grades which were far lower than expected...

but in general, it's true to say that the papers of the last couple of years have been harder than those of say, the late 90s/early 00s? I just find it from practicing papers... for example, giving 20 marks for simple tasks like to solve difference equation without having to verify it or anything, simple 20 mark trig equations, etc.. they seem to have been much easier and quicker to do than those of recent years.

Anyone else notice this or is it all in my head?

dan719

I'm not sure. I think it varys from year to year, and person to person. I know people who came out of higher maths last year saying it was easy.(they got their a1s). I do think they are trying to catch people out who only study half of the course though. And in all honesty, if someone is studying maths or a maths related degree after school, its only going to get much much harder!!!

ninebeanrows

Yea they threw in that proof by Induction in the Diff last year:eek:

Infact the 2006 paper scares the living bejebus out of me! The Q3 PP1 was a disaster.. and that crazy Trig one would have messes me on the day.

Speaking of maths, i've got some chunk a study to be doing:rolleyes:

But at least with maths you can actually study it, and you get into the rhythm without too much effort.

ZorbaTehZ

Md99, you are most certainly right - however as I've said before - it's a step in the right direction. (Not trying to be elitist honestly) but I feel that the Honours course did not properly reflect - in terms of difficulty on the papers - the quality of the course.
Unfortunately we're not seeing the same thing happen with the physics exams.

5uspect

ZorbaTehZ wrote:

Md99, you are most certainly right - however as I've said before - it's a step in the right direction. (Not trying to be elitist honestly) but I feel that the Honours course did not properly reflect - in terms of difficulty on the papers - the quality of the course.
Unfortunately we're not seeing the same thing happen with the physics exams.

I have to agree with you, the exams were suffering in recent years. And it really shows in the ability of undergrads when doing basic calculus.

boger

hl maths easy a1 .

cson

boger wrote:

hl maths easy a1 .

In your opinion.

lemansky

5uspect wrote:

I have to agree with you, the exams were suffering in recent years. And it really shows in the ability of undergrads when doing basic calculus.

Absolutely.I'm only doing the LC this year but friends who didn't do transition year and who are now doing maths in college say that there fellow students can't carry out basic functions in many of the areas of maths which would've been covered at lc level.This is a direct result of having prepared by the easy standards of previous years for the leaving cert.Whereas from a student's POV its not great(poor us!!:) )its necessary.Those who truly understand maths to an A1 standard will get their A1,just like in any subject.

cocoa

ZorbaTehZ wrote:

Unfortunately we're not seeing the same thing happen with the physics exams.

but of course not. You couldn't put anything *difficult* on the physics exam, that might scare people off, and we *need* more people in science, no matter how basic their understanding...

JC 2K3

md99 wrote:

Is it just me or... Has the HL Maths paper become a good deal more difficult in recent years?

No. Every paper in the 00s has been an absolute píss take in terms of difficulty. Look back at papers from early-mid 90s.

md99 wrote:

I mean the 2006 paper was just an (unfunny) joke, my grinds teacher is friends with the man who set it and apparently there was uproar over it, ie it was marked far easier to make up for the grades which were far lower than expected...

Yes, a joke. God forbid you might actually have to think on your feet in a maths exam. :rolleyes:

tbh, I didn't notice it being any more difficult than any other paper in recent times. Piece of cake compared to pre 00s papers.

boger wrote:

hl maths easy a1 .

Agreed.

(w00t, diplomatic victory!)

dan719

hey I think maths and physics are too easy at leaving cert level also. And I also think we are in for a shock next year(assuming we take related degrees- any fellow future tpers here???) but this thread is becoming dangerously elitist. Not everyone is able for, or wants to do honours maths and physics for the leaving. I personally would hate to do something such as art!!! Celebrate diversity, and if you want some real maths and physics Roger Penrose 'road to reality' and '100 greatest proofs in elementary(i.e no complex numbers) mathematics'.

'The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible' Albert Einstein

ninebeanrows

Leave it out.

Us returds have to be able to get SOMEwhere in life:o

lemansky

dan719 wrote:

any fellow future tpers here???

yes!!so i'll be seein u in college then assuming we go to the same place??:D And i totally agree with your little booklist there!I was speakin to some tpers,who say that they find it hard but once you like it you'll get along fine, because it is literally what you love if you enjoy lc maths, and physics!

JC 2K3

I considered TP briefly, but decided on CS in the end.

eZe^

I dont agree with the fact it has become harder. Our teacher was just saying the everybody was doing differentiation and nobody attempted sequences and series to the tweaked the ones answered too readily and made the less answered ones alot more managable.

dan719

well lemansky deadly to hear that, I was looking at the lecture notes and its like WOW!!! Im hoping to go to tcd. How about you? Oh if your looking for info give mp fry an email.He is really helpful!

dan719

JC 2K3 wrote:

I considered TP briefly, but decided on CS in the end.

I hope tbhat you come back to us!!! There is still time.:D

lemansky

snap!i'm lookin for tcd as well!yea i was looking at the lecture notes as well....and the books......*cough*i looked at the maths for special relativity its only now it looks hard,once we have the underlying principles of vector calculus drilled in it should be easy cos i could follow it okayish as it is!yea i might just drop him a line!do you have a link or an address for him..(PM it maybe).did you go to the open day they had in tcd for the maths and physics departments?

JC 2K3

dan719 wrote:

hey I think maths and physics are too easy at leaving cert level also. And I also think we are in for a shock next year(assuming we take related degrees- any fellow future tpers here???) but this thread is becoming dangerously elitist. Not everyone is able for, or wants to do honours maths and physics for the leaving. I personally would hate to do something such as art!!! Celebrate diversity, and if you want some real maths and physics Roger Penrose 'road to reality' and '100 greatest proofs in elementary(i.e no complex numbers) mathematics'.

Meh, as you said, celebrate diversity, those who aren't interested in maths and physics don't have to do them.

I mean, don't take it that I'm trying to sound elitist, but if someone can't cope with LC physics it begs the question as to why they picked it in the first place...

dan719

Im not sure but its on the tcd maths website, yeah i did, I was the guy slavishly taking notes in the string theory lecture!! I still have them. And I thought conor haughton's lecture was class too. And of course the brownian motion lecture(ironic that its taught by a german!!!lol) basically I thought the whole thing was deadly!!!

JC 2K3

dan719 wrote:

I hope tbhat you come back to us!!! There is still time.:D

Nah, for a while there I was really into all this complex physics stuff and wanting to learn about subatomic particles and the origin of the universe and the likes.

However, I've grown to be less interested in it in recent times, Computer Science in TCD FTW. The lecture at the open day was class.

lemansky

ah yea i know the guy you mean now!i thought u wer talkin bout sum1 here!conor houghton as actually very good and he helped me out via e-mail with a little maths query there recently!top guy. the string theory was very good and i just finished a book on it there.any ideas how much they cover in tp?i know it may come up in one or two places but it doesn't have its own course as such??another guy from my year is also mad in2 that and doin same course so u shud get on gr8!i must admit i never thought to take notes which i now deeply deeply regret!wan't it funny also that the german guy actually pronounced Einstein correctly as well-like a german would?he was a ledge!

dan719

Apparently there is loads of it in third and fourth year, a guy I know is planning on doing his phd in string theory, he is only in second year! two of ye in the one school??? Id say that gets a little competitive does it:D ?? So theres two of the thirty five places gone already!! oh yes einSTEIN was how it went. Although I thought the drunken sailor dance was definately his best moment!

lemansky

Cool!lookin forward to it already!btw if u want the note conor haughton sent me re the maths problem i can giv it to you-it will hopefully expand ur maths knowledge and if you already know this stuff then we're all f*cked!Well i'll be honest about the competition.in physics we do one revision test a week.two of us get high nineties or 100, then one other gets an a, another a b, then the others....don't do so well!the two of us help each other-and by that we race each other to get the answers but its all good natured!!yes i forgot the dance!u r now the legend for reminding me!

Naikon

dan719 wrote:

hey I think maths and physics are too easy at leaving cert level also. And I also think we are in for a shock next year(assuming we take related degrees- any fellow future tpers here???) but this thread is becoming dangerously elitist. Not everyone is able for, or wants to do honours maths and physics for the leaving. I personally would hate to do something such as art!!! Celebrate diversity, and if you want some real maths and physics Roger Penrose 'road to reality' and '100 greatest proofs in elementary(i.e no complex numbers) mathematics'.

'The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible' Albert Einstein

True, I do OL level maths and to be honest I wont need honours for my course.
I like maths, but I wouldn't want to pursue subjects like TP:o

Maths is a usefull tool to me, to somebody else a way of living/thinking.
I hate to say it but I do Honours Physics and the maths aint too bad at all considering there is no Calculus at all.
The current course is too vague/not hard enough for people who want to pursue TP and physics related degrees.

JC 2K3

Apparently some top scientists are starting to lose faith in string theory.

This has gone way off topic btw.

lemansky

and other top scientists aren't!:D its all a different angle on one thing!and with this new accelerator in CERN there may be a breakthrough!ah come on give us a break with the topic!its all an extension on lc maths after all!and that particular question that was asked has been answered!

JC 2K3

meh, I'm not a mod, continue as you wish.

:|

Eh.......do physics in DCU

lemansky

I wan't bein narky just so as ya know!:D

dan719

Yeah send me the note if you don't mind!!! Ah the joys of competition in physics class, the only person I get to compete with is the teacher!!!lol joking. well kinda. okay String theory and ed whitten. Definition of legend, did a degree in history, before doing phd in physics. Then won a fields medal(which is a maths and not a physics prize btw). And some are losing faith in string theory but others say 'it is our best hope'. Howabout holographic mechanics(is that what its called btw??)

lemansky

As far as i know its what its called alright!Like i sy its all a matter of perspective when it comes to losing faith....how u choose to look at the problems etc.Its just another window into the same room.Lucky for you!Our teacher is quite the legend!He makes physics interesting for those who are good at it-by humour......yea enough said!who knows you cud be the next witten!although i could NEVER bring myself to look at history again!I actually lost the note, but i e-mailed it to my tp buddy in school so i'll have it bak hopefully tomorrow and you'll defo get it!

lemansky

wrote:

Eh.......do physics in DCU

What they have is not quite what i'm after........i looked into physics there though

dan719

Sound! And I rally don't see that happening, i wonder if there are any other future tpers here. We need to take over(in a nice way of course) more of these maths threads.:D

lemansky

yes we should conquer anything thats in anyway roughly related to physics, maths, tp....everything!:D i'm gonna try get that guy i was talkin bout to join here to add to our numbers!we should set up a thread for future tpers to talk on........is that possible??

dan719

I believe so, I shall go do it now!!!

lemansky

good man!:cool:

dan719

Alright its up there now, I expanded it a little to include maths and experimental physics, we can get them to change then!!!hahah

lemansky

i'll head over!!

lemansky

where is the forum you set up dan719??

Naikon

lemansky wrote:

What they have is not quite what i'm after........i looked into physics there though

TP as opposed to experimental?

ZorbaTehZ

JC 2K3 wrote:

I mean, don't take it that I'm trying to sound elitist. . .

Ok. . .obviously someone else is using JC's account.

*looks at sig*
Uhhhh, maybe not. . .

md99

looks like we've got Invasion of the Topic Snatchers again, you maths/physics junkies are all over the place these days, hard to believe a topic I created started this much discussion on things I've no idea about :rolleyes:

dan719

Its definately not topic snatching, its more a progression. And in fairness everyone has had their say about leaving cert maths at this stage.:D

sd123

I actually disagree with you because i thought the 2006 paper was actually very doable. however the 2003 paper was a disaster. a well it looks for 2007 to be really hard anyway. by the way who is that person who made up the paper? does he teach in the institute?

md99

sd123 wrote:

I actually disagree with you because i thought the 2006 paper was actually very doable. however the 2003 paper was a disaster. a well it looks for 2007 to be really hard anyway. by the way who is that person who made up the paper? does he teach in the institute?

why does it look for the 07 paper to be really hard?

Don't know his name, my grinds teacher is good friends with him... apparently he worked with the Central Bank for the last few years, or something, he only taught maths for 4 years of his life and in a very studious/bright school... last years papers were marked up in a big way as a result of his paper however.

ninebeanrows

I actually reckon that this year might be okay in a few areas, I think after the abuse they got for the Trig last year that they will just put in a regular question.

Last years paper made you have to really think and drew aspects from different sections in questions. And it's alright sitting here and saying ya could do them but when your in their and you have 2 hours 30 minutes to do your paper for your LC, you don't have much time to do indepth thinking

JC 2K3

Weathercheck wrote:

I actually reckon that this year might be okay in a few areas, I think after the abuse they got for the Trig last year that they will just put in a regular question.

Last years paper made you have to really think and drew aspects from different sections in questions. And it's alright sitting here and saying ya could do them but when your in their and you have 2 hours 30 minutes to do your paper for your LC, you don't have much time to do indepth thinking

There was no indepth thinking involved, there were only 2 groups who were at a disadvantage:
1)Those who left out sections of the course.
2)Those who learned maths by drilling how to do specific questions into their heads rather than viewing it as an application of logic.

lemansky

Naikon wrote:

TP as opposed to experimental?

Yes the actual details of the courses indicate that tcd suits my interests more.I searched through loads of courses in dcu, ucd, NUIM,tcd, loads of places but tp in tcd appealed most to me

ninebeanrows

JC 2K3 wrote:

There was no indepth thinking involved, there were only 2 groups who were at a disadvantage:
1)Those who left out sections of the course.
2)Those who learned maths by drilling how to do specific questions into their heads rather than viewing it as an application of logic.

Well i suppose that's what the problem is with maths these days, i was never taught it in a way in which it was an application of logic, it was just taught as a subject for my leaving cert where you must answer x questions and x question is this and x question is that. I actually do not understand what i am doing but i can say that 95% of my classmates do not either.

I suppose that's why in College when one must carry out more detailed maths problems they fail, just because they were never taught.

For example with Physics, i was never taught Physics, downloaded those examsupport grinds and i don't even know at what standard the teacher is at but i actually totally understood and enjoyed Physics for the first time ever. It just shows what affect a teacher can have on you. I realise if one was to read the book and study they would understand but for those of us who don't do that having a decent teacher is half the distance. But unfortunately for maths the teachers don't actually teach you what the purpose of the problems are, they just throw them up and get ya to know how to do them.

ZorbaTehZ

Exactly what is fundamentally wrong with our education system.
Last years Maths HL exam is a prime example of that, students going into a test loaded with all the formulas and in what situation to use them. But then when a question comes along phrased a little differently, or asking to show/compute some-thing that is merely a different stage or advancement of the same conditions they are so used to, they are confounded and dumb-struck as to how to do them.

Obviously some people are just unable to understand or comprehend a certain topic etc. that I understand . But what seems to be the case is teachers are unwilling to go in-depth into a topic for fear of 'losing' what little grasp of the concept students have by confusing them. Is it really asking a lot that teachers take that extra time to actually get their students to understand the fundamentals?