Mystery emailer VS has alerted me, that the VCE exam reports have been published (Word, idiots):
*) Methods Exam Report 1 and Exam Report 2 (and exam 1, exam 2, marking guide 1, marking guide 2)
*) Specialist Exam Report 1 and Exam Report 2 (and exam 1, exam 2, marking guide 1, marking guide 2)
*) General Exam Report 1 and Exam Report 2 (and exam 1, exam 2, marking guide 1, marking guide 2)
*) Foundation Exam Report (and exam and marking guide)
UPDATE (22/04/25)
The “marking guides” were significantly updated on 13/02, seemingly with the genuine marking guides used by the markers. The links have been updated above (and the old links appear to be dead).
UPDATE (31/01/25)
Below is from the GM1 report (with my red circles added), on the infamous Hungarian question. VCAA and their noble team of psychometrician voodooists would appear to have some explaining to do.
To the guy who contact-emailed me a “welcome back”:
(1) Thank you for the “welcome back”.
(2) The Boaler video made me puke (which I assume was the intended effect).
So question was “proven” to be unambiguous yet the stats showed 45% of respondents chose B?
Can this be put on this year’s foundation maths exam?
Surely this requires significant please explain from VCAA.
Once again I wonder if the writers of such responses from management simply refuse to read this blog or simply think they know better than the mathematics community?
It is incredibly sad because there were hopes last year that seem to be fading already
There is zero chance that VCAA is unaware of this blog’s commentary on the question and its grading.
First time having a quick look through these. This caught my eye:
Specialist Exam 1, Question 1b (solving f(z) = 0 where f(z) is a complex polynomial).
Exam report states “some students neglected to show they were solving an equation and moved directly from the factored form of the polynomial to writing down the solutions to f(z) = 0”.
Now I suppose that if one wrote, out of the blue, “(x-1)(x-2), so x = 1, 2” there’s some cause for complaint. But in the context of a question asking “what are the roots of x^2 -3x +2”, who cares?
Sigh.
Yes. VCAA is technically correct but it is anal nonsense, particularly coming from people who don’t know the difference between a root and a solution. It is the kind of thing that has won VCAA so many adoring fans.
SM Exam 1 Q3C. Over 50% got 0/3 for a sketch.
This is from the examiners report “Students were much more successful in showing the correct behaviour of the graph on the left-hand side if they evaluated the function at several points.”
I find it frustrating that there are no clear guidelines on what’s expected of a sketch. I have to tell students to basically set up a table of values for any sketch or else you’ll lose marks.
Also MM Exam 1 Q7C: Another graph 45% got 0/3. No mention of end points but I heard that both inclusive and exclusive were accepted.
Hi abc123. The scores are poor, but I’m not sure VCAA can be blamed for these ones (except for the idiotic endpoint ambiguity).
I don’t interpret the exam report as indicating that a table of values was required, just that this appeared to be helpful, with a nudge for future students to do so. And I don’t see what VCAA was expecting that students shouldn’t have expected VCAA would expect.
I think it would be interesting to know why students did poorly on the two questions, and I have no good guesses on that. But it would surprise me if it were due to the students not knowing what information was expected.
For the spesh graph, many students drew the LHS as closely approaching the vertical asymptote, when in fact the graph exited much farther to the left
Ok, I think I get it now. Before I comment, let me just make sure I know what’s going on.
The exam paper has marked graph paper. Then the marking guide has red errorish bars. So those bars indicate where the students were meant to have their graphs enter and leave the grid? And if the graphs weren’t passing within the error bars then the students lost marks?
Yes, I believe so.
I lost two marks on spesh graphs (one on E1 one on E2), which cost me a raw 50 lol.
I distinctly remember not exiting quickly enough on the graph in E1 but can’t remember what I did incorrectly for the E2 graph.
In the marking guide they gave numerical range as well (LHS branch must exit between x values of -3 and -2, and y values of 1.5 to 2.5
If so, that is nasty and insane. There is absolutely nothing in the exam question suggesting such attention to specific values is required, and there is zero mathematical reason to require it.
If I were you, I’d appeal. You will lose, but VCAA deserves grief over this and you are owed an explanation. Make these assholes work.
On 3a. The report states that “various methods could be applied”. Does this include starting with x^2 – 2x + 1 = A(x+1)^2 + B(x+1) + C and then observing, by comparing coefficients, that A = 1, B = -4 and C = 4?
Obviously what you are suggesting is a legitimate method. You’re concerned that VCAA’s lunatic concept of “show that” might have precluded this?
A reader has emailed me, noting that VCAA has replaced their “marking guides” with marking guides, with seemingly with what was used by the markers. New links are in the update to the post.
The links for Methods Assessment Guide appear to link to the exam reports.
Interesting to note that they give sympathy marks in VCE exams:
Spesh Exam 2 Q1d:
“If get all three wrong, pay one mark out of three if the ‘directions’ of at least two the above four inequality signs are correct, pay it as the second mark in this case.”
Curious to know your thoughts on the assessment guides, Marty?
Thanks, VS. Links fixed.
I’m fine with the “sympathy marks” in 1(d), and it is surprisingly human. That’s the danger of micro-marking: a student could have had a good partial sense of all three parts but have still been awarded 0/3. It is good if VCAA is adapting to lessen the viciousness of its stupid exam format.
I haven’t looked at the guides at all. Too busy.
I think the issue in this case is the amount of 1 markers in the exam, necessitating only the answer, rather than rewarding apt thought or appropriate working. This is quite evident in the Spesh Exam 2 (especially in ER6, where the question and subquestions have remained the same 1 markers for the past few years).
Yes, the 1-mark thing, and the low-mark thing more generally, makes sensible grading absolutely impossible.