Regarding MCQ12: When first reading the question, I took “while traveling on both roads” to be a single phrase meaning something like “on a route using both roads.” That is, the question was asking for P(A or B), not P(A and B). I don’t think this interpretation is unreasonable but maybe that’s just me. Though I’d certainly say it is poor wording given that “while traveling” is a completely unnecessary part of the sentence.
Regarding QB9(b): This one’s a little harder explain. Hopefully it makes some sense.
The only way to interpret the question so it can be answered is just a simple calculation of 11.9% of 236 mL but then I don’t understand why it’s been written the way it has or why it’s worth two marks.
To me the question reads as if there’s only a direct variation between the cost and volume of the milk. But this isn’t enough to answer the question. We need to assume that the direct variation applies to the cost and volume of both the milk and the coffee as a whole and that it’s the same for both. This is not quite clear and all of this seems somewhat problematic as the earlier cost breakdown is mostly made up of things that don’t have any volume.
Is any of this an error? I don’t know. But it is, as you say, nuts.
Ah, I see what you mean about MCQ12. Yes, I’d say the ambiguity is slight, but it is there, and it is an absurd own goal, since the storyteller traveling aspect is entirely unnecessary for the question.
And, yes, I could make no more sense of B9(b) than what you’ve done. It seems absolutely nuts, but so nuts that I think I must be missing something.
Thanks again, James. I’ve updated the error posts, and I decided that I agree with you, that the ambiguity in MCQ12 is stronger than I initially thought.
A fun thing about this exam is that the first two questions involved the number “420”.
This can’t have been overlooked by many students – but clearly was by the proof readers! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/420_(cannabis_culture)
MC Q12: I do not like the word “likelihood” being used instead of “probability”. In mathematics, likelihood and probability mean different things. In school mathematics, we should always use the word “probability” instead of “likelihood” or “chance”.
The “median position in an ordered set of sample size ” struck me as non-standard language. I would define the “median” rather than the “median position”.
The meaning of “long term data trends” does not accord with my understanding.
The formula given in the formula sheet for the “probability for a large number of trials of event A” is usually defined in school mathematics as the “experimental probability of the event A” which is mentioned in the preceding row.
Thanks, Terry. Yeah, “position” is obviously redundant, but for Foundation I assume they’re consciously erring on the side of caution. I more concerned with the formula given for the median. Definitely the experimental probability thing is sloppy (and “probability for” should at least be “probability given”). I trust you on “long term data trends”, but the expression means nothing to me.
Had a quick read through. I think MCQ12 is a bit ambiguous. Something about Section B Q9b seems off to me too.
Thanks, James. I’ll look once I see to the exam.
Hi James. I’ve looked now.
MCQ12 is poorly written and silly, but why do you regard it as ambiguous?
QB9(b) just seems nuts. Before posting it as an error, can you (or anyone) give me your interpretation?
Regarding MCQ12: When first reading the question, I took “while traveling on both roads” to be a single phrase meaning something like “on a route using both roads.” That is, the question was asking for P(A or B), not P(A and B). I don’t think this interpretation is unreasonable but maybe that’s just me. Though I’d certainly say it is poor wording given that “while traveling” is a completely unnecessary part of the sentence.
Regarding QB9(b): This one’s a little harder explain. Hopefully it makes some sense.
The only way to interpret the question so it can be answered is just a simple calculation of 11.9% of 236 mL but then I don’t understand why it’s been written the way it has or why it’s worth two marks.
To me the question reads as if there’s only a direct variation between the cost and volume of the milk. But this isn’t enough to answer the question. We need to assume that the direct variation applies to the cost and volume of both the milk and the coffee as a whole and that it’s the same for both. This is not quite clear and all of this seems somewhat problematic as the earlier cost breakdown is mostly made up of things that don’t have any volume.
Is any of this an error? I don’t know. But it is, as you say, nuts.
Thanks, James
Ah, I see what you mean about MCQ12. Yes, I’d say the ambiguity is slight, but it is there, and it is an absurd own goal, since the storyteller traveling aspect is entirely unnecessary for the question.
And, yes, I could make no more sense of B9(b) than what you’ve done. It seems absolutely nuts, but so nuts that I think I must be missing something.
I’ll update the posts tomorrow.
Thanks again, James. I’ve updated the error posts, and I decided that I agree with you, that the ambiguity in MCQ12 is stronger than I initially thought.
Click to access 2025-FoundationMaths.pdf
They uploaded the exam pdf.
Thanks, Legionnaire. I’ll update the posts tomorrow.
A fun thing about this exam is that the first two questions involved the number “420”.
This can’t have been overlooked by many students – but clearly was by the proof readers!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/420_(cannabis_culture)
Sorry, 420, I just found your comment in the spam folder.
I have never heard of the 420. I assume a coincidence on VCAA’s part. Is this a commonly known thing?
MC Q12: I do not like the word “likelihood” being used instead of “probability”. In mathematics, likelihood and probability mean different things. In school mathematics, we should always use the word “probability” instead of “likelihood” or “chance”.
Yes, good point. I’m less fussed about the use of “chance”, although there is also no good reason to use the term. But “likelihood” is wrong.
I have some quibbles about the formula sheet.
I wondered: Is Heron’s formula in the syllabus?
The formula for “ratios” seems odd to me.
The “median position in an ordered set of sample size
” struck me as non-standard language. I would define the “median” rather than the “median position”.
The meaning of “long term data trends” does not accord with my understanding.
The formula given in the formula sheet for the “probability for a large number of trials of event A” is usually defined in school mathematics as the “experimental probability of the event A” which is mentioned in the preceding row.
Thanks, Terry. Yeah, “position” is obviously redundant, but for Foundation I assume they’re consciously erring on the side of caution. I more concerned with the formula given for the median. Definitely the experimental probability thing is sloppy (and “probability for” should at least be “probability given”). I trust you on “long term data trends”, but the expression means nothing to me.