2025 school trial papers (1 Viewer)

[dan964]

slightly neater copy of the Roseville paper

 

[coolcat6778]

slightly neater copy of the Roseville paper

this paper looks so boring and generic

also who tf writes uses vectors as matricies?

 

[killer queen]

wow these exams are so hard. i wish i did victoria's specialist math instead, much easier and more rote learning similar to math advanced

lol I thought you didn't like rote learning tbh

 

[coolcat6778]

lol I thought you didn't like rote learning tbh

there's a balance, the good balance is math advanced and specialist maths. extension 2 questions are so random, abstract and unique. im pretty sure in uni they don't make their exams like hsc (atleast for non pure math degree people). hsc is for differentiating people, while uni exams are just to see ur knowledge.

 

[killer queen]

there's a balance, the good balance is math advanced and specialist maths. extension 2 questions are so random, abstract and unique. im pretty sure in uni they don't make their exams like hsc. hsc is for differentiating people, while uni exams are just to see ur knowledge.

ykw fair point I guess, ext 2 really is quite different - I enjoy its uniqueness a lot more than math adv though personally

that's true that HSC and uni has different purpose

 

[Bob123d3gt41]

One of the papers that @dan964 has made available is an Advanced paper with this question:

View attachment 49010

Does anyone else think the answers are wrong?

I understand the calculations but I don't think they correctly interpret the questions.

Maybe the answers are to the questions that the examiner intended to ask?

Note: Edited to correct link to provider, it is dan964 who has made all of these resources available. Thanks, Dan!

Hey mate i just did it, care to share the answers? i got 1.25m
39.375plus 19.6875 so 59m total

and then one more meter for the final question.

 

[tywebb]

sydney tech ext. 2 maths attached

and 24 more here https://www.mediafire.com/file/clnqj6vs3q2ytpe/e2-2025-24-papers.zip/file

note the zip includes the penrith paper. there is a error in 15biii. the formula in part iii in the paper is incorrect.





here is the penrith sol


this is a nonsense



and therein lies the fallacy of their argument

they were asked to prove a formula which is wrong. it should be remarked. either disregard the question and deduct 1 from total, or give everyone (including non-attempts) 1 mark for part iii. this won't compensate for time lost wasting time trying to prove a wrong formula, but this adjustment would be better than ignoring the problem.

 

[coolcat6778]

. it should be remarked. either disregard the question and deduct 1 from total, or give everyone (including non-attempts) 1 mark for part iii won't compensate for time lost wasting time trying to prove a wrong formula, but this adjustment would be better than ignoring the problem.

i don't think they can fix the grades anymore. nesa did the deadline thing

 

[tywebb]

i don't think they can fix the grades anymore. nesa did the deadline thing

well i only discovered this today

deadlines are for getting marks in on time

when it is discovered later that there is a error they should be able to change it no matter how late

 

[coolcat6778]

well i only discovered this today

deadlines are for getting marks in on time

when it is discovered later that there is a error they should be able to change it no matter how late

just email their school lol

 

[tywebb]

here are the rest

 

[coolcat6778]

here are the rest
View attachment 49405

View attachment 49406

these integrals aren't in the vce syllabus right?

 

[Luca26]

Hey mate i just did it, care to share the answers? i got 1.25m
39.375plus 19.6875 so 59m total

and then one more meter for the final question.

Not what I got., which was:

(tex)\text{(a)}\qquad \frac{5}{8}\ \text{m}(/tex) (striking out)





EDIT: As noted below, I have mis-remembered the question. (a) should be:

 

[alphxreturns]

Not what I got., which was:

(a) should be 1.25
height of 4th rebound
1. 10m
2. 5
3. 2.5
4. 1.25
(b) i got same as u (solutions are wrong, they dont take "peak of the 6th rebound")
(c) is a bit ambiguous as "after the 6th rebound" doesnt imply if we measure from the peak or immediately from the rebound

but in the solns they just take the sum, 60, and minus (b) (which is not clear). overall bad question, expect the hsc to be worded better

 

[Luca26]

(a) should be 1.25
height of 4th rebound
1. 10m
2. 5
3. 2.5
4. 1.25
(b) i got same as u (solutions are wrong, they dont take "peak of the 6th rebound")
(c) is a bit ambiguous as "after the 6th rebound" doesnt imply if we measure from the peak or immediately from the rebound

but in the solns they just take the sum, 60, and minus (b) (which is not clear). overall bad question, expect the hsc to be worded better

You are correct about (a), I have mis-remembered in writing the above... it is 1.25 m.

As for (c), I agree it is ambiguous, but I don't see how "after the 6th rebound" can start at the max height of that rebound rather than at the point where the next rebound begins (ie. at the ground). I see the answers as:



I 100% agree that the question is poorly expressed. I'm not sure where it comes from, but it was in at least two trials that I have seen, so it is more likely a commercial source.