The perennial question - were exams harder in the old days?
I have culled this old O-Level mathematics question for anyone that would like to try to exercise their brain cells. Bear in mind this is just one question from eighteen, and you had two hours for the lot.
I struggled a bit with this one, even though I got an A in O-Level maths, but worryingly, I had a moment or two with some of the English Language ones too that I expected to walk over. Getting old. Sigh.
Here it is. Try it on the kids. :)
A machine which cost £35000 is operated 8 hours a day in a 5 day week but one hour each day is used for test purposes. For the use of the machine there are three scales of charges, the first at the rate of £5 an hour for private use, the second at £15 an hour for research work and the third at £40 an hour for commercial work. It is estimated that the numbers of hours charged at the first, second and third rates are in the ratios 4:2:1.
Express the receipts from commercial work as a percentage of the total receipts.
|
|
IMO my 1955 O levels would have been today's As and my 1957 A and S levels would have been a good way towards a 2nd class degree!
|
|
so that is the mental arithmetic question. Where are the Calculus questions?
|
>> Where are the Calculus questions?
We moved onto Geology already?
|
>> >> Where are the Calculus questions?
>>
>> We moved onto Geology already?
>>
>>
tinyurl.com/calculus-for-real
|
>>were exams harder in the old days?
Absolutely, yes!
The introduction of the GCSE was certainly one of the points where the rot "set in", and the questions now are quite trivial in comparison with what they were.
This has now meant that the A levels have also cascaded down in standard, and at university level, in my subject area, more time has to be spent on remedial maths before we can actually get on to anything even remotely close to the content of an engineering degree 20 years ago.
How do I "know" this?
I'm currently preparing a course for final year students, and I've been looking back at my yellowing notes from my degree. I know that I can't teach large sections of the subject, largely because of the weakness, particularly in calculus, of the current students.
At its worst, I've seen colleagues watering down what should be technical courses to become almost a history of engineering course with little mathematical content - knowing interesting factlets about Newton is not the same as being able to do some useful work in dynamics though! As per usual, it is the students who are short changed - but, they get an easy ride, and an easy exam, so, they lap it up! - their feedback forms glow and they write nice things in the National Student Survey. It should be employers who rate universities, not students!
|
>> >>were exams harder in the old days?
>>
>> Absolutely, yes!
With a Devil's Advocate hat on, does it matter? Is education about getting a "better more highly paid" job, satisfying the individual, or about "advancing the sum of human knowledge" or something less lofty in between?
If it's the former, then in a world where everyone has easy exams, but (nearly) everyone has a standard of living higher than their parents and way higher than their grandparents, what have we lost?
|
>>does it matter?
I think that in some subjects - where you are in the situation of obtaining a licence to practice - then, yes absolute standards do matter.
Oddly engineering doesn't fall into this category - there's a large range between worthwhile courses and those which exist to keep students off the dole. I just hope that safety critical engineering design is done by those students who did the better courses!
I'm not at all qualified to talk of subjects outside of engineering, but, the common denominator of degree level courses is [or should be!] helping the students to achieve some degree of autonomy and critical thinking rather than a blind acceptance. In technical subjects, you simply can't begin to think critically about the material without having the mathematical skills under your belt.
|
>> so that is the mental arithmetic question. Where are the Calculus questions?
Well, it's O-Level, so not much on that front. I can offer this one for you if you like:
Sketch the curve y=x(4-x) for values of x from 0 to 4. Taking pi as 3.142, find the area of the curve enclosed by the curve and the x-axis, and the volume obtained by rotating the area about the x-axis.
|
>> were exams harder in the old days?
The GCSE exam replaced both GCE and CSE O-levels in 1988. There was much criticism at the time that the "new" exams were too easy, consequently the following year's were apparently made much harder.
That's my excuse, anyway (I took my GCSEs in 1989).
:)
Last edited by: Dave_TDCi on Tue 23 Aug 11 at 20:14
|
|
There's no way I could even try to answer the Maths GCE "O"level (Oxford & Cambridge Board) which, amongst other subjects, I passed in 1952!
|
|
I took my A-levels in 1994. Some of the practice questions we did in the run-up period were taken from O-level papers of a decade previously, and were quite clearly of the same rigour.
|
I have some knowledge when a student rep in meeting at university that some syllabuses had changed a lot. Some might say made easier. Maths was always a prerequisite for computing at Manchester. But when students came with maths they did not know anything about the maths areas required. So the department had to teach this.
What I find with the results is the percentage of passes/grades goes up most years. I always thought in the past the grades were worked out based on percentile graphs to smooth out differences in how hard an exam was. So it used to be that the top x% got an A, then the next y% got a B and so on.
|
|
A levels were a topic of conversation here the other day, unexpectedly I gained a NVQ level 3 in my CAB work, unexpected that I followed their training regime and was presented with a "certificate" - I'm told that the work I undertook was the equivalent of doing an A level course - it was simple - very simple, no too simple but seemingly true. I will add it to my other academic trophies !
|
|
Exams haven't changed that much - people were stupider in the past, and teachers now teach to pass exams, not encourage brain growth.
|
>>I gained a NVQ level 3 in my CAB work,<<
That's the third time you've mentioned that in the past week:)
I assume the certificate is now framed and hanging on the wall? (in the loo)
Pat
|
Seems to be more of a test to selectively identify information than mental arithmetic.
£35,000 cost of machine - doesn't matter!
5 days a week - again, doesn't matter.
Key points:
8 hours a day, but only 7 hours for useful work. Unless I've missed something obvious, that means the commercial income is £40 (out of a total of £90) (or some multiple thereof), which is about 44% (no paper or calculator here).
So, tell me what I got wrong!
Last edited by: Alfa Floor on Tue 23 Aug 11 at 21:16
|
>> Key points:
>>
>> 8 hours a day, but only 7 hours for useful work.
>> So, tell me what I got wrong!
How is that a key point?
|
>> So it used to be that the top x% got an A, then the next y% got a B and so on
I used to pick up a lecturer who also marked English exam papers in the summer. She said there were guidelines as to what marks corresponded to which grades, i.e. 68%-78% = B, 78%-89% = A, 90%+ = A* etc. She would then assess papers based on these scores, and award, say 78% if she felt a paper was an A, but only just; or 76% if it was a good B but not worthy of an A grade.
One year (much reported in the press IIRC) the exam board moved the goalposts post-marking, raising the bar for each grade. So in the above example, the student who'd scraped an A (and thus, possibly the offer of a university place) found themselves demoted to a B and missing out on that offer. The assessor had marked the paper with a percentage which she expected to translate to an A grade because, in her opinion, the work was good enough to merit that A and its consequences for the student's educational career. ISTR the exam boards lost quite a few markers after that.
|
Not sure I believe what you were told. The determination of grades was after they had all been marked. They would plot them to see where they fell so to speak.
But you do mention English which is subjective. I did maths and sciences and therefore you had right or wrong answers. Easier to mark (and check you had the right answer in an exam yourself).
|
I'll put up the answers as given to the questions in a day or two.
The Americans might feel tht exams are easier too, viz:
Teaching Math in 1950:
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price. What is his profit?
Teaching Math in 1960:
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price, or $80. What is his profit?
Teaching Math in 1970:
A logger exchanges a set "L" of lumber for a set "M" of money. The cardinality of set "M" is 100. Each element is worth one dollar. Make 100 dots representing the elements of the set "M." The set "C," the cost of production contains 20 fewer points than set "M." Represent the set "C" as subset of set "M" and answer the following question: What is the cardinality of the set "P" of profits?
Teaching Math in 1980:
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20. Your assignment: Underline the number 20.
Teaching Math in 1990:
By cutting down beautiful forest trees, the logger makes $20. What do you think of this way of making a living? Topic for class participation after answering the question: How did the forest birds and squirrels "feel" as the logger cut down the trees? There are no wrong answers.
Teaching Math in 2002:
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $120. How does Arthur Andersen determine that his profit margin is $60?
|
Good fun!
Sketch the curve y=x(4-x) for values of x from 0 to 4. Taking pi as 3.142,
find the area of the curve enclosed by the curve and the x-axis,
y=x(4-x)
= -x^2+4x
int y dx = -x^3/3 + 2x^2 +C
as the integral is definite, we can ignore the constant of integration
at x=4
int y dx = 32-64/3
= 96/3 - 64/3
= 32/3 units
and the volume obtained by rotating the area about the x-axis.
first, find the height of the centroid of the area
The area is 32/3, and the length along the x axis is 4 units
The average height is therefore 32/12 units.
then using the Pappus theorem, find the volume
Volume = area of section * path length of centroid
= 32/3 * 2*pi*32/12
= 32/3 * pi*16/3
>> (32/3)*(16/3)*3.142
ans =
178.7449
178.74 units cubed
|
Crumbs, I even did Maths for Natural Scientists in my first year at University*, but I've never heard of Pappus' theorem (or if ever I did, I've forgotten both him and it in the last nearly couple of decades). Couldn't have done the O level paper. Of course as our former head of English (sorry cannot remember who) alludes lower down on this thread, much of exams is regurgitating particular facts, and if you don't know the fact you cannot regurgitate it.
Fact regurgitation is what you do in professional exams. If you've never learned to do it, then you'll never pass them...
________________________________________________
*and I struggled to remember most of that even for the exam, let alone afterwards
|
>> I even did Maths for Natural Scientists in my first year at University
A Nat Sci then.... I assume Cambridge :-)
|
>> I assume Cambridge :-)
Probably a spy or gay then. Or both.
Not that I like to generalise of course.
|
like!
But if I were a spy do you think I'd be spying on you?
|
>> Teaching Math in 2002:
>>
>> A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $120. How does
>> Arthur Andersen determine that his profit margin is $60?
Answer: Arthur Andersen went out of business due to their involvement in ENRON. They cannot determine anything.
|
Having got experience in NVQ I would like to point out the standard is no where near the same. I've made talked about this before, but the level is system is crap. Take communications level 3 key skills, it is supposed to be A level standard, it was the easiest exam I ever took, it was easier than GCSE!
Of course it also makes people feel better to believe that exams where easier in the old days! I think there is a little bit of truth in that exams are easier, but more than anything I think the content is just different.
I suspect the problem universities have with maths is not more that there are too many examining boards and different students could both have an A in maths but studied different things.
PS Its nearly ten years since I started university, so when it comes to this subject you could call me an old git, but I still think unless somebody really understands it they can't comment. I have often found the ones which made such comments are the ones which have sort of of bitterness about their own exam results.
PS that comment about maths circa 2002, would have been GCSE foundation level, so a GCE and not O level!
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Tue 23 Aug 11 at 21:41
|
>> PS Its nearly ten years since I started university
I came to Manchester as a student in October 1989...! Been here almost 20 years!
Last edited by: rtj70 on Tue 23 Aug 11 at 21:43
|
|
That 20 years was a joke of course! :-)
|
|
I know Rattle - it makes me laugh..!
|
>A machine which cost £35000 is operated 8 hours a day in a 5 day week..
The questions have been updated. This is from the 2010 paper:
Question 1. (8 Marks).
Your reponse rate is one reply per 10,000 emails and you convert 10% of those opportunities into income. The average profit for Viagra is £10, Cialis £50 and Levitra £100 and your sales ratio is 10:2:1.
If your ISP has spam controls that limit outgoing emails to 60 per minute how long will it take you to buy a new iPad?
a) Don't care, the admin at spam.ru still hasn't secured his mailserver.
b) Don't care, I'm doing Media Studies.
c) Viagra! Cialis! Levitra! Email ____@_____.___ for best prices - guaranteed!
Jokes aside,
I've been toying with the idea of building an Ultima but I'm very tight on space in my garage and I'd need to buy a bunch of tools I'd never use again.
I hit on the idea of approaching my local college (BCOT) to use their facilities. I would buy all the kit and components and the college could use the project as practical work for engineering students.
Unfortunately the only automotive engineering course they do is a BTEC Diploma where I would never have any involvement.
So, I went for this instead: www.bcot.ac.uk/everyone/courses/course.asp?course=1009
I've failed the test every week for about six months now but it's far more interesting than an NVQ 3 from the CAB :-)
Last edited by: Kevin on Tue 23 Aug 11 at 22:43
|
>
>> So, I went for this instead: www.bcot.ac.uk/everyone/courses/course.asp?course=1009
>>
>> I've failed the test every week for about six months now but it's far more
>> interesting than an NVQ 3 from the CAB :-)
Could only happen in Basingstoke!!!
|
To quote: "Candidates must provide tweezers."
I suppose there is a demand for this. I'd assumed (and still do) it's females only. But it does say: "Candidates must receive intimate waxing services and have the areas ready for treatment first day of the course"
Last edited by: rtj70 on Tue 23 Aug 11 at 22:59
|
>Could only happen in Basingstoke!!!
Applications are available online and you're not far away.
|
|
Get out of it, have you seen Basingstoke girls?
|
When I was looking at redundancy I thought an NVQ in IT would be useful. I was told I'd have to start at level 1. The criteria were something along the lines of:
Compose an email using a spell checker.
Receive an email.
I sent an email suggesting they could send the certificate by return!
|
>> I sent an email suggesting they could send the certificate by return!
Clearly they never got it. You must be the only person that has failed an NVQ IT user Level 1
|
My dad was offered one where he works but level 2, but then they asked a question "do you have any qualifications" he read his list out "O levels, A levels, HE diploma, CLAIT etc" they replied "argh, you have O levels, this is for people with GCSEs at D or below or GCEs or less".
He was a bit mythed as it was the early 70's since he has last done any real education.
I was did a job when I was 17 which offered NVQ Level 2 IT, I started it but was so patronised by the content I left and went back to college. Glad I did, because I have such a wide range of experiences as a result.
That said I had just dropped out of a digital electronics BTEC, partly due to personal reasons and partly because I found the practical elements hard.
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Tue 23 Aug 11 at 23:40
|
Does anyone remember the TV series "That'll Teach 'Em"?
thatllteachem.co.uk/
"Channel Four television had commissioned a programme, which took 30 pupils back to a mock 1950's style school.
These pupils had just finished their GCSE exams and many had predicted grades of A or A*.
They were to board at the school and have four weeks of 50's style lessons as well as enduring the living conditions, food and discipline of the era.
At the end of the four weeks they were given a partial GCE 'O' Level exam that was marked to the standards of the 50's.
The results were very revealing but how ever caused much more debate on the Channel Four website."
To put it bluntly they struggled with "O" levels. I don't believe people are any more or less bright today than they were in earlier generations. Today's students are being short changed by an educational ethos that says that "all must have prizes" to the detriment of overall quality.
|
It was a farce as different things are taught now. There will be a lot of content in todays A level maths which would be alien to somebody sitting in the 1950s.
|
>> It was a farce as different things are taught now. There will be a lot
>> of content in todays A level maths which would be alien to somebody sitting in
>> the 1950s.
>>
Only relevant for Maths, Rattle, and it wasn't just Maths that were examined by the programme, but other subjects as well. In every case the modern students did less well on the O-level papers and found the questions more difficult. Comparing like-for-like (e.g. Trigonometry) the modern students level of understanding was so much less.
But it is not their fault.
I'll repeat - there is NO DIFFERENCE IN INTELLIGENCE between the generations. Modern students taught with the same rigour and high expectations as previous generations would achieve just as good a result (and indeed still do so at independent schools that don't buy in to the current educational groupthink).
|
Come to think of it, I remember finding my dad's O-Level papers from the 1960's (back when you could take exam papers home with you), and thinking at the time that some of the things he was doing at 16 I didn't touch until my first year at university.
This is probably why uni - and especially maths or physics courses - can be a massive step up from A-levels. The university content hasn't changed but A-Levels have become easier, and the bridge gets wider and wider each year.
|
>> Get out of it, have you seen Basingstoke girls?
>>
Liz Hurley comes from Amazingstoke, IIRC.
|
In a former life I was a Head of English and Drama in a comprehensive and before that taught in a grammar school. I taught to A.L., including the Special Paper, and Oxbridge preparation. I also marked O.L. English Language papers on a couple of occasions and was involved in other areas of assessment of English by test and coursework, inside and outside school.
I could write a great deal about all this, but I think the answer to the question "were exams harder in the old days?" isn't straightforward. The answer is "yes, in some ways", but, in my subject (and I suspect in others) what is examined, and therefore the style of the questions, has changed. You can argue that this is a change for the worse, perhaps.
A couple of examples:
Even before the introduction of G.C.S.E. the most significant change from the old-fashioned O.L. English Language was the dropping of the précis or summary question. This tested a number of skills, such as comprehension and the ability to analyse a piece of writing, distinguishing the relative importance of the various ideas. It is a fearsomely difficult question and perhaps it bore too heavily on weaker candidates. However, to my mind it allowed the really able candidate to shine.
The above shows the dilemma - how to stretch the good candidate, but still allow the weaker one to demonstrate something useful.
In English Literature, O.L. relied to a great extent on recall. If you learned the set texts really well and used your memory of them sensibly you could do very well. I always argued that this was of limited use in showing the ability to respond to literature. It is far better to set more open-ended questions. Then, of course, you have deal with subjectivity - of the candidate and the examiner - which requires a labour-intensive moderation process. This means training examiners before they start marking and rigorous sampling of their work, to ensure consistent standards are applied across the board.
I hope this gives some idea of a few of the issues in one subject at least.
|
|
Give me Long Shore Drift and Alluvial moraines and drumlins any day. Hated maths but loved geography. I never did anything other than o-levels so can't say if they were harder or not.
|
>> Give me Long Shore Drift and Alluvial moraines and drumlins any day.
I've got some Geography O-Level questions from the same era (these are mostly fifties/early sixties), so I'll bung one up later.
There are also English Language (which as mentioned, have the infamous summary question), History, something called General Science - but I'll spare us from all those.
Last edited by: Crankcase on Wed 24 Aug 11 at 15:49
|
Top post FP.
Mrs B has taught science since the mid eighties and would, I suspect, report a similar tale.
|
Machine answer: 44.5%
Area answer: 10.67
Volume answer: 107.25
|
|
University placement students come to my organisation for a year. Certainly their grammar and spelling leaves much to be desired.
|
That was a mean question - clearly I got it wrong first time through!
I don't think Pappus theorem was taght to me at O level, but, I've forgotten exactly when I learnt about it.
--------- Remedial Attempt!
Sketch the curve y=x(4-x) for values of x from 0 to 4. Taking pi as 3.142,
find the area of the curve enclosed by the curve and the x-axis,
y=x(4-x)
= -x^2+4x
int y dx = -x^3/3 + 2x^2 + C
as the integral is definite, we can ignore the constant of integration
at x=4
int y dx = 32-64/3
= 96/3 - 64/3
= 32/3 units squared
and the volume obtained by rotating the area about the x-axis.
first, find the height of the centroid of the area
The area is 32/3, and the length along the x axis is 4 units
Inverting the formula for y
x = 2*sqrt(4-y)
Finding the centroid
A y bar = int yx dy
= int 2* y * sqrt(4-y) dy
= 2* int y * sqrt(4-y) dy
= (-4/15) * (4-y)^(3/2) * (3y+8)
at y=4
= (-4/15) * (4-4)^(3/2) * (3y+8)
= 0
at y=0
= (-4/15) * (4)^(3/2) * (8)
= (-4/15) * 8 * 8
= -256/15
A y bar = 256/15
y bar = (256/15) / (32/3)
y bar = 1.6
Using Pappus theorem
Volume = Area * path length
= (32/3) * 2 * pi * (256/15) / (32/3)
= 2 * pi * (256/15)
= 107.25 units cubed
Unless I've approached it via a very difficult route when there's an easier way, I can't imagine too many pupils getting that right
I'll give it to my final year engineers as a coffee time puzzle!
|
NC
Far be it for me to criticise your method, but I could remember doing solids of rotation at Olevel, yet I had no recollection of the Pappus theorem or 'the centroid'!
After a little bit of Googling (as a reminder) using the Disc method is what seems a more appropriate and simplifies the working considerably. - (OK I accept that Pappus is a good generic solution for more complex functions)
This only takes 3 lines of long hand calculation
ie
squaring the original function,
integration of the square of the original function*(Pi)
(substitution, between limits of 0 and 4)*Pi and then longhand arithmetic calculation
OK it took a couple of attempts before the correct answer fell out ( inability to add up!)
I would have regarded it at the time (ie 50yrs ago) as a typical Olevel question and relatively quick and easy to get 100% of the marks available.
Last edited by: pmh on Thu 25 Aug 11 at 07:53
|
Criminey. I would have seriously struggled with that one at the time, especially after seeing the workings you guys did.
I cheated - at last I found something that WA worked with! Stick "area under y=x(4-x)" into
www.wolframalpha.com/ and there you go.
Couldn't suss how to make it do the volume though.
|
>>Far be it for me to criticise your method, ...
Thanks for suggesting an easier way - I was finding it difficult to imagine that my solution was what the examiners were after.
I'll have a play later, and see if I can get the disc method to work. Cheers!
|
|
pmh - that's the method I learned as well.
|
>>
>>
>> This only takes 3 lines of long hand calculation
>>
>> ie
>> squaring the original function,
>> integration of the square of the original function*(Pi)
>> (substitution, between limits of 0 and 4)*Pi and then longhand arithmetic calculation
>>
>>
>>
I've just tried it for old time's sake. Memory comes flooding back, and I realise I used to regard that kind of stuff as easy. It still would be with a small amount of practice.
I don't know what it proves though - that O-levels were just as easy then, or that they were hard but we found them easy because we were well-taught?
|
>> Some modern O level paers here;
>>
>> www.edexcel.com/quals/olevel/maths/7361/Pages/default.aspx
>>
>>
The best bit of the May 2009 paper is the fictional maths examiner in question 17, who delights in the name of Lois Denominator.
|
I would have regarded it at the time (ie 50yrs ago) as a typical Olevel question and relatively quick and easy to get 100% of the marks available.
Never done an O Level but looking at some on here. I would say yes. That question above, I wouldn't have had a chance on my GCSE of doing it. That sort of question is now on my HNC and I'm struggling with that now.
The course this year has reduced the amount of maths from 4 to 2 assignments and applied science from 4 to 3. Just my luck ! Wish I'd started a year later now.
|
Thanks - the disc method is much easier - and it also gives an easier route to finding the centroid.
Disc Method
V = pi int y^2 dx
= pi int (4x-x^2)(4x-x^2) dx
= pi int x^4-8x^3+16x^2 dx
= pi (x^5/5 -2x^4 + (16/3)x^3)
at x=4
= pi * ((4^5)/5 - 2*(4^4) + (16/3)*(4^3))
= 107.23 units cubed
Using the Disc Method followed by Pappus theorem allows the
height of the centroid to be found
y bar = Volume / (Area * 2 * pi)
= pi * ((4^5)/5 - 2*(4^4) + (16/3)*(4^3) ) / ((32/3) * 2 * pi)
= (3/64)*((4^5)/5 - 2*(4^4) + (16/3)*(4^3) )
y bar = 1.6 units
much easier!
|
|
Seems to be a few people who are good at maths, anyone know of any good websites for help with calculus?
|
Practice is the key - the ONLY way to do it really.
There's a good book by Anton - if you work through the examples in there, you'll be OK. You might be able to get hold of it through your library.
|
Probably right, got out of the habit of it now and I can't be bothered with it, but I just want to get it done and out of the way.
Got the John Bird one what do you think of it, no good? I'll look for the other one. Thanks NC.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 25 Aug 11 at 21:22
|
If it's the same Bird who wrote "Technician Mathematics", Bird & May, then, yes, that will also be a good text.
|
|
I've got 'Higher Engineering Mathematics' and having looked it is the same person.
|
That's more like it, NC! I'd tried that but because I didn't get your answer I'd sent myself to the bottom of the class.
Tried your 2009 O level paper 2 this morning. Cannot remember how to do the matrices questions, but the two questions that might have given me a bit of trouble they kindly provided the necessary formulae. Really, giving 2 marks away for "solve (2n-4)x90/n where n=8" is marks for old rope.
|
>>marks for old rope.
Have a nosy round the site, and look at the GCSE papers!
|
>>Have a nosy round the site, and look at the GCSE papers!
Far harder.
store.aqa.org.uk/resourceZone/pdf/maths/AQA-4360-3H-W-SQP.PDF
I have no idea how to answer question 6 a. "Because God made it thus," seems to be the best response.
Question 3 is little better.
9a is ambiguous.
|
>> >>
>>
>> I have no idea how to answer question 6 a. "Because God made it thus,"
>> seems to be the best response.
>>
>>
Because there are 5 of them.
If you define a full circle as 360 degrees (Does it want to know why we have decided on 360 ?) then if you walk in a series of straight lines and every so often make a sharp turn to the left, then after you have turned through a total of 360 degrees you will be going in the same direction as when you started. If you make 5 equal turns, 360/5 = 72 degrees. QED
Q 3.
If you imagine a triangle with a base of 10 cm but the other two sides are a million miles long, the perimeter will be longer than a circle of diameter only 10 cm !
Last edited by: Cliff Pope on Thu 25 Aug 11 at 15:47
|
>> But "why?"
>>
Why what?
Why are there 360 degrees in a circle?
Why does a pentagon have 5 sides?
|
An amusing tale. (Which partly links to the job applications thread.)
An acquaintance who has recently left university was bemoaning his lack of GCSE Maths, never having taken it, and the near impossibility of getting through the online job application systems.
Upon mentioning this to another acquaintance in a similar position, he wondered how he had been so let down by his school(ing).
The irony is that whilst he lacks GCSE Maths, he has a Maths degree. I suggested he take GCSE maths now.
|
|
lets cut out this noncy maths crap, where is the geography question that was promised.
|
|
Whilst 'revising' for 'O' levels, some of us were put in a classroom where first years were taking their end-of-year tests. I was told to leave after muttering too loudly: "Oh no, not draw a blinking amoeba" to the sound of staccato pencils.
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 26 Aug 11 at 01:49
|
>> lets cut out this noncy maths crap, where is the geography question that was promised.
>>
I abandoned the idea. They're all unanswerable (here) and not interesting.
eg things like "On the following map, mark areas of sheep farming, slate mining and wheat, and explain why the areas you have marked have those industries".
I couldn't find any about moraines, drumlins or volcanic fibrillations.
|
|
nothing about ox bow lakes?
|
Explain how drumlins are formed.
Amazing things when you see them in the flesh; I don't think diagrams (or even photographs) compare.
|
|
No ox bow lakes no. Anyway, I'd already settled down happily with the history questions.
|
|
But the WHOLE point of GCSE geography is the ox-bow lake. I don't remember learning anything else.
|
|
Nope. It's all stuff about why people live where they do, and so forth. Very little physical Geography at all, interestingly.
|
|
I remember my o level geography had an OS map of the vale of Evesham.
|
Anyone remember watching those rubbish Shell films on a big telly that was wheeled into the classroom by the teacher?
The footage was usually filmed in the late 60's and had a wobbly soundtrack and often featured some incredibly dull information about the steel industry in South Wales or a coal mine (remember them?)
|
Were O-Levels harder? - Meldrew
