1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Edexcel Maths B Unit2 exam paper from March the 5th

Discussion in 'Mathematics' started by gerard podevijn, Mar 6, 2012.

  1. Does anyone has to make a comment on the validity of question 14:
    "Express 0.25 (recurring) as a fraction in its simplest form"
    Ans: 23/ 90. For me, and according to the syllabus, this question and the method should be a Unit 3 question.

    Any comment. Thank you
  2. Anonymous

    Anonymous New commenter

    Do you think people will see 0.25 and put down 1/4
    That's the examiners being sneaky!!
  3. No. It's in unit 2, foundation and higher.
  4. It is nowhere to be seen in the Pearson/Edexcel student book for unit 2. It does however appear on page 6 of the student book for unit 3.
  5. Nazard

    Nazard New commenter

    According to the specification, it is, as Anna-Luise points out, in Unit 2 for Foundation and Higher. It is also in Higher Unit 3 (but not foundation). In all of these sections it says ~"Nk - Convert between recurring decimals and fractions".

    In Higher U3 it also says "Understand the recurring decimal to fraction proof" and adds examples: "change 0.37(both rec), 2.34(rec) to fractions."

    I am not really sure what is different about the U3 text.

    I am afraid this situation just supports my cynical view of Exam-board textbooks. It really is worth going back to the specification and not relying on the book itself.
  6. Piranha

    Piranha Star commenter

    Maybe it is a thing that comes with experience, but I don't think you can be sure that you are teaching everything that is needed if you don't read the Specification in some detail. In terms of what topics should be taught, I would have thought that should be in the SoW, so new teachers shouldn't have to plan everything.
    As I mentioned before, I am not familiar with Edexel, but I like the resources AQA have which allow very quick lookup of what is needed for each topic. Our kind KS4 coordinator has linked these to our SoW, so it only takes a few minutes to check when planning the next week's lessons.
    It does make sense to put this on unit 2, which is the non-calculator paper, especially as the latest Casios do recurring decimals.
    By the way, I agree with comments on exam specific textbooks. Perhaps this should be mentioned in teacher training - "don't rely on textbooks to tell you what to teach".
  7. Piranha

    Piranha Star commenter

    Do Edexel have an obsession with the digits 2 and 5? Practice paper B has 0.025 with the 2 and 5 recurring, and paper C has 0.25, again with both recurring. I would suggest using these as part of revision, as they are likely to pick up any areas that have been missed.
  8. Have they set 0.52 (2 recurring or 52 recurring) yet?
  9. Piranha

    Piranha Star commenter

    Probably, but I haven't checked. I downloaded the practice papers because I thought they would be a good source of tips on what to expect. If we did Edexel, I would have looked at more of them.
  10. Nazard

    Nazard New commenter

    The key word here is "business". Every time the national curriculum or exam specs change the publishers bring out new books immediately. These are often written before the new spec has received approval. The sales literature and salespersons then tell us how excited they are about their new book and how it will do everything required for the new course.

    Having first mover advantage is so important that there are inevitably errors and omissions.
    If they waited and produced a higher quality book they know that some schools would have bought the competitors' offerings in the meantime.

    Apart from anything else you can then produce an updated version a year later, making sure you have made some significant changes to chapter 1 so the page numbers of old and new versions don't match up.

    "That's rather cynical", I hear you cry. I don't know whether you mean me (fair comment, probably), or the publishers (fair comment, probably).

Share This Page