Jump to content

Satmi

Members
  • Content Count

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Unknown

Profile Information

  • Exams
    May 2012
  • Country
    Finland
  1. Thanks! But wow, those are some seriously high grade boundaries for Math HL. I wish now that I had put some effort into my studies – not for my own sake, but because we have such a devoted math teacher who I'm afraid will be forever depressed about our results. Anyway, I suppose there's no point in getting any of my papers remarked then. I'm several points below the boundaries in both Physics and Math, and in Biology there is just too much risk given that I might get the necessary points from re-moderation. I'm still not sure how I did so badly in Biology, but I guess I'll just have to live w
  2. Yes, she of course has them, but I did not realise to ask for them back when I mailed her to get my component grades. And seriously, I don't want to bother her any further. For my own sake. I am aware that in some subjects your exam marks can change a lot in remarking, but is that really the case with subjects like Physics or Math as well? Unless there actually is something very wrong with the marking, I mean. Because I find it hard to believe that in those subjects the markschemes would be ambiguous enough to allow such variation? It would be interesting to hear experiences on those two subj
  3. I don't know how I forgot to mention this, but I am be interested in finding out the TZ2 boundaries specifically, and the option Series & Differential Equations in Math HL. As to ibgrades.com, I think that having the correct grade boundaries is crucial for the decision on whether to remark or not. After all they vary so much from year to year, and I'm guessing it's not probably worth remarking in these subjects unless you are just one or perhaps two points away from the higher grade. It'd be interesting to hear experiences on this though – has anyone ever got higher scores after having the
  4. I'm one mark away from a 7 in HL Bio myself and I'm also wondering about remarking. I haven't personally seen my grade breakdown, only discussed my overall grade with my coordinator over the phone, so I'm not sure of where I'm missing the mark but I wasn't aware that you could submit IAs for re-moderation? I feel like it's doubtful I'd pick up the extra mark from my papers given the black and white nature of the markscheme. Can someone explain the IA re-moderation to me, please? There is no possibility for an individual candidate to have their IAs re-moderated – after all, the moderation is d
  5. I've been battling with the same question. I'm one mark away from a 6 in HL Biology, a subject where getting a 5 was really a surprise and a disappointment for me. However, as I mentioned in the results thread, our IAs where moderated down a lot (mine 15 points since the higher grades went down the most) and I believe our IB coordinator is now attempting to submit our IA samples for re-moderation. The moderation clearly was too harsh, and I think there should be a fair chance that our IA marks could go up at least a bit when re-moderated. I would only need two more IA points to get that missin
  6. Now I should probably start off by saying that I am, at least I was, very happy with my score. Apart from Math, I barely studied for any of the subjects and yet ended up with a 38. Even with Math it was about desperately cramming the half of the syllabus I had never been bothered to study. And that was enough for a 5. So perhaps I shouldn't complain. But. 5 Biology HL 6 Physics HL 5 Mathematics HL 7 Chemistry SL 7 Finnish A1 SL 7 English A2 SL D – EE in Physics B – TOK Yes, I was quite worried about my handwriting in the Biology, and perhaps also about not answering the long questions in enoug
  7. But wasn't the difference between the drugs what we were supposed to analyse in that question as well?
  8. That was tricky question.. if you continued reading the sentence in choice 'C' it says it promotes flowering in long-day plants during LONG NIGHT.. you cannot have both a long day and a long night which makes option 'C' wrong.. the same thing did apply for option 'A' (short-day + short night) .. WRT option D & B I don't really remember which one was right.. the answer was it promotes flowering in long-day plant during short nights.. Oh right, so I just misread it then. Or It could be that I remember the letters wrong. I just recall reading the question and options over and over (very weir
  9. P1 was easy I think, although I already know that I made the wrong choice in several of them – which is never a good sign. The question about phytochrome, to me, seemed to have two correct answers. c) I think claimed that pfr promotes flowering in long-day plants and d) that pfr inhibits flowering in short-day plants. Both are correct, no? Or did I just misread either the question or the choices? P2's first question was indeed weird – in the sense that they would choose data like that for analysis. I don't think I ended up having any problems with it, but there was this constant doubt that am
  10. As I said, I used the wrong unit in the calculation.
  11. I did. It's just that I never studied it before the previous night, and I did not have time to look at general relativity at all. I was able to do surprisingly many of the calculations though, so it went pretty much according to the plan.Astrophysics was quite easy, but I'm seriously worried about my handwriting. And I think I used the wrong unit in the apparent magnitude calculation, so I got something around -35 as the result. That would be one bright star...
  12. Random thoughts: I somehow feel pretty confident about P1, but then again past experience (mocks...) has shown that those feelings may not always be entirely accurate. As to my P2, well, let's just say that it clearly was not the best of ideas to first not bother to do anything over the two years, and then only study for the finals the evening before P1 and P2... I guess I would have been fine had I just been able to sleep normally – but no, apparently this insomnia of mine just isn't going anywhere until the finals are over. I mean it was the basic mechanics questions in Section A that were
  13. Oh shoot, that should've been so obvious... I guess I just forgot to think what is actually happening to the ball and just considered the GP... Ouch.
  14. Yep I think I got the string length question - unless I made stupid mistakes there too. I had very little time too, but it was a surprisingly quick one to do – I first calculated the lenght of the string between the circles, and the same angle I believe could be used (indirectly) for calculating the parts around the two circles too... Unless I remember wrong.Anyone remember what they got for the bouncing ball GP question? The value of n & total distance travelled? I think I got 26 for n and then sum to infinity of around 80 metres... I used 3.8 as u1, I hope that was a valid way to do tha
  15. I thought P2 was quite easy as such, however I hadn't been able to sleep properly for three nights in a row and so I was completely unable to think straight. I mean it was all stuff I knew, yet I clearly made a lot of careless mistakes and kept getting extremely messed up results... So now I am really just counting on method points, and hoping that will be sufficient. It's quite ironic actually that after being so worried about Section B questions that might cover topics I wasn't very familiar with, what in fact turned out to be the real problem for me were the simplest intermediate steps invo
×
×
  • Create New...