Wednesday, 5 September 2007

3 This Year’s Physics GCSE Paper.

Those of you on the distribution list will have received a copy of one of this year’s GCSE physics paper. Here are the answers – how did you do?
1. C, 2. B, 3. C, 4. B, 5. C, 6. B, 7. B, 8. C, 9. A, 10. C, 11. D, 12. D, 13. A, 14. C, 15. C, 16. D, 17. A, 18. D, 19. A, 20. B, 21. D, 22. A, 23. B, 24. D, 25. C, 26. C, 27. C, 28. C, 29. B, 30. A, 31. D, 32. C, 33. A, 34. D, 35. A, 36. D, 37. C, 38. B, 39. D, 40. C

1 comment:

Aidan said...

Hi John, I decided as a Physics Graduate that I should have a go at the new Physics GCSE paper and see how I got on.

I completed the paper over a lunch break but was surprised to discover that I only achieved 85% (34/40). Upon further inspection I found a number of "errors" which I can only presume are typos on the answers page. For example question 3, the answer is clearly D and not C (visible light is between Microwaves and Ultraviolet as indicated on the diagram in the paper). Of the remaining 5 wrong answers I discovered a further 2 questions where the answer is wrong, 1 silly error on behalf of myself and 2 questions where I dispute the answer given. It is these questions that i would welcome discussion on.

For question 34 I cannot see why the answer would be D (56000 secs), I calculate the answer to be 1274 sec for the seismic wave to travel from the Earth's surface to the core and back again. None of the answers given on the paper are 1274s so I'm left wondering whether I've missed something obvious or the paper contains an error? Putting the answer of 56,000 seconds into perspective this is 15.5 hrs, which is sufficient time for a 747 to fly from Heathrow to Jakarta, a distance which is approximately the same as travelling to the Earth's core and back (12000km). Given that 747s don't travel at 10km/s (that's 22,500 mph!) it seems unlikely that this is the answer. The other question which "got my goat" was 39, I cannot see why the answer is D, but again I would welcome alternative explanations.

For all my critisms I actually enjoyed working through the paper and would welcome further discussion.