That seems so obvious now you've said it, but I had also never made that connection before.

They don't. Rational functions as a whole is not as prominent as in some other exam boards. The closest is some inequalities stuff in FP1. It's a good extension topic though.

It will be questions, and it will not be all of the same question. The questions pay slightly different rates as well when I last did it, since not every question takes the same amount of time to mark. (I was doing a pure paper and I was on a team that had half the questions each time)

I still remember the day I came across this as a teacher - blew my mind and I immediately started using it in my teaching of the topic.

Oooh. I knew about arcsin and arccos, I did not know arctan could be part of that diagram too.

This is awesome, especially as FD1 doesn't seem to have a ton of resources dedicated specifically to it. Thanks for sharing!

Oh, hugely. No doubt.

While whether the curriculum is fit for purpose is a whole other debate, it is the system we have and these are the exams we have to prepare students for. As a result, applying the factor theorem to your example question is something I would expect to settle candidates.

Awesome!

Keith Johnson's Timetabler was what I used and it was pretty good with blocks and other options. We did the initial planning in Excel, both in terms of staffing and FTE, but also an initial look to ensure the blocks of KS5 and KS4 we wanted to run for the pupils could actually be staffed.

a) As a student in Y12 I would have picked FP1 and FP2.
a2) As a student now, I would pick FP1 and FM1.
b) To teach, I would pick FS1 and FD1.

Just to let you know I used this with my Y11 class today and they absolutely LOVED it and wanted to know if there would be a calculator paper too. (I did say not at the moment!) Thanks very much for sharing this.

This is awesome! I'm definitely using with my Year 11 class next week. If there was ever a Paper 2 I'd use that too!

A Level marking is hard. Pupils understanding how to apply mark schemes is harder. It is clear from checking peer-marked work that they generally don't have any idea how to award marks properly, which hugely skews their perception of what they actually understand when they self mark practice work.

Ah the legendary C3 Paper, with my favourite piece of examiner feedback ever.

"There was no evidence of candidates failing to finish the paper."

Of course there wasn't. The paper was so hard that pupils had all the time in the world on the Qs they could do because they could only do a few of them!

I did those papers! I have the June 2001 paper in my A Level file.

Pure: There's some polynomial algebra and calculus.
Stats: E(X) and Var(X), probability and mean/standard deviation.

(Probably not everything was examined though)

I've also got a photocopy of some CGP revision guide pages for it.

Likewise. I'm sure there used to be more event venues - however it is the first year back after a long hiatus, and the TMC had a scaled back first year before fully relaunching.

Agreed.

Ah, I read your initial comment as the three marks were all lost on the single 7 marker. This makes more sense.

That last "laws of logs" one is the thing I needed to really take my teaching to the next level. Thanks!

Does raising a complaint using Ofqual's "Make a complaint" procedure stand a chance of getting anywhere?

www.geogebra.org/m/ngcpe2cd Maths Pure
www.geogebra.org/m/gwdespdp FM Pure
www.geogebra.org/m/regzpujq Mech inc FM
www.geogebra.org/m/nwycmcfg Stats inc FM

These may be of use. This is a good request from your dept. I upskilled my use of tech a lot this year - I've never taught hyp testing so well.

Much of this response makes me so angry. "Undisclosed reasons" is unacceptable as it doesn't promote any trust, in a situation where there is an overwhelming lack of trust in what has just happened. Thank you for giving up some of your time to try to get some answers for us.

Agreed. I wouldn't expect anyone to be able to teach every part of all FM modules. I'd ideally want everyone to be able to do a spread of modules, so that each module has a few teachers who are experienced with it. I'm fortunate my current department has quite a wide variety, until someone leaves...

100% agree. However, if someone wants to develop into an A Level Maths teacher, allowing them to focus on just part of the course at a time helps, especially if they do prefer e.g. mechanics over statistics. Especially with the current national teacher situation, I wouldn't want to overload someone.

Maths - 2 teachers in (Pure + Mech and Pure + Stats)
Further Maths - 3 teachers in Y12 (Pure + Mech, Pure + Stats and Pure + Core Pure 1)
Further Maths - 4 teachers in Y13 (Two teachers finishing Core Pure 1 and Core Pure 2, two other teachers each doing one Edexcel FM option each)

How on Earth can they be "confident" of that when it's obvious that there were duplicate questions at the expense of other topics? The quartic question and final integration question are essentially on the same thing in both papers.

Have used the teddy bear one in the past - it's brilliant.

Definitely. In my experience of doing it, I found that you can actually accommodate any request that someone has... unfortunately this often would have had a far greater negative effect for others. I imagine many schools' budgets mean fewer staff than before, therefore less flexibility on staffing.

Radians and logs for single maths, polars, method of differences, collisions and PMCC for further maths. (We have 2 lessons per subject on Y11 taster day, so we do 4 for FM)