Lauren Richards

Lauren Richards on Extract common factors of polynomials 7 years, 4 months ago

Gave some feedback: Has some problems

Lauren Richards commented on Extract common factors of polynomials 7 years, 4 months ago

• I think it is good to give directions on making sure numbas accepts the answer, but you don't need I.E. inside the brackets, the asterisk would be fine. 
• You don't need the words "there is" in the last sentence of the first section of the advice.
• Slight mistake in part ii) of the advice - it says 613 instead of 6x13 in the second bracket, before y^2. 
• There isn't very much consistency in when you use X and when you use * and it gets a little confusing. Also for instance, in part a) when you state the question again before completing in in the advice, the statement of the question doesn't actually match the question in the parts, form-wise. I think you should only use * at the end, to show which form numbas would have accepted it in. 
• Slight mistakes in parts iv) and v) of the advice. The second term in each stated (52) instead of (5x2) and (62) instead of (6x2). The third term in v) also stated (619) instead of (6x19). 
• Typo right at the end of the advice talking about the video - bellow instead of below. 
• Good question. 

Lauren Richards on Dividing a polynomial with remainders, using algebraic division 7 years, 4 months ago

Gave some feedback: Has some problems

Lauren Richards commented on Dividing a polynomial with remainders, using algebraic division 7 years, 4 months ago

• I think the advice for the division should be reformulated, and focused more on being the algebraic long division with some narration. I think there should be a long division illustration of each bit of narration after it is said, and then you end up with the full one at the end. I also think the narration could be a little clearer in places. You have mentioned that you are dividing the first term of the polynomial by x, but haven't explicitly stated that that is because the first term of the divisor is x. Someone might be misled to think that dividing by x is always the first step to do, which it is not. 
• The question is quite short, would you maybe think about adding a second part where the divisor is a quadratic or something to make it a little harder?
• Would you want to include a statement? You could state what a polynomial is, or give a definition of algebraic long division or something.
• Good grammar, I can't pick you up on anything to do with that, well done haha!! 

Lauren Richards on Arithmetic sequences in an ice cream shop 7 years, 4 months ago

Gave some feedback: Has some problems

Lauren Richards commented on Arithmetic sequences in an ice cream shop 7 years, 4 months ago

• Typo in part b) - it says sequeces instead of sequences. Also, I think you should separate the different questions in part a) and part b) by i) and ii). 
• i) in part c) should be in italics and the writing for the question should be on the line underneath it. I would say the sentences coming after the i) should be capitalised, too. You're missing full stops at the end of the sentences in part c). 
• Is part c)ii) necessary? I'm not sure that it is particularly clear and don't think it is testing anything of importance. 
• The sequence I got given in part d) was exactly the same as the sequence I got in part c). Is it randomised? Is there a way of making sure you don't get the same sequence? I think I would put part d) as an extension of part c) and get rid of c)ii). 
• part e) - not sure that I would say "cycles through" - I think "alternates between sequentially" might be better. 
• For part c) in the advice, you have said "We can use the formula to find the 6 term." but in the parts you have managed to formulate it so it says "6th term". Also, maybe at the end of c)ii) advice, reiterate that the answer you get is the value of the 6th term. 
• I would definitely make part d)i) to be another section of part c) if the sequence is supposed to be the same. 
• I don't think the middle section of the advice for part e) is particularly clear. In the question, I actually don't think I would tell them how many flavours there are, I thinl that should be part of the question. 
• There is a typo in the advice for part e) - it says "are" instead of "our". 
• I think part a) and b) should be swapped around. For a) they need to know how to calculate the common difference and then use that to generate values but in b) they only need to calculate common differences, which is less difficult. 
• I do really like this question, and particularly part e). 

Lauren Richards on Find bounds for distance and time spent running, given imprecise measurements 7 years, 4 months ago

Gave some feedback: Has some problems

Lauren Richards commented on Find bounds for distance and time spent running, given imprecise measurements 7 years, 4 months ago

• I can't help but giggle a bit at the phrase "passionate jogger" as it is conjuring up images of a strange running style like Phoebe's from Friends who is definitely a "passionate jogger" haha. I think "keen runner" might be a little better. 
• Part a) states Josh is off for a morning walk but the statement said he ran not walked! 
• "Calculate upper and lower bounds to find an interval for all possible values of the distance run (????d), rounding to 2 decimal places:" should be in my opinion:
• "Calculate the upper and lower bounds of the distance (d) ran by Josh, rounding your answer to 2 decimal places." 
• ADVICE
• You talk about the degree of accuracy but haven't stated what this is. 
• I think the table in the advice is perhaps not in the best place. I think it is a little confusing too so I would perhaps just drop it altogether.
• I think you could condense the information about the distance and speed and the upper and lower bounds. You could just say: 
  "Speed = 9km/h. 
  Upper bound = 9+0.5 = 9.5km/h.
  Lower bound = 9-0.5 = 8.5km/h" and then do the same for time. Then i think is the best time to mention that distance = speed x time. 
• You might want to mention why you are converting time into hours instead of minutes. You also are missing full stops so might want to add those in. 
• In the advice, I don't think lb and ub for Lower and Upper bound is very clear. 
• For part a), you also might want to mention what the lower and upper bound is in WORDS, eg. the lower bound for distance is the slowest speed multiplied by the shortest time. My brain personally would understand that illustration better than LB of speed x LB of time. 
• State that you have rounded your answers to two decimal places in the advice. 
• Same feedback for part b).
• Think there might be a glitch in the last statement of the advice. We were supposed to establish whether Josh ran in under 60 minutes but it said: "Therefore, we cannot confidently say his time was less than 2 minutes as the upper bound for time (67.06min) is above this threshold.".
• I really like this question, it tests lots of skills and has a good context! 

Lauren Richards on Finding the $n^{\text{th}}$ Term of a Quadratic Sequence 7 years, 4 months ago

Gave some feedback: Has some problems

Lauren Richards commented on Finding the $n^{\text{th}}$ Term of a Quadratic Sequence 7 years, 4 months ago

• So after you have found the difference between the sequential terms, and then found the difference between the differences, which you found in the question I did to be 8, it is not clear how you would decide to start the nth term off as 8/2n^2. I think you need to add in a line explaining your reasoning for this.
• I don't think the first sentence reads very well. Maybe something more like "We first need to calculate the differences between the terms in the sequence.". and then for the second bit of writing "We can then calculate the differences of the term differences." I totally get that that is quite hard to word without being confusing. 
• I think "original sequence" should probably be capitalised. 
• In the advice, the second bit of writing that finishes with the word differences, is missing a full stop. You're also missing a comma at the end of "difference" near the end of the advice but I think this sentence should be re-worded anyway as it starts with "If", but then doesn't really end it like you would expect. I think it should be something like "We should first find the common difference.".
• No fault of yours but it gets a little confusing with the amount of differences being mentioned, and I think when you refer to the "sequence of differences" you should have sequence of differences in brackets when you first make it to make it clear when you next refer to it. 
• I think differences sequence should be capitalised.
• At the end, you're calculating the difference between 2n and the sequence of differences but you haven't done that in the same way as you have done earlier in the question advice and I think you probably should do. 
• One time I did the question, it said "Then we can find the difference between 1n and our sequence of differences" so I think you should make sure it just states "n" in this case. 
• I think this is a good question, and tricky to make clear!