Mechanics

Most candidates showed good analytical skills and a decent command of technical language. Some descriptive responses lacked structure and knowledge of basic physics. Very few candidates took advantage of expressing their ideas in the form of bullet points. On some scripts, potentially good answers were marred by premature rounding of numbers and erroneous transfer of data between questions. Generally, candidates made good use of their calculators and often wrote the final answers in scientific notation. Numerical answers must not be left as fractions or as surds. It is important that the final numerical answer conveys the significant figures used in the question. There were some very good scripts with clearly laid out physics and well presented calculations. 

 

 

Electrons, Waves & Photons

Candidates should be reminded that Examiners have to read their answers on a computer screen. Often answers are written down the side of the page, into the next section or at the bottom of the page instead of using the extra sheets at the end of the paper.

​

Attempts by students ranged from excellent to many lacking basic GCSE knowledge.  Most sections were attempted with candidates scoring well in questions which mainly required substituting into formulae – weaker candidates gained most of their marks in questions such as these.  Questions where explanations were required proved to be more discriminating, especially in Q4 and Q5.  Good candidates demonstrated their knowledge on the wide range of topics covered.

 

Many candidates did not set out their calculations so that they could be read and understood by a third party.  Q3c required an explanation as to why the calculation was being done and what conclusion was deduced by doing it but the explanation was often left out which left a string of numbers only.

 

Candidates should be careful with the use of past papers.  They are helpful for practice but many students fall into a trap of rote learning leading them to effectively answer questions that were set in previous years rather than the questions they are actually supposed to be answering (for example in Q3b about the potential divider).

 

Understanding of some terms including path and phase difference is still weak.  For example candidates confused "displacement" and "amplitude" and used terms such as "a phase difference of λ/2".

 

Questions are usually designed to lead candidates, but some do not make use of this by failing to read questions carefully.  For example Q6b was about a specific scenario about the effect of red and blue light on a metal surface, many answers to this question failed to address the specific situation and instead gave only a general description of the photoelectric effect.

 

 

Newtonian World

Positively most candidates organised their time well enough to attempt to answer all questions.  There was a good understanding of significant figures and the rounding of numbers among most candidates.  But candidates are reminded that rounding numbers in the middle of calculations is poor practice.  This practice will be penalised in the future.  Candidates should instead carry forward calculator values to at least four significant figures.

 

All students scored well in questions that involved substitutions into formulae but the opportunities to do this were fewer than in previous papers.  Weaker candidates were highlighted by questions in which explanations were required.  For example, questions 5 and 6 were not read carefully by many candidates who simply stated rather than explain their comments. 

 

Candidates are reminded of the importance to lay out written work and calculations clearly and carefully.  A significant minority of scripts were poorly set out (especially in calculations) which made it very difficult for examiners to follow the steps and award compensatory marks where relevant.  Students are also reminded that neat writing is important: in written answers it is not good practice to overwrite when changing an answer and in calculations it is important to form digits neatly especially in indices.

​

 

Fields, Particles and Frontiers of Physics

Positively, there was no evidence that candidates did not have enough time to complete the paper and there were some very good scripts with physics that was thoughtfully presented.

 

It was clear that candidates were well prepared for the exam, and stronger candidates exhibited confidence in their physics and mathematical skills.

 

This year candidates dealt with significant figures better than in previous papers.  But there were still a significant  number of students who lost marks due to rounding numbers mid calculation.  Good practice is to use values from the calculator throughout a calculation and then to write the final answer to the appropriate number of significant figures.

 

Answers from some students suffered from poor legibility which is an ongoing serious concern for a very small number of candidates.  Candidates had a good understanding of command terms in questions in general.  As in previous years some technical terms such as 'mass defect' and 'binding energy' baffled some candidates, though technical terms were in most cases used appropriately.  Candidates are again reminded that they would likely benefit from writing their answers as bullet points rather than writing in continuous prose.