<p>My teacher is asking my class to compile a list of topics for which we felt prepared and unprepared, and I thought it might be interesting to extend the poll to you people. What did you guys like/hate, what surprised you, what were you surprised wasn't on it? </p>
<p>I'm curious- I'd love it if you could respond, especially now that the FRQs are fair game!</p>
<p>HOWEVER- only mention general topics for the multiple choice. Remember, the college board will send its special ninja squad after us if we discuss individual questions :p</p>
<p>FRQs were alright.
Did not like the Calculator MC. Was hard for me. :(</p>
<p>first part mc was really easy because it was all computational, but calculator was really difficult since most of it is conceptual. I guess that concept (analysis of graph, MVT, IVT, horizontal asymptotes, continuity, existence of continuity) is really important. Differential equations (word problems) are important.</p>
<p>FRQs were good (except the last one, totally screwed that up).
Agreed, calculator MC was hard and confusing, I logically guessed most of them…
there were a couple of trick questions in there too.</p>
<p>Btw, FRQ for the area/volume problem part b), SO easy but yet so hard to realize what to do.</p>
<p>Multiple choice was fine. Not ridiculously easy, but not hard. Both sections were fine. The non-calculator section had a few trickier questions but overall not too bad.</p>
<p>The calculator Free Response was really easy. The no-calculator ones (4,5,6) were pretty bad.</p>
<p>I was really surprised at the lack of slope fields, related rates, and solids of revolution.</p>
<p>^ same.
Was totally expecting a slope field / differential equation thing on there…was sad to not see one. Those are the easy points.
Its a good thing related rates weren’t on there lol, I’ve lost practice with them.</p>
<p>For some reason, I couldn’t figure out the last 2 parts of the concert free response question. I thought the first MC section was okay, but I found the calculator MC section kinda hard.</p>
<p>I was confused at first too, but I somehow did it.
For part c) of that concert question, you can get the right answer by doing the wrong method, lol. If you just integrate (2 - t)R(t) from 1 to 2, you’ll get the right answer but the setup is a bit off.</p>
<p>For d), you just divide the total time by the total number of people.</p>
<p>^:O I just checked another thread, and people got the same answer that I did the first time I did the problem! I thought an answer over 300 was ridiculous, and I felt like banging my head on my table. Therefore, I changed my answer, and now I’m afraid it’s wrong. I didn’t realize the question was asking for an accumulation of the time everyone waited individually (that is what it was asking, right?). Was the real method fnInt((2-t)R(t), x, 0, 2) - fnInt((2-t)R(t), x, 0, 1)? That’s what I wrote as my setup, but my answer was a bit different.</p>
<p>Sounds familiar, i think that’s what I had. But why would you subtract the definite integral from 0 to 1 from the definite integral from 0 to 2? You can just do the definite integral from 1 to 2…</p>
<p>Same thing though.</p>
<p>Yep, that was the correct method.
You just set that equal to w’(t).
Most people did it the way I did because they didn’t remember that rule and still got it right.</p>
<p>Yeah lol the answer was 387.5 or something…
Something over 300 shouldn’t be THAT ridiculous because the total number of people was 980. Atleast thats what I reasoned out in my head while doing it.</p>
<p>^ for the last part of the crowd problem…would you do 1/980 * the integral of (2-t)(R(t) from 0 to 2 since you’re trying to find the average time a person waits on line</p>
<p>Wasn’t so bad, not hard.</p>
<p>I’m certain everyone on this board will get a 4+…obviously we care enough to study and surf these boards in need of confirmation 
What kid does that? :D</p>
<p>The wording of the mighty cable problem made me want to shoot a baby</p>
<p>I mean, the way they stated it made it seem like the cost would be 6sqrt(k) *k as if the cost per meter was constant. But then I had to use calculus somehow didnt I? But then I thought it couldnt be worded that stupidly…could it? so I had an inner battle with myself and answered half of them using calculus and half of them not.</p>
<p>Also on 4 parts b and c. reading directions are not my friend</p>
<p>I thought the sin(pi/2 * x) was in the form that saying a square cross sectional area was x^2, because when doing cross sectional area you always use the height…right? So I plugged the height in for x and woohooo, unsolvable integral</p>
<p>and then part c. …I’m one of those guys who reads the first line of the problem and goes to it, anyone else totally not see that it was supposed to be done in dy? like, I didn’t even read anything past find the volume of squares crosssect…</p>
<p>but thanks to multiple choice I still think I’ll get the 5, but gosh, I haven’t missed a question this year and the wording on those made me want to shoot myself, this was a reading comprehension test, not calculus</p>
<p>manyman, you and I are the same person! I had no idea I had to use calculus for the Mighty Might w/e company. The way it was worded was terrible. And then for the sin part I also plugged in the height 2x-x^2, and like you said unsolvable integral, booo. Part c, messed that up too. Only one girl I talked to from my school realized what it said. I’m sure other kids got it too but I’m thinking lots of kids made the same mistakes we did. Ughhhhh. I thought my MC was pretty awesome though. </p>
<p>For me, I did 6 practice exams before the real exam, and I learned all my conceptual calculus from there (for the most part).</p>
<p>Thanks for all the great comments people!
The no-calculator free response pwned me, and I was REALLY surprised at how the entire no-calc FRQ was ALL intergrals. The wait time question made me want to stick my head in a blender. So. effin. unclear. </p>
<p>I loved the no-calculator MC, though, which I wasn’t expecting at all! :)</p>
<p>and all the table of value questions on the MC and FRQ… blargh. not good. composition and transformation of functions/integrals was bad. </p>
<p>…and why are all the similar threads at the bottom of this page hair-related? weird :p</p>
<p>I actually didn’t like the wording either too much. Especially for the cable. What was disappointed was NOT to see much of the same material on the previous 10 years of Free Response Questions. I basically studied on those and found very little of what was on there. I was anticipating one slope field, find a particular point, and more volumes. Now that I think of it I wonder if I did dy.</p>
<p>Same here, even our teacher said that he didn’t like the wording of the Mighty Cable thing. </p>
<p>Did all of you get #6? All parts of it?</p>
<p>i liked the MC part (both calc and non-calc)
but frq owned me</p>
<p>The cable problem was not that hard. If you actually read the problem carefully, it says that profit is the difference between the cost of the cables and the cost to make them. All you really had to do for c and d was just create your own formula. How hard is it to add a subtraction sign from the 120 to the formula? lol</p>