<p>ohh… hmm. well i don’t think that there were too many BC topics though. i saw NO polar but i’m hearing people have seen, at the very least, one of those… i had form Q.
there weren’t any improper integrals… mostly AB topics i think.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>■■■■ same, I was really p-oed that it was all AB topics, and here i paniced about polars…</p>
<p>What’s odd is that on all the practice AP tests we did in class and even on this one, I have never seen the following things</p>
<ol>
<li> Trig substitution</li>
<li> Work/forces with integrals</li>
<li> Rieman sum with the i thing</li>
<li> Newtons method</li>
</ol>
<p>Rarely seen</p>
<ol>
<li> Polar (none this time even)</li>
</ol>
<p>You’d think they would test more on this stuff…</p>
<p>Ugh, I skipped 6 MC questions total and I think I missed a few. I hope my raw score is above 30. I bombed the free response; I skilled half of question 2, got the last part of 3 wrong for sure, made a silly, but significant error on question 5, and didn’t do question 6. I hope I got a 4.</p>
<p>bleh, AB was harder than I anticipated</p>
<p>^ Really? Did you prep with the past released tests? I felt like this test (both MC and FRQ) were easier than any previously administered test.</p>
<p>I did AB practice FRQs from previous years and I did nothing similar to the amusement park question…</p>
<p>^ That was the one where you just had to find the area under the function for like every part right?</p>
<p>And actually, a few of the AB problems confused me =[
i read and reread a problem then i do the problem then see if it matches any of the answers… and i don’t like the idea of skipping questions =P</p>
<p>you don’t need to know newton’s method or linearization. they use that stuff in the flinstone days when there weren’t any calculators.
force/work problems are straight forward…it’ll only show on mc section.
there are always rieman sums and trap,midpoint approximation problems typically.
i was actually well-prepared for polar, but there weren’t any, and that made me sadddd
after the exam i didn’t feel bad, but i might be overlooking on how well i did.</p>
<p>I think this conversation is getting a little too specific for the present time and date…</p>
<p>i think for the Taylor one you had to find the 2nd deriv to look at concavity… -_-
but i wasn’t sure and didn’t write it out</p>
<p>Work and force are physics topics, not calculus. I’ve seen older practice tests that involved Riemann sums and I know that Newton’s method is never on the test. I’m not sure why there aren’t more trig subs.</p>
<p>It’s not that they were actually hard, but (to me at least), they were worded rather poorly, especially for the Part A (green insert). Once I got the gist of the question, the math wasn’t that bad.</p>
<p>Jersey thats what I did. I didn’t know how to solve it any other way. But still…getting through that question took off a lot of time…</p>
<p>^ There is no other way to solve it lol, you’re given the graph of a function that isn’t explicitly defined. And I didn’t feel like it took away a lot of time, it was just adding up the areas of a few triangles and rectangles.</p>
<p>
I didn’t notice any strange wording. The first part was the snow, the amusement park and some other question right?</p>
<p>I won’t go into specifics, but suffice it to say that most of my testing room left the last FRQ completely blank and stopped early. I personally had some issues with it but made an effort. I think the rest went well enough to get a good score.</p>
<p>yeah just add the area under the curve to find the integral.</p>
<p>I didn’t really get green insert number 2c…</p>
<p>sorry I don’t remember specific question numbers</p>
<p>the snow problem</p>