Best wishes for 2015

Best wishes to all for 2015.

May it be a good year for you! Keep on to fulfill a positive role and contribute in a positive way to improve our education system as a whole and physical science in particular.

Merry Christmas 2014

To all the readers of hwscience.blogspot.com - have a joyful, good and merry Christmas. May you and your families enjoy the best of this special time of the year!

The Christmas Gift of Knowing You

The Christmas season fills our hearts with joy;

Bright, happy days bring special kinds of pleasure.
We're wrapped in the excitement of it all,

The sights, the sounds, the smells, the tastes we treasure.

Yet when we have some quiet time to think
About our finest blessings all year through,

We focus on our family and our friends,

And appreciate the gift of knowing you!

By Joanna Fuchs

American teachers get a tax benefit for buying educational material with their own money

How would you feel if you can claim back some of your money via SARS for buying material you need in your classroom? Sounds like a very good idea! A bill has just been passed making this possible for American teachers. Read more here.

In the past it was actually allowed in South Africa to claim expenses, within certain prescriptions, for your study at home. Everybody is supposed to know that teachers are supposed to prepare their work at home, mark books, etc. For that they need proper spaces and the guidelines allowed claiming for that from income tax. Unfortunately, it was stopped towards the end of the nineties.

Are cell phones and power lines harmful to us?

It seems as if cellphones and power lines do not harm us. Read more here ...

Drones are used for invigilation

New role for technology ... drones are doing the invigilation during examinations. Read more about it here. Other interesting articles, including this one, is available here.

Grade 12 marking: End in sight

The end is in sight! Don't "float" during the last few days (hours?); keep up the accuracy and pay special attention to concentration. Best luck!

One week of marking completed

One week completed for the senior teams at the 2014 grade 12 marking session, and the fifth day for the markers. Hope you are still fine colleagues. Keep up the energy, focus and best of luck.

Grade 12 marking: 2014

(C) imgkid.com

Best wishes to all colleagues who are going to mark the grade 12 scripts of 2014. The senior teams have already arrived yesterday, and the markers will DV arrive tomorrow. Stay focused, mark accurately and thanks for your input!

Einstein's documents

Thousands of Einstein's documents are now a click away. Read more about it here. A collection of the web addresses for the articles is available here.

The 33 digital skills every 21st century teacher should have

Read more here ...

Provincial winner in National Teaching Awards

On the 14th of November 2014, Mrs P M Motseki (second from the right) of Lekgarietse Secondary School in Welkom/Thabong was announced as the National Teaching Awards provincial winner in the category Excellence in Physical Science Teaching. We are very proud of Mrs Motseki and congratulations to her. Best wishes to her for the national competition. 

On the picture is from left to right: Mrs Z Alexander (Chief Director: Educational Development and Support), Prof. L C Jita (School of Mathematics, Natural Sciences and Technology Education at the UFS), Mrs P M Motseki and The Honourable MEC for Education, Mr T Makgoe.

Newton's laws and productivity

How can Newton's laws of motion help us to get things done? How to avoid procrastination?

Incorrect facts we teach our pupils at school!

We teach our pupils certain facts, but do we make them aware that it is fine to query the facts? Look at the article about "incorrect" facts they learn at school.

Edukite training cancelled

The Edukite training scheduled for November was cancelled.

Feedback from teachers: Monday's chemistry paper

"Overall I think the paper was quite challenging. I might be wrong, but I think the average for Chemistry will be lower than that of Physics. I like the approach of Q1.5 and 1.6. Q1.8 to 1.10 can be challenging to learners. In Q2 it is only Q2.2.1 that will be a challenge to learners. This is a much easier question compared to the one in the Sept paper. I like the fact that the name OR formula is asked throughout the paper. Questions 3 and 4 were fair. I expect questions 5.4 and 5.5 to be challenging to many learners. I hope that question 5.4 will not be negatively marked so that learners can earn some marks for correct arguments. 11 of the 18 marks in this question will be hard to get. The table for the Kc value is difficult. Many learners will probably get 3 out 8 for this question.  Luckily the mathematics in the second part will not be too challenging (that is for those who have something to substitute into the expression for Kc). Q6.3 will be easier for those learners where the teacher demonstrated this reaction, but the drawings in the question guide the learner very well. Question 7 requires a lot of reading and one has to refer back to the beginning of the question a few times. The same concept is tested in 7.2.1 and 7.2.5. I know it is supposed to guide the learner, but if you get the conversion of the volume wrong once, you’ll get it wrong twice. Question 7.2.6 will be very difficult for most learners. Question 8 luckily has 5 to 6 easy marks. Although I like the approach, learners will find it difficult. Only learners with an in depth knowledge of electrolysis will not get confused in Q9. Q10 was easy, provided a learner knows the theory."

"Wow! I was not aware that you pasted paper two comments yesterday, I have just read them now. Indeed, September papers were tougher than these ones. I also compared our standard of papers with those of other provinces, as we were revising. Really, our standard of papers is high in the Free State in general and the policy and structure of papers were followed to the letter. I saw in some of provinces there were no long questions on physical properties in organic chemistry and in Newton's laws. But electrostatics in 2D of WC was challenging."

"The paper was fairly balanced with bulk of questions from organic chemistry as expected 45 marks; very direct question mostly level 2 and 3 multiple choice questions 31 % of the paper. The only worrying factor in organic chemistry, which can cause learners marks is the technicality in marking for example question 2.2.1; naming of the compound with so many different substituents, use of hyphens and commas, alphabetical order of substituents, numbering of carbon atoms might pose a challenge to the level one and two learners. I just hope that there will be flexibility in marking question 3.3 for an example; if a learner refers to molecular mass and number of carbon atoms instead of the chain length as required by the examination guideline. Still expect them to do well in question 3 and question 2. Questions 5.4 will be a challenge to most of the level 1 and 2 learners, as they have to interpret the table and compare it with the graph. Organisation of facts and language will pose a problem for that 6 marks as they will have to compare all of the 4 experiments. I still expect the majority of learners to score average in question 5. Question 6 will be very challenging to most of the learners, especially question 6.2. Acids and bases is a new topic and contributed 23 marks, including multiple choice question contributing to 15 %. The challenging questions might be question 7.2.6 but generally expectation is to perform above average. Question 8 is familiar. I expect them to do well with a little challenge in question 9. Fertilizers - very familiar and straight forward question; they must score above average. Generally with the two papers and the effort made I won’t be surprised if we register and improvement in terms of both quality and quantity."

"The Chemistry paper was a repeat of the Physics paper. Well balanced paper. Similar to the Gauteng Preparatory Exam paper. So long as the learners have studied well, they should have obtained good marks in Organic molecules, Acids-Bases, Electrochemistry and Fertilizers. These two papers are proof that if learners work hard throughout the year, it is certain that they will pass at the end of the year."

"Paper 2 for was not difficult either; I think  it was well balanced. Multiple choice was easy, clever learners can obtain total in multiple-choice. Organic chemistry (Q2, 3 & 4) was also easy for learners to collect  marks from. Galvanic & electrolytic cells as well as fertilizers were also easy for learners to collect marks from. Only Q 5, 6 & 7 might be challenging for some average learners, but they were not difficult (the issue of mass as a factor that affect the rate of reaction in Q5 is an area of great concern to me). Can it be taken as a factor that affect reaction rate? I think the question should have referred to smaller & larger pieces in the table. Q7.2.6 should have been asked after 7.2.1. Stoichiometric application  in problems might be a problem to learners in acids bases and Kc. The overall paper was easy; learners can pass paper 2 with only Q1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9 & 10 only."


"The paper is fairly balanced and all topics done were tested, even the fertilizers were asked in a satisfying manner. Organic molecules were not asked in the confusing way. Question 7 (acids- bases) was well asked. I enjoyed the percentage purity calculation. Good start for CAPS."

"The chemistry paper was much easier than the physics paper."

"Learners indicated that the paper was easier than the one in September. Some of the struggling learners said the chemistry was easier than the physics."


"Both papers were well balanced. Average learners can also do well. The brighter ones can score a lot."


"Both papers were fairly easy."


"Chemistry was also a good paper; including Kc calculation were they have to calculate the initial mole."

Feedback from teachers: Friday's physics paper

"The balance of the paper – referring to Bloom's taxonomy – is spot on in my opinion, with about nine more marks allocated to levels 1 and 2 than prescribed. Despite this, the paper has it fair share of challenging situations, which is the correct approach in physics. The level one and two questions really enable learners to pass. If they don't pass, it will once again be an indication that they do not fail because of the challenging questions, but due to their inability to do the basics correct. The following deals with more specific subject related issues:

• Q2.3: Consideration must be given to accept a solution for full marks if the masses are combined to first calculate the acceleration of the system, followed by the calculation of the tension. Still on Q2.3. The last few years a trend crept into memoranda to expect learners to do the following when the magnitude of a vector was asked. If the final answer of the calculation was negative – purely due to the choice of the learner – the mark for the answer was awarded only when the value was once again written down, but this time as a positive number (with its unit obviously). For those learners who chose their directions in such a way to end with a positive number as the final calculation step, the same was not expected and the answer mark was awarded there and then. I am seriously concerned if this is going to continue for the following reasons: This is not fair towards learners because the expectations are not the same for the same marks. At a scientific level, I don't think it is in any case correct to expect somebody to express a scalar answer as a positive number if the calculation ends with a negative value due to the choice of direction. That negative does not imply the answer is less than zero; it merely indicates the direction of the vector. But, if the magnitude of that vector is asked, the final answer of the calculation – even if it is negative – should suffice as the magnitude and no extra responses should be expected from learners. This expectation in the past contributed to have lower marks than necessary and I think learners were not treated fairly and it influenced statistics negatively. We don't achieve anything with such an approach. The best way – if I may – to mark any final calculation's answer is to award the answer, irrespective whether the vector was asked or whether the magnitude of the vector was asked. If a vector was asked, a final mark should then also be allocated for the interpretation, which should include the absolute value of the numerical answer, with a description of the direction. We have used this method in the Free State physics paper of June, and it really gives a consistent, sensible and fair allocation of marks. Please look at other questions where the same argument is valid, e.g. 4.3.
• Q3.3: The maximum height of A is reached after half of the duration of time calculated in Q3.2. This duration of time is also applicable when the distance fallen by B is calculated. Some learners might realise that the distance fallen by B should be the same as the height reached by A, because they have the same acceleration and duration of time. Question: Will such a learner be fully awarded if the distance in the case of B is just written down, instead of finding the answer using a calculation?
• Q4: I guess the landing velocity of the dancer was meant to be vertically downwards. It might not be encountered, but I think dancers can land with non-vertical velocities. Hence, some learners might argue the velocity of 5 m·s^‑1 is at an angel with the horizontal, although the number of degrees is not supplied. That might save the question as they will revert back to think about "vertical" velocity. The question should have perhaps stated "vertical velocity" in order to have a fool proof scenario.
• Q7.3: I have interpreted the reference in the singular to "... the electric field pattern ..." as an indication that the NET electric field's pattern must be drawn. However, the absence of the word NET in the phrasing, in contrast with the phrasing in Q7.7, might influence learners to draw two electric field patterns; one for R and one for S. Are they necessarily wrong?
• Q8.2: This question's circuit is basically the same than that of Q1.8, and for the lesser prepared learner I think it will not be so obvious to analyse the connections involved. In my opinion, it is more fair to use non-similar circuits to avoid losing marks in more than one place due to similar conditions. There is nothing wrong with the questions though and they are quite interesting; I just feel that the similarity could have been avoided."

"Overall it was a fair paper with enough questions where level 1 and 2 learners could achieve marks. The exemplar paper, the September paper and previous exam papers were a good indication of what to expect. I think the more challenging questions for the learners will be questions 2.3, 5.2.2 and 8.2. Questions 3 and 4 were very fair. Question 5.1.3 is not unfamiliar, but since it is multistep some learners will have difficulty answering it. Question 6 and 7 were fair. Question 7.7 is a lot of work for 3 marks. Question 8.1 may still be a little unfamiliar, but the graph makes up for that. Question 9 and 10 were fair. The MCQ's were also fair. It was a good start for CAPS. The only thing I hope people on national level realise, is that it is impossible to finish the syllabus during school time. To finish all the work, every public holiday, every school holiday, many weekends and hours and hours of extra classes must be used. I do not think that is fair to the learners and the hardworking teachers. Why not less topics so that we can study those topics in more depth? Then each topic can be awarded more marks in the paper. That will mean that an easier four mark calculation can be asked on the topic and then a more challenging 6 or 7 mark question. That will give the level 1 and 2 learners a chance to earn more marks doing calculations and not only earning marks on definitions, etc."

"The paper covered all topics taught as per national guidelines. A fairly balanced paper. Most questions asked could be attempted by learners who worked hard enough during the course of the year. A little concern however on WEP questions (work, energy and power). Both questions were on inclined planes. I would have liked a variation such that another angle tested, like on a horizontal plane. We teach that as well, mind you. The red shift question challenged me as well, not much written in books, so questioning proves to be tricky. I hope our learners would do us proud in the subject."

"Learners indicated that the paper was easier than the one in September."

"The paper was well balanced; 14 marks on definitions and principles (learners can collect  marks there). Question 2: Learners might be confused of T2 and the 250 N force. Calculation of distance in 3.3 might give learners a problem. Momentum was easier than I expected. Q5.1.3 might be challenging to weak learners since it is not specific about the energy principles to be used like in the past (work-energy theorem & principle of conservation of mechanical energy). Doppler effect  was easy, but some learners  might be fooled by the 70 Hz higher  measured frequency (problem of interpreting questions). Electrodynamics was also easy for learners to collect marks. In general, with Doppler effect, photoelectric effect, electrodynamics, momentum, electrostatics and definitions on different questions and multiple choice, learners can pass the paper. They can even collect marks on electric circuits. It was not difficult either."

"Paper 1 was not easy. The low level learners will not get the easy marks because they don't know their definitions; also the multiple choice questions were quite challenging. Some even more than one thought."

"The paper was fine, with a very nice question on projectile motion. Learners who did not develop the thinking ability will miss it. Frequency that is 70 Hz higher than that emitted by the siren in Question 6 can be a problem to learners in general, because they do not pay attention to English. The paper was fine; not easy, not difficult as well."

"I expected worse. Each question presented an opportunity to learners to earn marks. The paper has tested whether learners understand their work and practiced it; that is how a paper should be. Hope the chemistry will also be like that."

"I was expecting a difficult paper due to the fact that this is the first CAPS grade 12 paper, but it was moderate."

"I was telling Mr ... about today's paper. It reminded me of the first NCS paper of 2008. In all fairness, this paper was relatively well balanced. If learners fail, it will be because they did not prepare for this paper since the beginning of the year. I was under the impression that today's paper would be as tricky as the June and Sept papers were. This paper is proof that when learners are well prepared - when the teacher uses challenging questions in class - they succeed."

IBP videos on YouTube

ICTISE has made short videos available on YouTube, especially to those schools who are not part of the Internet Broadcast Project. A list of the videos is available here. All the videos are short (plus minus 10 minutes). The majority deals with chemistry, and for those learners with internet connection it could be a great source.

Physics examination

Three days to go ... grade 12 physics paper on Friday the 7th. Best wishes to everybody with the preparations.

Grade 9 common examination in November for Natural Sciences

The circular referred to in the post of 27 October is available here.

Grade 9 common examination in November for Natural Sciences

Apparently there will be a common examination in November. The Examination Section has sent out a circular in this regard. Please refer to it for further detail.

Grade 11 November examination papers

Answer just received. Free State is exempted from writing the common national papers in physical sciences for grade 11.

Teachers must set their own question papers. Remember to follow the prescriptions in the Free State Assessment Guidelines for the final examination (more or less page 21).

Grade 11 November examination papers

The Examination Section has not yet supplied an answer whether schools have to write the National common examination papers in grade 11 or should set their own examination papers, as the original arrangement in the province was since January of this year. As soon as an answer is received, you will be notified.

Grade 10 November examination papers

Teachers must set their own question papers for the final examination of grade 10. Remember that there are two papers and each one is 150 marks for three hours (not two hours as indicated by CAPS). Refer to the Free State Assessment Guidelines for specific detail.

Notes on grade 10 September papers

Most recent addition to this is about Q7.4

Q1.3
Answer should be A.

Q1.10
No correct answer in the memo. Don't mark and deduct the two marks from the total.

Q2.3
It seems as if CAPS does not mention these terms. Some textbooks might mention this. If you have done it with your learners (from the textbook(s) you use), go with the memo. If not, don't mark and deduct the marks from the total.

Q1.10 and 2.3: Remember to convert back to 150 if questions are cancelled.

Q7.4
Memo correction:

Notes on the grade 12 September memoranda

Clarifications about the grade 12 September memoranda will be posted here as soon as feedback is received from the examiners and/or internal moderators. Please email your enquiries to the usual address.

Physics

Q3.2

The word “net” does not appear in the learner's answer. How does this affect the allocation of marks?

Award the marks, because it is in accordance with the definition for a closed system.

Q4.2

The formula for static friction does not appear on the data sheet. Should this question be ignored as a result of this and should the paper be marked out of 147?

If the learner was not advised on this during the writing of the exam paper he/she should get the benefit as suggested.

Q5.1
Correction on memo. The answer should be:
No   -   Gravitational force is not the only force acting on the block/Normal force is also acting on the block.

Q8.2.2

How must marks be awarded to the following solution?

Q9.2.3

The memo calculates period, but frequency is asked.

Typing error in memo. Formula should be f = 1/T.

Chemistry 

Q3.4
Final decision on this question, despite the conflicting info in the paper, is to mark it as discussed via IBP. The question cannot be scratched.

Q4.2.2
No indication is given in the diagram whether the alcohol is the major or minor product.
Decision: Accept the structural formula of the minor product, i.e. propan-1-ol.

Remember that -OH can be accepted instead of -O-H in the structural formula,

Q4.4.1
This question is related to Q4.2.2.
Decision: If the minor product was given in Q4.2.2, then this answer should be 1-chloropropane.

Q7.2.4
Click here to get an alternative option for this answer. We recently experienced problems to download something. If this is the case with this file, try to print it from the "preview" window. While the downloading sometimes do not work, printing still works.

Examination Guidelines for Learners

Teachers were supposed to give this document to learners earlier this year, but here another copy marked New item.

Link to resources

The DCES for Technology distributed the following link to access teaching resources. You are welcome to use it. The link is: http://goo.gl/EK72eL

Last push strategies

Best wishes to everybody involved with all the last push strategies for the remainder of the term. Keep the motivation high! All your efforts are highly appreciated.

Welcome back

Welcome back to all for term three. This is the final stretch for our grade 12 learners. Best wishes to everybody for a very successful term three.

Additions/Alternatives/Corrections to the June 2014 memoranda

Go to this page to find the latest information. Teachers are welcome to send further information. At this stage the additions/alternatives/corrections refer to the following questions:

Grade 11 examination paper

• Q9.1.1

• Q11.3.1

• Q11.4

Grade 12 physics examination paper

• Q3.6

• Q8.2.4

• Q9.3

• Q9.6

Grade 12 chemistry examination paper

• Q2.3.1

• Q4.1.2

• Q4, Q6 and Q9 (minor info about totals)

• Q7.3

• Q7.5

• Q7.6

• Q8.2

• Q8.3.2

• Q8.4.1 to Q8.4.2

• Q9.3.2

Marking June Scripts

Best wishes to all teachers who are busy with the marking of the June scripts.

Does MTN provide free access to Wikipedia?

Is it true that MTN provides free access to Wikipedia from cell phones? I have seen the following website claiming that it is possible since 14 February 2014. If this is the case, it is amazing and thanks to MTN. It will help learners to access Wikipedia from their cell phones when they are looking for information. What about the other cell phone companies?

Teachers and learners, please test this and let me know. You can use the email address at the bottom of the page.

Edukite training postponed

Yesterday Head Office has sent out a message that the Edukite training scheduled for 11 and 12 June is postponed until further notice.

Solar panels on roads?

Read this interesting article about using solar panels instead of tar, cement, etc. on roads.

Maths and Science Marketing

Refer to this Maths and Science website for resources.

Polymers

Read this interesting website of the Southern African Vinyls Association. It gives more information about PVC.

Updated Examination Guidelines for Grade 12

The updated guidelines are available here.

Exemplar papers for 2014

The exemplar papers and memoranda are available on the NDBE website. Click here to go to the website.

Refresher workshop: Work, energy and power as well as chemical equilibrium

Refresher workshops will be available on 12, 13 and 15 May 2014 on these topics. More information and an online form to RSVP are available here.

SAASTE Symposium

A SAASTE Symposium will DV take place on 31 May 2014. The registration form is available here. Closing date for registration is 20 May 2014.

The Answer Series

Contact details to order study guides from The Answer Series are available here.

Edukite training and software to schools

Twenty teachers in Lejweleputswa were selected for training on 16 and 17 April 2014 by Edukite on educational software. The schools involved are: Eldoret, HTS Welkom, JC Motumi, Kutloanong, LA Wesi, Lenakeng, Lephola, Letsete, Mamellang-Thuto, Mamello, Mosala, Naledi-ya-Botshabela, Nanabolela, Oziel Selele, Rainbow, Rearabetswe, Seqhobong, Thotagauta, Tikwana and Unitas. These schools will also receive the software for their computer labs.

Physical science teachers and principals should be on the lookout for an invitation via email during the first week of the second term.

Training/refresher on Acids and Bases

From 7 April 2014 a refresher training will be provided to teachers. See Meetings and Workshops for the dates and venues.