Jason L
Posts:
2
From:
New York City
Registered:
6/21/11
|
|
Re: Algebra 2/Trig Regents
Posted:
Jun 21, 2011 9:49 PM
|
|
I called the state today about question #32. I told the woman that by definition, for a function to be invertible it must be 1-1. Her response was that every function has an inverse, it just that every inverse is not necessarily a function. She said that the inverse could just be a relation. I told her that she was wrong and then quoted her a definition that says that a function is invertible if and only if it for every input there is exactly one corresponding output value. I then said that it was only invertible only if we restrict the domain to all value greater than or equal to zero, or all values less than or equal to zero. It the domain is restricted in this way, the student shouldn't write positive or negative. She said that they can receive full credit if they only stated the positive solution, given that they explained that they restricted the domain to make it 1-1. I asked her why did I have to expect so much from the kids when a bunch of adults who made the exam, didn't make that distinction? She told me that i wasn't going to win the argument. This error is more apparent given that the question uses function notation.
This error in restricting the domain is repeated in question #19.
Though the error was not as clear, I also questioned number 8. It is pretty clear that the answer is number 2, but I wanted to know why they didn't put some sort of scaling. Question number 3 also represents exponential decay. If they kids substitute a value they should see the correct answer, but why should there be any ambiguity. The lady on the phone told me that if there is no scaling, the scaling should assumed to be one. I am probably just splitting hairs, but I take off points when my kids make graphs and do not scale. Why shouldn't we expect the same from the test makers?
|
|
