Back to pathway

Timed constructed-response mock · controlled beta

Senior secondary — general complete timed mock assessment — Österreich

180 minutes · 120 marks. Questions require evidence, reasoning and application; answers cannot be identified by guessing a short option.

11 tasks use shared beta scenarios and need subject-specific authoring and academic review.

Task 1: English language and literature

10 marks

A school, community or employer must make a decision involving english language and literature, but the information provided is incomplete and two stakeholders disagree about the strongest conclusion.

Evidence

  • Source A provides a dated quantitative claim but does not explain its sampling method.
  • Source B provides a detailed professional account but may reflect one organisation’s interests.
  • A new constraint changes one cost, risk or assumption by 10 percent.

Write a reasoned response that selects and applies an appropriate method, uses the evidence precisely, addresses the strongest alternative and reaches a conditional recommendation.

Challenge: State what additional evidence could overturn your conclusion and how you would verify it.

Marking criteria and answer guide
  • Method is relevant and explained
  • Evidence is interpreted rather than copied
  • Calculations, terminology or citations are accurate
  • Alternative and uncertainty are addressed
  • Conclusion follows from the analysis
  1. Define the decision and constraints
  2. Evaluate the reliability and relevance of each source
  3. Apply the discipline-specific method step by step
  4. Compare at least two defensible interpretations
  5. Give a checked conclusion with limitations and next evidence

Task 2: Mathematics

10 marks

A simulated object's height above the ground is modelled by h(t) = −5t² + 20t + 1.5 metres, where t is seconds after release. The model is valid only until the object first reaches the ground.

Evidence

  • The coefficient of t² is −5, so the graph opens downward.
  • The starting height is 1.5 m.
  • A learner reports the maximum at t = 4 s because 20 ÷ 5 = 4, then uses a negative root as the landing time.

Calculate the time and height of the maximum and the positive time when the model predicts ground contact. Show a quadratic method, units and a substitution check. State the physical domain of the model.

Challenge: Identify both errors in the learner's answer and one assumption that could make the real flight differ from the model.

Marking criteria and answer guide
  • 2 marks: vertex time t = −b/(2a) = 2 s
  • 2 marks: maximum height h(2) = 21.5 m
  • 3 marks: solves h(t) = 0 and selects positive root approximately 4.07 s
  • 1 mark: substitution or independent check with coherent units
  • 2 marks: corrects the vertex and root errors and states 0 ≤ t ≤ about 4.07 s plus a model limitation
  1. For a = −5 and b = 20, vertex time = −20/(2 × −5) = 2 s.
  2. h(2) = −5(2²) + 20(2) + 1.5 = 21.5 m.
  3. Ground contact solves −5t² + 20t + 1.5 = 0. Multiplying by −1 gives 5t² − 20t − 1.5 = 0, so t = (20 ± √430)/10.
  4. The positive root is about 4.07 s; the negative root is outside the physical domain. Substitution gives a height close to zero, allowing for rounding.
  5. The model applies from t = 0 until first contact. The maximum is at 2 s, not 4 s; air resistance or an inaccurate acceleration assumption could change the observed height.

Task 3: Further mathematics

10 marks

A school, community or employer must make a decision involving further mathematics, but the information provided is incomplete and two stakeholders disagree about the strongest conclusion.

Evidence

  • Source A provides a dated quantitative claim but does not explain its sampling method.
  • Source B provides a detailed professional account but may reflect one organisation’s interests.
  • A new constraint changes one cost, risk or assumption by 16 percent.

Write a reasoned response that selects and applies an appropriate method, uses the evidence precisely, addresses the strongest alternative and reaches a conditional recommendation.

Challenge: State what additional evidence could overturn your conclusion and how you would verify it.

Marking criteria and answer guide
  • Method is relevant and explained
  • Evidence is interpreted rather than copied
  • Calculations, terminology or citations are accurate
  • Alternative and uncertainty are addressed
  • Conclusion follows from the analysis
  1. Define the decision and constraints
  2. Evaluate the reliability and relevance of each source
  3. Apply the discipline-specific method step by step
  4. Compare at least two defensible interpretations
  5. Give a checked conclusion with limitations and next evidence

Task 4: Physics

10 marks

A school, community or employer must make a decision involving physics, but the information provided is incomplete and two stakeholders disagree about the strongest conclusion.

Evidence

  • Source A provides a dated quantitative claim but does not explain its sampling method.
  • Source B provides a detailed professional account but may reflect one organisation’s interests.
  • A new constraint changes one cost, risk or assumption by 19 percent.

Write a reasoned response that selects and applies an appropriate method, uses the evidence precisely, addresses the strongest alternative and reaches a conditional recommendation.

Challenge: State what additional evidence could overturn your conclusion and how you would verify it.

Marking criteria and answer guide
  • Method is relevant and explained
  • Evidence is interpreted rather than copied
  • Calculations, terminology or citations are accurate
  • Alternative and uncertainty are addressed
  • Conclusion follows from the analysis
  1. Define the decision and constraints
  2. Evaluate the reliability and relevance of each source
  3. Apply the discipline-specific method step by step
  4. Compare at least two defensible interpretations
  5. Give a checked conclusion with limitations and next evidence

Task 5: Chemistry

10 marks

A school, community or employer must make a decision involving chemistry, but the information provided is incomplete and two stakeholders disagree about the strongest conclusion.

Evidence

  • Source A provides a dated quantitative claim but does not explain its sampling method.
  • Source B provides a detailed professional account but may reflect one organisation’s interests.
  • A new constraint changes one cost, risk or assumption by 22 percent.

Write a reasoned response that selects and applies an appropriate method, uses the evidence precisely, addresses the strongest alternative and reaches a conditional recommendation.

Challenge: State what additional evidence could overturn your conclusion and how you would verify it.

Marking criteria and answer guide
  • Method is relevant and explained
  • Evidence is interpreted rather than copied
  • Calculations, terminology or citations are accurate
  • Alternative and uncertainty are addressed
  • Conclusion follows from the analysis
  1. Define the decision and constraints
  2. Evaluate the reliability and relevance of each source
  3. Apply the discipline-specific method step by step
  4. Compare at least two defensible interpretations
  5. Give a checked conclusion with limitations and next evidence

Task 6: Biology

10 marks

A school, community or employer must make a decision involving biology, but the information provided is incomplete and two stakeholders disagree about the strongest conclusion.

Evidence

  • Source A provides a dated quantitative claim but does not explain its sampling method.
  • Source B provides a detailed professional account but may reflect one organisation’s interests.
  • A new constraint changes one cost, risk or assumption by 25 percent.

Write a reasoned response that selects and applies an appropriate method, uses the evidence precisely, addresses the strongest alternative and reaches a conditional recommendation.

Challenge: State what additional evidence could overturn your conclusion and how you would verify it.

Marking criteria and answer guide
  • Method is relevant and explained
  • Evidence is interpreted rather than copied
  • Calculations, terminology or citations are accurate
  • Alternative and uncertainty are addressed
  • Conclusion follows from the analysis
  1. Define the decision and constraints
  2. Evaluate the reliability and relevance of each source
  3. Apply the discipline-specific method step by step
  4. Compare at least two defensible interpretations
  5. Give a checked conclusion with limitations and next evidence

Task 7: History

10 marks

A school, community or employer must make a decision involving history, but the information provided is incomplete and two stakeholders disagree about the strongest conclusion.

Evidence

  • Source A provides a dated quantitative claim but does not explain its sampling method.
  • Source B provides a detailed professional account but may reflect one organisation’s interests.
  • A new constraint changes one cost, risk or assumption by 28 percent.

Write a reasoned response that selects and applies an appropriate method, uses the evidence precisely, addresses the strongest alternative and reaches a conditional recommendation.

Challenge: State what additional evidence could overturn your conclusion and how you would verify it.

Marking criteria and answer guide
  • Method is relevant and explained
  • Evidence is interpreted rather than copied
  • Calculations, terminology or citations are accurate
  • Alternative and uncertainty are addressed
  • Conclusion follows from the analysis
  1. Define the decision and constraints
  2. Evaluate the reliability and relevance of each source
  3. Apply the discipline-specific method step by step
  4. Compare at least two defensible interpretations
  5. Give a checked conclusion with limitations and next evidence

Task 8: Geography

10 marks

A school, community or employer must make a decision involving geography, but the information provided is incomplete and two stakeholders disagree about the strongest conclusion.

Evidence

  • Source A provides a dated quantitative claim but does not explain its sampling method.
  • Source B provides a detailed professional account but may reflect one organisation’s interests.
  • A new constraint changes one cost, risk or assumption by 31 percent.

Write a reasoned response that selects and applies an appropriate method, uses the evidence precisely, addresses the strongest alternative and reaches a conditional recommendation.

Challenge: State what additional evidence could overturn your conclusion and how you would verify it.

Marking criteria and answer guide
  • Method is relevant and explained
  • Evidence is interpreted rather than copied
  • Calculations, terminology or citations are accurate
  • Alternative and uncertainty are addressed
  • Conclusion follows from the analysis
  1. Define the decision and constraints
  2. Evaluate the reliability and relevance of each source
  3. Apply the discipline-specific method step by step
  4. Compare at least two defensible interpretations
  5. Give a checked conclusion with limitations and next evidence

Task 9: Economics

10 marks

A school, community or employer must make a decision involving economics, but the information provided is incomplete and two stakeholders disagree about the strongest conclusion.

Evidence

  • Source A provides a dated quantitative claim but does not explain its sampling method.
  • Source B provides a detailed professional account but may reflect one organisation’s interests.
  • A new constraint changes one cost, risk or assumption by 34 percent.

Write a reasoned response that selects and applies an appropriate method, uses the evidence precisely, addresses the strongest alternative and reaches a conditional recommendation.

Challenge: State what additional evidence could overturn your conclusion and how you would verify it.

Marking criteria and answer guide
  • Method is relevant and explained
  • Evidence is interpreted rather than copied
  • Calculations, terminology or citations are accurate
  • Alternative and uncertainty are addressed
  • Conclusion follows from the analysis
  1. Define the decision and constraints
  2. Evaluate the reliability and relevance of each source
  3. Apply the discipline-specific method step by step
  4. Compare at least two defensible interpretations
  5. Give a checked conclusion with limitations and next evidence

Task 10: Government and civic studies

10 marks

A school, community or employer must make a decision involving government and civic studies, but the information provided is incomplete and two stakeholders disagree about the strongest conclusion.

Evidence

  • Source A provides a dated quantitative claim but does not explain its sampling method.
  • Source B provides a detailed professional account but may reflect one organisation’s interests.
  • A new constraint changes one cost, risk or assumption by 37 percent.

Write a reasoned response that selects and applies an appropriate method, uses the evidence precisely, addresses the strongest alternative and reaches a conditional recommendation.

Challenge: State what additional evidence could overturn your conclusion and how you would verify it.

Marking criteria and answer guide
  • Method is relevant and explained
  • Evidence is interpreted rather than copied
  • Calculations, terminology or citations are accurate
  • Alternative and uncertainty are addressed
  • Conclusion follows from the analysis
  1. Define the decision and constraints
  2. Evaluate the reliability and relevance of each source
  3. Apply the discipline-specific method step by step
  4. Compare at least two defensible interpretations
  5. Give a checked conclusion with limitations and next evidence

Task 11: Computer science

10 marks

A school, community or employer must make a decision involving computer science, but the information provided is incomplete and two stakeholders disagree about the strongest conclusion.

Evidence

  • Source A provides a dated quantitative claim but does not explain its sampling method.
  • Source B provides a detailed professional account but may reflect one organisation’s interests.
  • A new constraint changes one cost, risk or assumption by 40 percent.

Write a reasoned response that selects and applies an appropriate method, uses the evidence precisely, addresses the strongest alternative and reaches a conditional recommendation.

Challenge: State what additional evidence could overturn your conclusion and how you would verify it.

Marking criteria and answer guide
  • Method is relevant and explained
  • Evidence is interpreted rather than copied
  • Calculations, terminology or citations are accurate
  • Alternative and uncertainty are addressed
  • Conclusion follows from the analysis
  1. Define the decision and constraints
  2. Evaluate the reliability and relevance of each source
  3. Apply the discipline-specific method step by step
  4. Compare at least two defensible interpretations
  5. Give a checked conclusion with limitations and next evidence

Task 12: Research and study skills

10 marks

A school, community or employer must make a decision involving research and study skills, but the information provided is incomplete and two stakeholders disagree about the strongest conclusion.

Evidence

  • Source A provides a dated quantitative claim but does not explain its sampling method.
  • Source B provides a detailed professional account but may reflect one organisation’s interests.
  • A new constraint changes one cost, risk or assumption by 43 percent.

Write a reasoned response that selects and applies an appropriate method, uses the evidence precisely, addresses the strongest alternative and reaches a conditional recommendation.

Challenge: State what additional evidence could overturn your conclusion and how you would verify it.

Marking criteria and answer guide
  • Method is relevant and explained
  • Evidence is interpreted rather than copied
  • Calculations, terminology or citations are accurate
  • Alternative and uncertainty are addressed
  • Conclusion follows from the analysis
  1. Define the decision and constraints
  2. Evaluate the reliability and relevance of each source
  3. Apply the discipline-specific method step by step
  4. Compare at least two defensible interpretations
  5. Give a checked conclusion with limitations and next evidence