Grade distributions in VCE General Mathematics are often misunderstood because families try to read them as a simple measure of cohort strength or exam difficulty. In reality, the distributions reflect how the subject is designed to differentiate students through accumulation of small execution errors rather than through a small number of difficult questions.
When the 2023 and 2024 distributions are examined closely, a very consistent picture emerges.
The centre of the distribution is doing most of the work
In both 2023 and 2024, the largest concentration of students sits in the C+ to B range, with B being the median grade for several assessed components.
In 2023:
- the median for Exam 1 was B
- the median for Exam 2 was C+
- the overall distribution shows the highest percentages clustered tightly between C+, B, and B+
This is not an accident. It reflects the fact that most students understand the majority of the content and can access most questions. What separates grades is not whether students can attempt questions, but how consistently they execute them.
Students in this central band are typically losing marks in the same ways:
- minor arithmetic slips
- incorrect rounding
- incomplete responses on one- and two-mark questions
- CAS outputs copied without interpretation
None of these errors indicate conceptual failure. They indicate lapses in control.
Why the jump from B to A is statistically difficult
One of the most important features of the distributions is how sharply the percentage drops as grades move from B+ to A and A+.
In the 2023 Exam 1 distribution:
- approximately 16–17% of students achieved a B
- around 14–15% achieved B+
- only 10–11% reached an A
- just over 10% reached A+
That narrowing at the top is critical. It shows that the exam is not selecting a large group of “top” students. It is selecting a small group of students who made very few mistakes across a long paper.
At this level, students are not distinguished by whether they can answer difficult questions. They are distinguished by whether they avoided losing marks on easy ones.
The lower tail reflects compounding error, not inability
At the lower end of the distribution, the number of students receiving UG, E, or E+ is very small relative to total enrolments.
For example, in 2023 Exam 1:
- fewer than 2% of students fell into the UG or E categories combined
This tells us something important. The vast majority of students can access the exam. Very few are completely unable to engage with it.
Students in the lower tail are usually experiencing compounding breakdown, not isolated misunderstanding. Examiner’s Reports consistently describe patterns such as:
- misreading multiple questions
- failing to use the CAS effectively
- abandoning checking altogether under time pressure
Once these patterns begin, marks fall away quickly because there is little partial credit available.
Why Exam 2 spreads students more than Exam 1
The 2023 data shows a wider spread in Exam 2 than in Exam 1, with a lower median and a larger proportion of students sitting below B.
This is expected. Exam 2:
- is longer
- places heavier demands on interpretation
- requires students to manage multiple contexts and constraints
- increases fatigue-related errors
The distribution confirms that Exam 2 is where execution discipline matters most. Students who rely on speed or pattern recognition tend to lose control late in the paper.
What the distributions say about SAC performance
The distributions strongly support what teachers see every year. SAC performance is not a reliable predictor of exam outcomes unless SACs have been run under exam-like conditions.
Many students who sit in the B and B+ range in the exam have strong SAC results. Their drop is not due to lack of knowledge. It is due to:
- unfamiliar question phrasing
- strict marking
- absence of scaffolding
- unforgiving treatment of rounding and form
The distributions show that the exam is doing exactly what it is designed to do. It is ranking students based on reliability under constraint.
Why General Mathematics feels harsher than expected
When families compare General Mathematics to subjects with extended responses, the grade distributions can feel confronting. There is less opportunity to recover marks through explanation or method.
General Mathematics allocates marks to outcomes. If the outcome is incorrect, the mark is not awarded, regardless of reasoning.
The distributions reflect this. They are compressed because the exam rewards consistency rather than brilliance.
What this means for preparation
The distributions make one thing clear. Students do not need to learn harder mathematics to improve their outcomes.
They need to:
- protect one- and two-mark questions
- control rounding precisely
- read constraints carefully
- check CAS outputs against context
- maintain concentration across the full paper
Small improvements here move students up entire grade bands because the distribution is so tightly packed.
An ATAR STAR perspective
ATAR STAR uses grade distribution data to guide preparation priorities, not to label students.
For students sitting in the middle of the distribution, modest improvements in execution often translate into significant score gains. For high-performing students, precision is what protects their position at the top.
The 2023 and 2024 General Mathematics grade distributions do not show a difficult subject. They show a subject that rewards control.
Understanding that distinction is what turns effort into results.