‘Had the question stated that the diagrams accurately describe the wall that will cover the door opening, then the question would have been complete.’ File picture: Independent Newspapers
It should be noted that the purpose of the two diagrams in the ‘brick wall’ question is to show the pattern of the bricks, and one should not read more than this into it. The examiner should therefore not misleadingly assume that more information is provided.
No two diagrams state how the bricks should be packed to close the garage door openings, and this should not simply be assumed.
The caption above one of the diagrams states, “Incomplete diagram showing the pattern of how the bricks should be laid, with the first two rows completed.” Hence, the diagrams were only included to indicate HOW the bricks should be laid, and nothing more.
Further, the first diagram displays the brick patterns and essentially depicts that the bricks on successive layers should overlap the bottom ones by half.
The second diagram clarifies two aspects: 1) that the second wall has the same pattern as the first wall, and 2) that a brick that appears to be half a brick in the first diagram, is a full brick placed sideways across both walls. This implies that the wall will not contain a single half brick, hence the statement, i.e. “Half bricks are thrown away (not re-used)” is non-sensical. This statement could confuse learners, and it should not have been included in the question.
Nowhere in any of the diagrams is it explicitly stated that the number of bricks in a row, and the number of layers of bricks depicted will close the garage door opening completely. This should not be assumed. Hence, to infer that 9 and a half bricks are required to close the width of the garage door opening and that 20 bricks are required to close the height of the door opening is wishful thinking.
Had the question stated that the diagrams accurately describe the wall that will cover the door opening, then the question would have been complete. In the absence of this information, the dimensions of a brick and the thickness of the mortar between successive layers and between adjacent bricks would have been required to solve this problem.
The DBE’s remark that this question does not require the calculation of the individual number of bricks is absurd. To calculate the number of palates you do need this number, period.
In conclusion, the examiner should not expect learners to use information that is not provided by the paper.
I rest my case.
* Adiel Ismail, Mountview.
** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media.
Do you have something on your mind; or want to comment on the big stories of the day? We would love to hear from you. Please send your letters to arglet@inl.co.za.
All letters to be considered for publication, must contain full names, addresses and contact details (not for publication)
Related Topics: