0625 · Cambridge IGCSE
0625/63
Alternative to Practical
Physics · June 2024 · Variant 3
Relative difficulty
Analysis source: Cambridge Assessment International Education
Analysis aligned to the official syllabus and assessment design.
3.2 / 5
160
180 min
Motion and Forces
Cohort performance
Session statistics from official examination reports
Total marks
160
Duration
180 min
Session difficulty
3.2 / 5
Key examiner messages
Top priorities from the principal examiner before you revise
The May/June 2024 series was rated as moderate (3 out of 5 stars).
While standard calculation items were highly accessible, Paper 4 (Extended Theory) featured demanding qualitative tasks requiring rigorous, precise physics definitions.
Weaker candidates often relied on vague terminology or confused fundamental terms, such as misinterpreting extension for total length in spring experiments or failing to differentiate the behaviors of a.c.
Question difficulty map
How candidates performed on each question in this series
No data available in official reports
Assessment objectives
Skill and AO weighting from official examiner commentary
Skill weighting
Shows the skill mix this paper tested most heavily.
Mathematical & Calculation
Weight: 6100%Scientific
Weight: 583%Recall
Weight: 467%Experimental
Weight: 350%Descriptive Explanation
Weight: 233%
Method marks watchlist
Where working, steps, or method marks were commonly lost
No data available in official reports
Recurring mistakes across years
Themes examiners flag in multiple recent sessions for this subject
No data available in official reports
Question choice intelligence
Mean scores and popularity for optional questions (HKDSE electives)
No data available in official reports
Level exemplars
What candidate scripts at each grade level looked like
No data available in official reports
Grade & admission context
How marks relate to grade thresholds and entry standards
Report type
Cambridge Principal Examiner Report — component performance and international standards
Level A*
Approx. 71% of maximum mark
Level A
Approx. 61% of maximum mark
Level B
Approx. 51% of maximum mark
Level C
Approx. 41% of maximum mark
Level D
Approx. 35% of maximum mark
Level E
Approx. 29% of maximum mark
Deep insights
What top candidates did
Techniques and approaches examiners rewarded in this series
No data available in official reports
Command word playbook
How to match each command word to the expected response style
Show formula, substitution, and unit; method marks need visible working.
Match the expected response style for “State” questions.
Give reasons and link mechanism to outcome; each point needs a because/so chain.
State features in sequence or list observable properties — do not explain causes unless asked.
Match the expected response style for “Determine” questions.
Match the expected response style for “Define” questions.
Apply knowledge to an unfamiliar context; concise, practical points score best.
Time traps
Sections where candidates spent disproportionate time relative to marks
Min per mark: 1.5
Min per mark: 1.1
Syllabus traceability
Topics linked to questions and mark weighting in this session
Motion
16 marks this session
Light
12 marks this session
Electric circuits
11 marks this session
MCQ trap analytics
Commonly chosen wrong options from examiner commentary
No data available in official reports
Topic heatmap across years
Mark concentration by topic and exam year for this subject
Mark intensity
Motion
Electric circuits
Forces
Electromagnetic effects
Light
Electrical quantities
Stars and the Universe
Radioactivity
Paper comparison
Marks and duration breakdown across papers in this session
Paper 23 Multiple Choice (Extended):
Paper 43 Theory (Extended):
Paper 63 Alternative to Practical:
Marks you can still earn
Where valid approaches outside the mark scheme may still gain credit
No data available in official reports
Practise what examiners flagged
Target weak topics from this report inside the Revui app
Motion
16 marks this session
Practise in RevuiLight
12 marks this session
Practise in RevuiElectric circuits
11 marks this session
Practise in RevuiSelf-diagnostic checklist
Key actions before you sit this paper — copy and tick off as you revise
- 1Message
The May/June 2024 series was rated as moderate (3 out of 5 stars).
- 2Message
While standard calculation items were highly accessible, Paper 4 (Extended Theory) featured demanding qualitative tasks requiring rigorous, precise physics definitions.
- 3Message
Weaker candidates often relied on vague terminology or confused fundamental terms, such as misinterpreting extension for total length in spring experiments or failing to differentiate the behaviors of a.c.
Teacher briefing pack
One-page session summary for tutors and classroom review
June 2024 2024
Physics
The May/June 2024 series was rated as moderate (3 out of 5 stars). While standard calculation items were highly accessible, Paper 4 (Extended Theory) featured demanding qualitative tasks requiring rigorous, precise physics definitions. Weaker candidates often relied on vague term
The May/June 2024 series was rated as moderate (3 out of 5 stars).
While standard calculation items were highly accessible, Paper 4 (Extended Theory) featured demanding qualitative tasks requiring rigorous, precise physics definitions.
Weaker candidates often relied on vague terminology or confused fundamental terms, such as misinterpreting extension for total length in spring experiments or failing to differentiate the behaviors of a.c.
- Total marks
- 160
- Duration
- 180 min
- Session difficulty
- 3.2 / 5
Session analysis
The May/June 2024 series was rated as moderate (3 out of 5 stars). While standard calculation items were highly accessible, Paper 4 (Extended Theory) featured demanding qualitative tasks requiring rigorous, precise physics definitions. Weaker candidates often relied on vague terminology or confused fundamental terms, such as misinterpreting extension for total length in spring experiments or failing to differentiate the behaviors of a.c. and d.c. voltages.
Updated Jun 13, 2026
Paper breakdown
Paper 23 Multiple Choice (Extended):
Paper 43 Theory (Extended):
Paper 63 Alternative to Practical:
Top chapters
Exam structure insights
Marks by chapter
See where the marks were concentrated so revision time goes to the highest-value topics.
Mark accessibility
Estimate which marks were basic, mid-level, or high-difficulty.
75% within easy or medium reach
Command word frequency
Spot common command words so answers match the expected response style.
Question type mix
Compare the mark share of each paper section and question type.
Theory Structured
80·11·50%
Multiple Choice
40·40·25%
Practical Structured
40·4·25%
Study ROI
Bigger bubbles recur more often; higher bubbles carry more marks, helping you rank revision priorities.
Difficulty trend
Compare difficulty across recent years.
Time vs marks
Compare marks with suggested time allocation to plan exam pacing.
Paper 2 Multiple Ch
0.89 m/minPaper 6 Alternative
0.67 m/minTotal marks
80
Total time
105 min
Avg pace
0.76
Cumulative marks ladder
The line is your running mark total question by question; dashed lines are the estimated grade cut-offs. See which question the line crosses your target grade at, so you know how far you must answer cleanly and which questions decide a band.
Next-year prediction
Topics worth watching next year, with the reason shown directly below each bar.
AC Generators & Magnetic Fields
88%88%
Total Internal Reflection & Critical Angle
82%82%
Momentum, Collision, and Impulse
79%79%
Overall Difficulty Verdict
The May/June 2024 series was rated as moderate (3 out of 5 stars). While standard calculation items were highly accessible, Paper 4 (Extended Theory) featured demanding qualitative tasks requiring rigorous, precise physics definitions. Weaker candidates often relied on vague terminology or confused fundamental terms, such as misinterpreting extension for total length in spring experiments or failing to differentiate the behaviors of a.c. and d.c. voltages.
Examiner notes & key calculations
- Unit Omissions and Conversions: A persistent loss of marks occurred when converting prefixes (such as kHz \text{kHz} kHz to Hz \text{Hz} Hz) or when failing to convert time units from minutes to seconds in energy transfer equations.
- Two-way Echo Problems: In sound echo and light travel questions, candidates frequently forgot to halve the total time or double the distance.
- Vague Explanations: Utilizing pronouns like "it" or "they" without indicating the exact physical quantity (e.g., density or current) often led to zero marks in comparison questions.
Exam tips
Paper format
- Duration
- 1h
- Total marks
- 40
Analysis is paraphrased for study purposes. Always verify against the official examiner report and mark scheme.