This quest ion was reported to be attempted by majority of the candidates. Their performance was said to be better in part (a) than it was in part (b) where their performance was said to be poor.
In part (a), majority of the candidates who attempted this question were reported to have simplified the numerator thus:    of      =    =  . Simplifying the denominator gave    =   = .  Dividing we have,   =    =  =  .
Majority of the candidates reportedly answered the question correctly however; some candidates were reported not to invert the fraction on the right when converting from division to multiplication. Others left their final answers as improper  fractions.

325
In part (b), it was reported that candidates’ performance was poor. Majority of them did not apply the rules of logarithms correctly. Others showed inability to read from the anti-logarithm tables correctly. Candidates were expected to show that since  = , then log = . i.e.  =  or  = 2   = . Taking the antilog of both sides gave  = 0.2229.