I feel the same.

I too was very disappointed in the results.  I felt that the students were prepared for the exam yet the diploma marks were overall low.  I have reflected on this and I am not sure how to better prepare them for tricky questions that are testing their reading comprehension before their math abilities.

We have not received our results yet...

Where did you get the diploma results?

The results for my class were very poor as well. I knew I should have some students do very well and others not as much, but it was much lower than expected.

I just got mine this morning. I was also very shocked to see how a few of my students faired. I felt that the exam was fairly difficult at times. Several of the questions had some trick components. I was also not impressed to see the interval notation as part of multiple questions, given that it is not explicitly outlined as part of the curriculum. 

I have NOT seen my results yet. But after reading all the comments, I think we should step back and think about the Math 30-1 Course. The intention is that it is a course/stream students take that has significant algebraic depth in preparation of Calculus. Keep that in mind. Picking up on some themes of earlier comments, the questions should be tough and the test challenging, the questions should have depth, the questions should use notations as stated in the curriculum, the students should not expect to breeze through. The questions, all of them are from the program studies, acceptable and SE. Problems they face will not always be perfect, the way we expect them. The students should be flexible and be able to apply 'and solve problems that involve..." , and we as educators and colleagues should also be flexible and appreciative of the efforts of our colleagues that wrote these questions and that were field tested. Sure, I would have preferred if some of the questions were NOT asked (my students sure complained and said some weren't fair), because my students didn't ever encounter that style, but the questions were on topic, from curriculum, and asked for a depth of understanding that the course is supposed to provoke.

I have to provide that experience as well in my classroom, and this past diploma exam helped me realize the expectations placed on my teaching practice to provide a better depth and breadth!

This brings up the age old problem "Is the tail wagging the dog or vice versa?" 

A problem I find is that it is impossible (or nearly impossible) to determine if the students have deep understanding with a multiple choice exam.  Yes this exam is the gatekeeper for most universities, but I feel as this notion is changing.  Already, University of Sask is looking at the class mark if it higher than the diploma mark.  Next, Red Deer College is going to take into account the teacher's mark more than the diploma when determining entrance requirements.  I think there are more pockets of this, and the pockets are growing.

Diane, but please don't disparage any great teaching due to low results, as I feel that our job as math teachers are to inspire students to learn the next level, not simply score a higher mark on the test.  

Seth Godin said "As soon as we associate reading with a test, we've missed the point" and I feel as this should be brought to math as well.  I personally have never put faith in the results of my students, as my faith in my teaching ability comes from their answers when I ask "Have I made you want to learn more?".

It breaks my heart when I hear of teachers taking away valuable time, which could have been spent on creativity and innovation, to teach test taking skills.  No matter what the results, focus on the former.  

Lastly, I have removed all forms of test prep from my math courses, and if you are interested here is the link http://realteachingmeansreallearning.blogspot.ca/2013/08/henry-ford-and-education.html

It is stated in Math 10C that:

It is essential that students understand and are able to use set builder notation and interval notation effectively since these will be the primary ways of describing sets of numbers in future courses...

Which means one could equally complain about the test having set builder notation... instead of interval.

It is stated in Math 30-1 again restates that students should understand both...

It is similar to knowing both ways of writing a combination. It is a note!, not within the 'outcome'.

First I would like to say that I am in the same boat as many of the other teachers who have contributed to this discussion with respect to the disappointment in how the students did on the Exam. However, as I read the comments here I can't help but think that there is a bigger issue here than things like the inclusion of something like Interval Notation, as the discrepancy I saw in the marks was more than 5%. If many of you are seeing as wide a discrepancy as I am understanding, then what concerns me for the future is that there is obviously something that Alberta Education sees as is important to be assessed with respect to Math 30-1, and that we as teachers are either not aware of, or for some reason are not understanding, and unless this is clarified and remedied, this problem is not going to go away. With the impending curriculum changes in 2016, where we will be moving even further away from the approach many of us saw as students and as beginning teachers, I worry about what can be done to close this gap in understanding so that future classes do not have the same struggles our classes had this year. I have to admit at this time I do not have many answers, and I am not sure who does.

Alberta Education will be coming to Calgary on April 28th, 2014 to talk about the 30-1 (and 30-2) Diploma.  More information is attached and registration can be found at http://www.crcpd.ab.ca/programs/category/15#programs.  Most of the comments/concerns in this thread has been given to them and they will look to address them during their presentation (comments/concerns were kept anonymous).