Qualifications Scotland (SQA) Advanced Higher Physics Past Papers 2026

Structured + extended-response

Duration: 3 hours

Researched investigation

Duration: Coursework — externally assessed

Uncertainty propagation and experimental analysis

The single most consistently underperforming area across all three diets. In 2023, candidates could not calculate the absolute uncertainty in μ₀. In 2024, candidates found the random uncertainty but could not convert it to the absolute uncertainty in the period. In 2025, candidates failed to account for the power-of-three relationship in the Young's modulus formula when propagating uncertainty. Few candidates addressed all three uncertainty types (scale reading, random, calibration) successfully.

Question Paper, Project

Rotational dynamics — unbalanced torque, angular momentum conservation, and components of forces

In 2023, few candidates could state that the unbalanced torque decreases and justify this in terms of the component of force. In 2025, only some candidates could state the principle of conservation of angular momentum. In 2024, circular motion force diagram questions (labelling forces on an object in circular motion) were poorly executed with arrows drawn far from the object.

Question Paper

Gravitation — escape velocity, gravitational potential energy, and orbital mechanics

In 2024, few candidates could explain why the DART spacecraft impact must occur far from Earth — candidates incorrectly assumed debris or Earth's field would change the asteroid's path rather than explaining the conservation of momentum and the role of distance. In 2025, few candidates could explain why the spacecraft speed should exceed escape velocity in terms of leaving the gravitational field entirely.

Question Paper

Special and general relativity — time dilation, GPS satellite corrections, Schwarzschild radius

In 2024, candidates answered the GPS clock adjustment question but often gave the wrong direction of adjustment. Identifying which clock runs slower (on the satellite vs on Earth) was done by only some candidates. In 2025, few candidates could state that 'the rate at which time passes increases' — many incorrectly said time 'runs faster' which does not address the rate.

Question Paper

Quantum physics — wave-particle duality, Compton shift, and photon momentum

In 2024, only some candidates could state experimental evidence for wave-like behaviour — many gave the name of the experiment rather than what the evidence showed. In 2025, few candidates could explain the implication of 'the momentum of a photon', and only some candidates could name the ultraviolet catastrophe. The Compton shift direction question required candidates to identify the direction of change of the measurements, which most omitted.

Question Paper

Electromagnetism — magnetic field sketching, ferromagnetism, and capacitive reactance definitions

In 2024, few candidates could sketch the magnetic field produced by a solenoid with attention to the uniform parallel field inside. Few could define 'ferromagnetism' or 'capacitive reactance'. In 2025, candidates frequently drew electric field lines without a ruler, with lines crossing or not perpendicular to the conductor surface.

Question Paper

AC circuits and inductors — why current doesn't reach maximum immediately, reactance, and time constants

In 2025, few candidates could explain why the current in an inductor does not immediately reach its maximum value — the required explanation is that the changing current creates a changing magnetic field that opposes the change (back EMF). In 2023, few candidates could explain the back EMF mechanism or why it was large enough to flash the neon lamp. Capacitive reactance definitions were poorly answered in 2024.

Question Paper

Project methodology — procedures, raw data inclusion, and depth of evaluation

Across 2024 and 2025, candidates lost marks in Procedures by not including labelled diagrams, not using past-tense passive voice, and not stating the range and interval of the independent variable. In Results, candidates omitted raw data (e.g. time for 20 oscillations, original wire length) and produced graphs without minor gridlines. In Discussion, evaluations were too superficial — 'the equipment was old' or 'the experiment worked well' — instead of identifying the dominant uncertainty source with a specific improvement strategy.

Project