Connect with like-minded professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'Science' started by annaj_82, Jan 18, 2012.
Anyone got an opinion on this? After the B1 exam I was hopeful for a fairly nice paper...
pretty disgusted with the question on electrolysis of aluminum when the spec spefically says they don't need to know the process of electrolysis!
My pupils were struggling to finish within the hour as well.
I thought it was a hard paper, in all honesty.
myorangecrush - was that on the foundation paper? I've only seen the higher paper.
Really disappointed with todays C1 exam. My pupils ran out of time and I don't think the paper was a true reflection of their development of knowledge and understanding of chemistry over the past term. It's January, year 10 - why are they comparing and contrasting full balanced symbol equations in C1??? Also, they are not studying the politics of chemistry, but, chemistry. I am upset. My pupils are salt of the earth/working class types who really think they are doing something special by studying triple award; THEY ARE! They have worked so so hard. I feel the exam has let them down (it's the first time I have complained about any exam, and the first time I have seen a pupil in tears after a chemistry exam)
Unhappy atoms today I'm afraid I'm worried they will be put off working so hard. I know we are all in the same boat which brings some reassurance.
What are others' thoughts on this?
No, it was on the higher. Big picture of aluminium electrolysis with a question underneath of where do the aluminium ions travel - or words to that effect.
MIne really struggled on the bauxite/aluminium oxide percentage question - I think it was too easy - or I've read it totally wrong.
The cracking question as well, with the multiple products threw them as well.
I'm not looking forward to physics now.
Are we looking at the same paper?! AQA C1? I've looked at it several times and can't see the question you're referring to!!
THink it's after the one with the table of gases
big diagram of an aluminium electrolysis equipment.
I agree with you all. It was probably one of the worst papers for a new spec that I have seen (and I have been through quite a few spec changes)!
On the foundation paper - The electrolysis question - this is a C2 question and should not have been asked on this paper. The behaviour of ions was not in the spec, they will argue that the students can see from the diagram. However these are Foundation students!!
The Brazilian government question - what was going on there? I actually thought that they had missed out a graph or something. I can't answer the question of why the government decided to reduce the amount of ethanol in petrol in 2011 - so how can the students!
Really unfair foundation paper!
The higher was difficult but mainly fair so no complaints about that.
I really hope that the mark scheme reflects the difficulty on the foundation - otherwise we are *****ed!!
It is in the specification. Metals forming positive ions is in C1.1.3 and that positive ions move to the negative electrode is in C1.3.1. I have no idea what the question about the reaction of calcium carbonate with nitric and sulphuric acid was after for an answer! Luckily, most took an educated guess about what the theory of mantle dynamics was!
Hi Found nemo
Yes movement of ions is in the spec C1.3.1.h) - under addtional guidance by the electrolysis of copper point!!! So what did we do.... not aluminium!!
Agreed about the nitric acid was a bit random and think the matle could be answered!!
Not looking forward to March....
In B1. The QWC question was the same on both foundation and higher. In C1 the questions were different with foundation students looking at positives and negatives of limestone quarrying. I think students will have needed more than 6 minutes to do that question justice. I fully expect the report to comment on the number of candidates who didn't even attempt that question or only partially attempted it. I was struggling to come up with answers. I also struggled to come up with 3 answers in the earthquakes question. They had completely twisted that question around. Students will know why earthquakes are hard to predict but this will have thrown them!
As for the Aluminium oxide content of the bauxite I assume the answer iss 55 tonnes (50 extracted and 10% of 50 in the sludge which is 5) I expect most to miss this and put 50.
Overall the most able I'm sure would be ok but the B/C students will not have enjoyed this exam!
We complained to AQA today via email. NEVER done that before but was so mad at some of the questions that we felt compelled to! Reply said it would be passed onto the chief examiner who wrote the exam.
Didn't like the mantle dynamics, the carbonate and acid one for 3 marks - we thought 1 mark = different salt made, but for 2-3 marks pupils will have to mention the state symbols which is part of C2, not C1.
Also, no one has mentioned it but my other gripe was the steam distillation of lavender on both H and F tiers. It says in the spec that they need to know the general principles but 'Knowledge of specific examples or processes is not required'. Surely this question was knowledge of a specific process??
I agree with mm38 - the B/C students will have been really stressed out.
Compared to the B1 exam last week where I felt like I had done a good job of teaching it, C1 has been a disaster!
Maybe if enough of us complain they will do something????
I'll be complaining tomorrow when I've got the spare papers in front of me.
I'm getting emails from pupils panicking about having failed now, and these are good, A/A* pupils.
One B/A student had a full on panic attack and couldn't do the paper at all. Poor kid.
My year 9 top set came out of the exam completely demoralized
I agree with the general consensus here. Science76, we share our gripes! Why not ask about the extraction methods of titanium, which covers a lot more real chemistry, than aluminium extraction? I was surprised also at the amount of 'new' stuff on the curriculum that was missed out! Eg: miller-urey, fractional distillation of air etc. Who the frig is Holmes and his mantle dynamics? It's hard enough coming to terms with wegener for most! The more I think about it, the more frustrated I become. All that work! They want blood as well as our pensions! And also - thought seismic waves were physics! That was a tough 3 mark question!
Sorry for the rant guys, but I feel it's fully justified! Hope I've given my fantastic pupils the best chances to guess the answer in the examiners head!
I disagree with whoever said the higher paper was fair (haven't seen foundation so can't comment on that).
THREE reasons why people/government ignored scientists predictions??!! THREE??!!
Some of the questions seemed to be 'trick' questions - the % of aluminium oxide in bauxite for example.
4 marks on distillation of plant oils requires knowing this process in DETAIL i.e. not what the spec says!
Mantle dynamics?!?!?! Poor kids.
still can't find the electrolysis question...
My main concern is with Q6(b)(ii) however.
The question says to "describe how the results for sulfuric acid are different AND use the symbol equations to explain this difference". To me, this means they need to use the data in the 2 graphs.
So... the graphs.
If, as stated in the question, the only variable is the type of acid, then HOW can these graphs be correct?! The limiting factor must be the acid.
Surely the reaction with sulfuric acid would produce double the volume of carbon dioxide, as 1 mole is required to produce 1 mole of CO2 (of course, these kids no nothing of moles yet!) whilst 2 moles of nitric acid is required. Instead, the H2SO4 graph quickly levels off while the HNO3 graph carries on rising and does not level off.
Which leads on to the next problem - why would a rate of reaction graph (which is what this is) be a straight line?!
Now, I am really questioning myself on this - I just cannot believe that an exam board would make a mistake like this - so I am hoping one of you will correct me and make me look really stupid...
A major issue I had with the graphs was the lack of values on the y-axis. For all we know the scales could have been different.I thought they might be looking for the one to two ratio and the fact that one gave a solid salt and the other an aqeuous salt but after that I'm struggling!
Today I downloaded an old AQA exam paper from 2003 from their linear course. Funnily enough lots of the diagrams I recognise from post 2006 papers. I think my students would find the sections based on unit 1 easier to answer than the paper they did.
I think another issue is the fact that now assessment objective A03 is now assessed in the written papers and not just in the ISAs. That might explain some of the random questions.
I'd also look closely at the grade descriptors for an A grade on the old Chemistry spec versus the new spec. I'd say that the new grade A is considerably tougher than the old grade A. Notice the changing of 'demonstrate a good understanding' to 'understand'.
If you couple this with the fact that in the absence of externally marked KS2 SATs FFT targets might be inflated so we are really up against it!
lets clear something up AQA or OCR?
Obtuse, out-to-get-you type questions. Fair enough to challenge the very top end to think outside the box, but not enough for the good solid B graders to get their teeth into and show what they've learned. And not the same style as the B1 exam, which is unfair, Dreading P1 now.... Is it true that if the whole country finds a paper hard they lower the grade boundaries? My poor Y10 kids are doing all three exams this January, to cope with doing Triple with the imposed changes in curriculum and only allowing a two-year overlap. People who make these decisions don't really know how schools / kids function, do they?