This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

OCR F324-June 2013 Chemistry

Reply 3400

V__005

17

What was the type of isomerism where we had to draw a stereoisomer??

Reply 3401

Brad0440

Re: the mark scheme, all marks are there, but 9 of those need answers/confirmation of answers. But it's close, so thanks to everyone who helped! :biggrin:

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 3402

LegendX

15

Original post by Zaphod77

I'm hoping so! But I don't know, it wasn't a difficult paper...

Tbh, aside from making stupid mistakes, there was nothing that separated the A* students from the A students hence I think that they will probably have the A* grade boundary at 57 but put the A boundary at about 48/49 ish....

Btw, how did everyone draw that optical isomer? lol

Reply 3403

Zaphod77

1

Original post by MathsNerd1

Yeah it was rather easy, just grateful I got my A at least :smile:

Yeah, my main concern is silly mistakes, as per usual! According to that unofficial mark scheme I've lost 7-8 marks, I really hope that's 75 or more UMS, but I'm not sure because of January's ridiculous mark scheme :s-smilie:

Fingers crossed though!

Reply 3404

Zaphod77

1

Original post by LegendX

Tbh, aside from making stupid mistakes, there was nothing that separated the A* students from the A students hence I think that they will probably have the A* grade boundary at 57 but put the A boundary at about 48/49 ish....

Btw, how did everyone draw that optical isomer? lol

I doubt they would make the gap that big between A and A* when the gap between A* and full would be so small, if A is 48 then A* would be 54ish, that's my thoughts!

Reply 3405

LegendX

15

Original post by Zaphod77

Yeah, my main concern is silly mistakes, as per usual! According to that unofficial mark scheme I've lost 7-8 marks, I really hope that's 75 or more UMS, but I'm not sure because of January's ridiculous mark scheme :s-smilie:

Fingers crossed though!

The very first question, did you have to draw the whole of the displayed formula for it to get the mark? As reading the unofficial markscheme it states that one of them had a double bond present? Not too sure if there was? Arggghh cant remember

Reply 3406

ZakRob

2

Original post by LegendX

The very first question, did you have to draw the whole of the displayed formula for it to get the mark? As reading the unofficial markscheme it states that one of them had a double bond present? Not too sure if there was? Arggghh cant remember

There was a double bond present, because it linked into a later question of reasoning behind increased chances of CHD

Posted from TSR Mobile

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 3407

Zaphod77

1

Original post by LegendX

The very first question, did you have to draw the whole of the displayed formula for it to get the mark? As reading the unofficial markscheme it states that one of them had a double bond present? Not too sure if there was? Arggghh cant remember

Paranoia always steps in at about this time! For the first question, it didn't specify displayed, so I think you'd be allowed to simplify some parts (e.g. -OH instead of -O-H). I think one of them did have a double bond, that was shown in the question? But I'm not sure, I might be getting confused with a later question :tongue:

Sorry!

Reply 3408

LegendX

15

Original post by ZakRob

There was a double bond present, because it linked into a later question of reasoning behind increased chances of CHD

Posted from TSR Mobile

oh right, now I remember, in total there was 2 structures right? 1 was different but 2 were the same? Both produced salts?

Reply 3409

Zzzyax

2

grade boundaries i think i was a bit harder than jan so 53/52 for an A*

Reply 3410

Mus1995

Original post by Zzzyax

grade boundaries i think i was a bit harder than jan so 53/52 for an A*

Agreed. Definitely harder than January 2013. 48 - A, 52 - A*. Around there?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 3411

LegendX

15

Anyways, I think I'm looking at around 53/54 marks, quite disappointed as it wont bite into the A* and my F325 seemed to be a mid A too so I guess I can kiss the A* good bye QQ

Reply 3412

chocandy21

I put nucleophillic addition for the reduction one
is that wrong?:/

Reply 3413

keepontrying

i say 48 for an A , 43 for a B and so on

Reply 3414

keepontrying

Original post by Mus1995

Agreed. Definitely harder than January 2013. 48 - A, 52 - A*. Around there?

Posted from TSR Mobile

agreed

Reply 3415

Zzzyax

2

Original post by Mus1995

Agreed. Definitely harder than January 2013. 48 - A, 52 - A*. Around there?

Posted from TSR Mobile

But im hoping and praying to god that they are lower

because i got the final structure a little wrong and didnt relise it was alkaline hydrolysis

Reply 3416

V__005

17

Original post by keepontrying

i say 48 for an A , 43 for a B and so on

How reliable are TSR predictions?

Reply 3417

drplease

Original post by Zzzyax

But im hoping and praying to god that they are lower

because i got the final structure a little wrong and didnt relise it was alkaline hydrolysis

what alkaline hydrolysis :s-smilie:

Reply 3418

herothing11

3

Original post by Varsh05

How reliable are TSR predictions?

We're the best out there! :colonhash:

We can't predict the boundaries for certain as they're due to how people perform.
I reckon, however, that there was lots of places people could have lost silly marks so I will personally say.

A* - 53
A - 48
B - 43
C - 38
D - 33
E - 28

Reply 3419

keepontrying

Original post by Varsh05

How reliable are TSR predictions?

are you asking or being sarcastic?

OCR F324-June 2013 Chemistry

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you