Join TSR now and get all your revision questions answeredSign up now
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What was the type of isomerism where we had to draw a stereoisomer??
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    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!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (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
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MathsNerd1)
    Yeah it was rather easy, just grateful I got my A at least
    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 Fingers crossed though!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (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!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (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 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
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (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 Sorry!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (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?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    grade boundaries i think i was a bit harder than jan so 53/52 for an A*
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (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
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    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
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I put nucleophillic addition for the reduction one
    is that wrong?:/
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i say 48 for an A , 43 for a B and so on
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mus1995)
    Agreed. Definitely harder than January 2013. 48 - A, 52 - A*. Around there?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    agreed
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by keepontrying)
    i say 48 for an A , 43 for a B and so on
    How reliable are TSR predictions?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (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 :confused:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Varsh05)
    How reliable are TSR predictions?
    We're the best out there!
    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
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Varsh05)
    How reliable are TSR predictions?
    are you asking or being sarcastic?
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.