As Chemistry WJEC Paper Unit 1

Watch this thread
Jack Dinham
Badges: 1
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#1
Howd you guys find the exam?
0
reply
Big stinky
Badges: 2
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 1 month ago
#2
It sucked donkey ****
0
reply
EI2478
Badges: 9
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report 1 month ago
#3
terrible, we hadn't learned emission spectra :]
1
reply
Archock
Badges: 10
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report 1 month ago
#4
It was pretty easy except the last couple questions. I had no clue what to do there.
I got confused with the apparent lack of uncertainty in the titration question for calculating final reading for titre 2. So that's 6 + (50/50 for 1 more) marks off total.

All the calculations were 👌.

Probably missed 3 or 4 marks regarding La Chatalier questions. I didn't revise that properly. Then question 2 or 3 was just worded confusingly, the one regarding polarity. Maybe a mark off there. The strangest question was the 6Mark QWC, just confusing. I didn't think there was enough to say to get 6 marks. I'm guessing I lost 2-3 there. Then the species for the mass spectrometry... I probably have gotten wrong, I put PCl2+. Would like input on what you guys put.

So that brings me down to 68/80 maximum to 64/80 minimum. Plus, it's good to assume 3-4 marks were missed elsewhere despite me not thinking so. So, at worst, 60/80 =75%

It definitely could've been harder. Easier than all the other past papers for the new spec.
0
reply
EI2478
Badges: 9
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report 1 month ago
#5
(Original post by Archock)
It was pretty easy except the last couple questions. I had no clue what to do there.
I got confused with the apparent lack of uncertainty in the titration question for calculating final reading for titre 2. So that's 6 + (50/50 for 1 more) marks off total.

All the calculations were 👌.

Probably missed 3 or 4 marks regarding La Chatalier questions. I didn't revise that properly. Then question 2 or 3 was just worded confusingly, the one regarding polarity. Maybe a mark off there. The strangest question was the 6Mark QWC, just confusing. I didn't think there was enough to say to get 6 marks. I'm guessing I lost 2-3 there. Then the species for the mass spectrometry... I probably have gotten wrong, I put PCl2+. Would like input on what you guys put.

So that brings me down to 68/80 maximum to 64/80 minimum. Plus, it's good to assume 3-4 marks were missed elsewhere despite me not thinking so. So, at worst, 60/80 =75%

It definitely could've been harder. Easier than all the other past papers for the new spec.
😑😑
0
reply
Archock
Badges: 10
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report 1 month ago
#6
I'm not wrong though, it is easier than the past papers for new specification. emilyi0028
Last edited by Archock; 1 month ago
0
reply
048243
Badges: 2
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
Report 1 month ago
#7
(Original post by Archock)
I'm not wrong though, it is easier than the past papers for new specification. emilyi0028
I disagree.
0
reply
Archock
Badges: 10
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
Report 1 month ago
#8
(Original post by 048243)
I disagree.
I suppose it depends on what you're good at. This one definitely had more calculation based questions. If I remember correctly, there were 6 or so. Or do you mean it was harder in some other way?
0
reply
Sol'
Badges: 3
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9
Report 1 month ago
#9
I thought the paper was quite kind, I definitely blanked a little on the mass spectroscopy question. The last question threw me a little aswell, I hadn't realised that the titration was only 25cm^3 of a 250cm^3 solution which left me wondering which group one metal had a mr of 229.9. Figured out my mistake in time though. Overall I think it went quite well
0
reply
jwlko
Badges: 3
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#10
Report 1 month ago
#10
Thought it went well.
2 things puzzled me though, firstly the gap-fill: "hydrogen atoms bonded to small ...... atoms". I put highly electronegative but I know that sounds wrong.
Also, I completely forgot whether group 2 metals reacted with cold water.
Other than that, calculations, mass spec, and titration questions were good.
0
reply
EI2478
Badges: 9
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#11
Report 1 month ago
#11
I really ran out of time, 1hr30 is not enough
1
reply
Aspiringdentist6
Badges: 4
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#12
Report 1 month ago
#12
Pretty easy tbh, I agree with archock. Very much a calculation focused paper, and as I am somewhat less sucky at calculations compared to the whole list of my other weaknesses in chemistry I found the paper decent. But ig if that's not your strength then my condolences are with you.
1
reply
Archock
Badges: 10
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#13
Report 1 month ago
#13
(Original post by EI2478)
I really ran out of time, 1hr30 is not enough
Yep, agreed. If I had 15 more minutes, I could've properly understood and attempted the last couple questions worth 6 marks. I'd like to think I would've gotten at least 3 of them even when I was super confused after reading the q's for 3 minutes lol.
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest

Does school Maths prepare people well enough for the future?

Yes, it gives everyone a good foundation for any future path (39)
32.23%
Somewhat, if your future involves maths/STEM (55)
45.45%
No, it doesn't teach enough practical life skills (26)
21.49%
Something else (tell us in the thread) (1)
0.83%

Watched Threads

View All