1. No specific comment available.

2. No specific comment available.

3. It was disappointing to find many candidates unable to satisfactorily define the

three terms italicised in this question. For nucleophilic substitution, what was
wanted was some recognition that an existing atom or group in a molecule was
being replaced by another and that the attacking species had a lone pair of
electrons or was attacking a (slightly) positive site in the molecule. In contrast,
parts (b) to (e) were generally well done, and the award of marks by error
carried forward was rarely needed. Part (f) was rarely correct, with very few
candidates giving the equations in the markscheme. Those who showed an S N2
mechanism could score by error carried forward from their rate equation in (d),
although this rarely happened.

4. No specific comment available.

5. No specific comment available.

6. Some candidates were unable to label the axes correctly but the explanation in
(ii) was usually good. The two graphs should appear to have equal areas under
them.

7. Order of reaction was defined very poorly as many candidates failed to take
note of the power of the concentration. The order of reaction was very well
deduced and the calculations were often correct. Most candidates were able to
carry out the calculation in (iii) correctly but units caused problems. A number of
candidates did not adjust the answer in (iv) to the correct number of significant
figures.

8. No specific comment available.

9. No specific comment available.

1
2
10. This was a popular question. The equation and sketch graphs were generally
well done. The explanations in terms of changes in concentration and collision
theory were poorly done.

11. Many candidates had problems defining the rate of reaction. Their answers
often lacked precision and the calculation of the half-life was difficult for many.
However, most knew the effect on rate of changing the concentration and the
overall order of reaction.

12. No specific comment available.

13. No specific comment available.

14. No specific comment available.

15. No specific comment available.

16. (a) (i) A common error was to answer in terms of the amount of nitrogen rather
than the rate of its production. Few candidates stated that the frequency of
collisions decreases as the concentration of reactants decreases.
(ii) A significant number of candidates stated that the reaction goes to
equilibrium even though there is no equilibrium sip in the equation
given in the question.

(b) (i) This was a very easy mark gained by virtually all the candidates.
(ii) Most candidates were aware of an increase in energy for the
molecules; “more collisions” rather than “more frequent collisions”
was often suggested. Only a small percentage of candidates made
any reference to activation energy.
(iii) This concept was well known and most candidates scored both the
marks available.

3
17. Some respondents suggested the expression that relates k to T appears in the
Data Booklet and knowledge of it should not be tested in paper 1, which did not
include the Data Booklet with the examination materials. Inclusion of a fact or
item in the Data Booklet does not automatically eliminate the necessity of
knowing by the candidate. The teachers’ note for A.S.16.3.2 clearly states that
this method should be explained. The question discriminated very well and was
answered correctly by 56% of candidates.

18. (a)–(c)Determination of reaction orders was done well and many candidates
were able to correctly determine the value of the rate constant.
The more able candidates were able to state and explain that the
mechanism agrees with the experimental rate expression; others had
difficulty recognizing that the slow rate determining step depends on [X]
and [NO], and [X] depends on [H2] and [NO]. An important thing to note
was that the overall equation from the mechanism agrees with the
stoichiometric equation.
Candidates generally had difficulty explaining why a single step
mechanism would be unlikely for the reaction that involves the collision of
four particles.
Comparisons of the rate of formation of different products were generally
done well.

19. No specific comment available.

20. Part (a) was almost never answered correctly. The phrase “average bond
enthalpy” appeared to be an unfamiliar one for many candidates. Equations
were seldom given, were incorrect or inappropriate. Most candidates received
some credit for part (b), but few achieved full marks. Marks lost were due to a
wrong sign or a mathematical error. Part (c) was generally answered
adequately. Most candidates showed the energy levels for the reactants and
products in part (d), but some failed to indicate the activation energy. Diagrams
often lacked appropriate labels.

21. This was a fairly popular question. A few candidates had difficulty with part (a).
Some misinterpreted the question and suggested ways to vary the conditions
rather than ways to follow the reaction, while others suggested impractical
methods, such as measuring the quantity of water formed or studying the mass
of solid reacting. Collision theory discussions occasionally lacked precision in
part (b). Part (c) was answered reasonably well.

4
22. Marks were often scored in part (i) and (ii), but few individuals were able to
answer part (iii) adequately.

23. (a) Most candidates could identify and explain why the reaction was first
order.

(b) The majority of candidates drew reasonable graphs.

(c) Many candidates gained this mark, often as a result of “error carried
forward” from (a).

(d) The calculation was well attempted and explained, with most candidates
gaining at least two marks.

(e) Error carried forward from (c) permitted most candidates to gain credit
here. However, many could not give the correct units.

24. No specific comment available.

25. (a) Many candidates were aware of the need for the correct orientation of the
colliding particles, with sufficient kinetic energy for the reaction to take
place. However, fewer referred explicitly to activation energy, and of those
that did, many appeared confused as to what exactly activation energy
refers to!

(b) Only a small number of candidates gained full credit, even though this type
of question has been previously asked on more than one occasion at
standard level. Most candidates stated the fact that the particles have an
increased number of collisions, but only the better students related this to
per unit time i.e. increased frequency of collisions. Students did not earn
the first point, unless they mentioned explicitly time in their answers.
Equally, even if activation energy was discussed, on fewer occasions, did
candidates state that increased proportions of particles have energy
greater than or equal to the activation energy. Some candidates again
mentioned incorrectly the concept of force. Other misconceptions involve
the reduction in activation energy or bond strength. Increased pressure
was also sometimes used to explain the increase in rate. Some of the
better candidates who clearly had a more in-depth understanding of this
area included a graph to support their answer, involving T2 > T1.

5
26. No specific comment available.

27. No specific comment available.

28. No specific comment available.

29. No specific comment available.

30. (a) Most candidates could not define the rate of reaction correctly. Some
common errors were ‘the time it takes for the reaction to reach completion’
or ‘the time it takes for the reactants to form products’.

(b) (i) There were some good answers here but many candidates gave
vague answers such as ‘there were fewer collisions or particles didn’t
have Ea’.
(ii) Good reasons were given to explain the relatively large increase in
the rate because of a small increase in temperature. Again, some
candidates wrote ‘more collisions’ instead of ‘more frequent
collisions’ or ‘more collisions per unit time’.
(iii) Most candidates were successful in this part with a minority referring
to surface area, even though the reaction involved two gases.

31. (a) Nearly everybody deduced the correct order of reaction with respect to O 2.
Some of the wrong answers gave the order as zero or ½.

(b) Deducing the order of reaction with respect to NO was a bit more difficult.
A few candidates said it was order 1 or order 3, but the majority correctly
said it was second order.

(c) Stating the rate expression for the reaction given didn’t present any
difficulty.

6
 (d) Substituting the values of rate and concentrations from the table was fine
and produced the correct value for the rate constant: 1.75×102, but getting
the correct units proved to be more challenging. The units were dm 6 mol-2
s-1.

(e) In this section many candidates lost a few marks. The possible
mechanisms given didn’t always agree with the rate expression, or they
said it was a SN1 or SN2 reaction. In general the candidates could identify
the rate determining step as the one where the NO 2 was formed.

32. No specific comment available.

33. (a) Half-life was generally well defined.

7
 (b) Many students had problems measuring half-life and often students gave
concentration values rather than time intervals.

(c) A number of students correctly identified the reaction as first order and
gave the correct equation whereas fewer mentioned the fact that there
was a constant half-life.

(d) This calculation was generally well done although the calculation of units
was more challenging and many students failed to notice the reaction was
in minutes and not seconds.

34. Convoluted / not on syllabus

It is agreed that there was a lot of unfamiliar information for candidates to read
and digest. However, the question tested A.S. 7.1.1, and was correctly
answered by 78 of candidates, with a discrimination index of 0.31, so was
considered to have worked well.

35. No specific comment available.

36. Most candidates scored well in this question, although with some confusing
concentration and rate. Very few left blanks or drew random lines.

37. No specific comment available.

38. No specific comment available.

39. No specific comment available.

40. (a) Most candidates could recognise that the graph showed a first order
reaction, but far fewer were able to explain why.

8
(b) Most candidates were able to gain this mark for the rate equation as the
error from part a was allowed for.

9
 (c) Most candidates correctly calculated a half life from the graph and then
correctly substituted it into the formula for t½.

41. No specific comment available.

42. This question was generally well answered, although with some answers
spoiled by arithmetic errors in the calculations.

43. This question discriminated well, with the better candidates being familiar with
the method, although few scored full marks.

44. No specific comment available.

45. One respondent expressed a view that this question was poorly worded and
structured. However, this was not felt to be the case and in fact close to 65% of
candidates got the correct answer here (A).

46. (a) Few candidates could state that rate is a change in some defined quantity
w.r.t. time.

(b) Many candidates missed the statement that nitric acid was in excess, and
that calcium carbonate ran out.

(c) Most candidates could draw an approximately correct curve on the graph
but some had no idea of what it should look like.

(d) The majority of candidates appreciated that the rate would increase with
temperature but only a minority could justify this in terms of collision
frequency or kinetic energy and activation energy.

10
 (e) A good number of students calculated the rate correctly but a significant
proportion of these lost the mark for significant figures. Exceptionally, very
few candidates gave answers to more than the required number of
significant figures. Candidates were penalised for giving too few.

47. This was generally well answered, although there were more errors than
expected in (a)(i), such as having the orders for C and D the wrong way round,
or stating that the doubling of both rate and concentration indicated second
order. Although the values in the table were easy to work with, some candidates
struggled with the order with respect to D because none of the values of [C]
were the same. Quite a few candidates scored consequentially in (a)(ii) and (a)
(iii), and a disappointing number attempted equilibrium expressions in (a)(ii). In
(b), more candidates seemed to be familiar with the concept of half-life applied
to nuclear disintegrations rather than to first-order chemical reactions.

48. Some respondents felt that this question was difficult. However, 70% of
candidates cited A as the correct answer, and this was found to be the 9th
easiest question on the paper.

half-life applied to nuclear disintegrations rather than to first-order chemical reactions.

49. This question, which involved candidates determining the order of reaction for
iodide and hydrogen peroxide drew a number of diverse comments from
respondents on the G2 forms. Although many felt that the question required
good mathematical judgement, and was significantly more difficult than previous
years, student performance in fact was quite reasonable, with 54% obtaining
the correct answer, which would be expected for a question of this nature. The
question gave time data (in s), as opposed to the more typical rate data. Once
more, candidates should not expect the same format in questions each year,
and if one understood the basic principle of rate as the reciprocal of time, then
this question should not have been perceived in any way as being problematic.
Another respondent stated that there was an assumption in the question that
candidates knew that starch and iodine react to form a blue colour. Again, the
question might have been better worded in this regard, and have included some
additional statement such as due to the formation of iodine. However, this
information was clearly implied in the question and students would have been
able to answer the question without this specific knowledge.

11
50. No specific comment available.

12
51. (a) Most candidates were able to determine the order of NO and Br 2 as
second and first order respectively. Many candidates determined the
orders mathematically, and hence showed good understanding of the
principles. A number of candidates did not give a reason for the correct
response and hence did not score the marks.

(b) The rate expression was easily determined, particularly where part (a) was
completed correctly. Even where candidates did not complete part (a)
correctly they were given credit by error carried forward (ECF) where
appropriate. Common errors with the weaker candidates included: writing
the equilibrium law, missing the rate constant, writing the rate constant as
K, which is the equilibrium constant as opposed to lower case k, which is
used for rate constant. This was not penalized by examiners but teachers
should emphasis the correct use of symbols for quantities.

(c) Candidates often made calculation errors, made errors with significant
figures and found the determination of units challenging. A common
6 2 1
mistake involved units of dm mol s instead of the correct units of dm6
mol2s1.

(d) (i) Many candidates answered this question satisfactorily, being familiar
with the fact that temperature was the only factor that changed the value
of the rate constant. In part (ii), most candidates were able to state that the
rate of change of the bromine concentration would decrease, (but only a
few cited the actual factor involved  this was not required for the mark)

(e) This question was generally well answered by candidates. The enthalpy
level diagram was usually drawn. However, some candidates did not
labelled Ea. and Ea(cat) accurately on the diagram or label the axis.

52. This question asked which statement is correct about the rate expression for a
chemical reaction, from a list of four possible choices. Two respondents stated
that the term rate expression is not on the SL syllabus. This is a valid comment
and it would have been better if the term rate of a chemical reaction would have
been used, as rate expression is involved only at HL and in actual fact is not the
correct wording in the context of this particular question. It was not felt however
that this mislead the students in terms of the overall correct answer, namely, D.,
i.e. that the rate can be determined by measuring the change in concentration
of a reactant or product over time, and 81.39% of candidates did cite the correct
answer

13
53. As at HL one respondent stated that the term grain size is obscure. The use of
this term was discussed in detail, and it was felt that the question at SL should
also have been written with the term particle size, which is used in the guide in
7.2.3. However, similarly at HL, it was thought that this did not have an impact
on the ability of students to answer the question and the difficulty index was
78.64%, although use of the term grain may have been somewhat obscure for
those students where English is their second language, as suggested by the
respondent. In the context of the question however, it was very clear that this
did in fact refer to particle size, as related to the concept of rates of chemical
reactions.

54. The graph showing the distribution of molecular energies was usually well
answered, although some students cited incorrect labels for the axes. In
contrast, the definition of activation energy was answered correctly by nearly all
students.
The fact that the question asked about an endothermic reaction seemed to
confuse some candidates and they tried to explain the effect on the extent of
the reaction. Although almost all knew that the rate would increase.

55. (i) and (ii) were generally well answered but some candidates gave a line
instead of a curve for the variation of concentration of acid versus time, or had
concentration increasing to a maximum. Most who correctly drew the graph
were able to describe the decreasing slope of the line.
(iii) Candidates correctly identified a decrease in rate but often did not state
fewer collisions per unit time.

56. No specific comment available.

57. No specific comment available.

58. This was not a popular question.

This was typically well answered overall, which showed solid understanding of
chemical kinetics. However, it also revealed several misconceptions, including
the careless use of “K or k = ...” instead of the rate expression. Although the
question clearly states that ‘the rate is independent of the bromine
concentration’, some included [Br2] in one or more of the expressions in (ii),

14
while the predictions often ignored bromine. Rate expressions, half-life and
catalysts were very well understood in parts (iii) and (iv) and better answered.

15
59. No specific comment available.

60. No specific comment available.

61. No specific comment available.

62. No specific comment available.

16