Brisbane Boys’ College

Assessment Cover Sheet: SCIENCE 2019

Student Number: Year Level: 9 Semester: 2 Term:4

Subject Chemistry Instrument IA2

no.
Technique Student Experiment
Unit Chemistry
Topic Chemical Analysis

Conditions

Duration 7 hours class time

Mode Written response — Length 1000-1200

scientific report
Individual/ Group prac work with Other –
group individual report
Resources Use of school science laboratory and library (online: internet and school
available intranet, databases, journals).
Context

You have completed the following practicals, or simulations, in class:

• Yr 8 text: 8.3, 8.4, 8.5, 8.6
• Making and testing oxygen, hydrogen and carbon dioxide gas
• Yr 9 text: 7.3, 7.4
• Using litmus paper and universal indicator to determine the pH of solutions (demo)

Task

Modify/ combine these experiments into a series of tests which will identify three unknown
solutions – A, B, and C.
The solutions will be chosen from 1M concentration solutions of:
• Hydrochloric acid (HCl),
• sulfuric acid (H2SO4),
• acetic acid (vinegar),
• sodium hydroxide (NaOH),
• ammonia (NH3),
• sodium chloride (NaCl),
• sodium hydrogen carbonate (NaHCO3).
Each group will receive a different combination.

Each group will also receive:

• Strips of magnesium metal
• Calcium carbonate powder
• Matches and a satay stick
• Solid sodium hydrogen carbonate powder
• Litmus paper – blue and red
• Universal indicator
• Barium chloride solution
Your group may also request other chemicals with your teacher’s permission.
To complete this task, you must

• Plan a set of 3-4 tests to identify the substances and complete a RATIONALE to
explain your choices/ your thinking/ what results you would expect. [250 words]

• Assess the dangers and complete a RISK ASSESSMENT.

• Write a METHOD with enough detail for someone else to read and follow. This may
include labelled diagrams or photos of your set-ups. [200 words]

• Safely carry out the experiments and collect enough data to identify the unknown
solutions

• Present the results in a RESULTS TABLE.

• Analyse and interpret the results to identify the three unknown solutions. Write a
JUSTIFICATION of your conclusions by explaining your thinking. Include any
EQUATIONS for reactions that occurred. [300 – 400 words]

• Evaluate how confident you are in your conclusions. Evaluate your choice of tests.
Write an EVALUATION which include IMPROVEMENTS that could be made. Also
include how this method could be EXTENDED for other purposes. [100-200 words]

• Write a CONCLUSION finally stating the identity of the three unknowns. [20-40 words]

• Write a BIBLIOGRAPHY of the references you consulted. Use CiteAce. [About 5-7
sources]

THE WORKBOOKLET WILL HELP YOU PLAN, BUT IT IS NOT YOUR FINAL REPORT.
YOUR FINAL REPORT SHOULD HAVE THE SECTIONS INDICATED IN CAPITAL LETTERS
ABOVE.

Checkpoints
Will be determined by your teacher

Criterion Marks allocated Result

Research and planning 6

Analysis of evidence 6

Interpretation and evaluation 6

Communication 2

Authentication • Teacher will provide class time for task completion.

strategies • Students must document the process.
• Students must acknowledge all sources.
• Teacher will compare the responses of students who have worked
together in groups.

Scaffolding • Completion of class pracs, teacher demonstrations and student

work booklet.
Simplified Instrument Specific Marking Guide: Student Experiment Name:

The student’s work shows they can utilise an experiment in chemistry to show understanding of identifying unknown chemicals, modifying experiments and processing Teacher:
data; analyse and interpret experimental evidence; and evaluate experimental processes and conclusions.
Research and Planning 5-6 3-4 1-2 0 Mark
Rationale for experiment Informed, considered, clear Adequate, reasonable Rudimentary, vague or
[APPLY] understanding of why tests chosen irrelevant, unclear reasoning for
tests chosen
Modifications to the methodology Informed, justified and clearly shows Feasible, may have some issues with Inappropriate, vague, unclear
[APPLY] how to identify unknown chemicals one or two tests. Does not satisfy
Methodology that enables collection of data Sufficient, relevant, easy to follow Relevant, mostly clear to follow Insufficient and irrelevant, descriptors /6
[INVESTIGATE] unclear what is needed to be
done
Management of risk and ethical or environmental Considered Adequate Inadequate
issues [INVESTIGATE]
Analysis of evidence 5-6 3-4 1-2 0 Mark

Collection of raw data Effective and efficient Effective Ineffective

[INVESTIGATE] Sufficient, relevant Relevant Insufficient and irrelevant
Processing of data through data tables, visual Appropriate Adequate Rudimentary
Does not satisfy
and graphical representations of data [APPLY]
Identification of trends, patterns and
Correct and relevant
Systematic and effective
Basic
Effective
Incorrect or irrelevant
Ineffective
descriptors /6
relationships [ANALYSE] Thorough Obvious Insufficient and irrelevant
Uncertainty and limitations of evidence Thorough and appropriate Basic Incorrect or insufficient
[ANALYSE]
Interpretation and Evaluation 5-6 3-4 1-2 0 Mark
Interpretation of research evidence by linking Insightful, justified conclusions, Adequate, reasonable conclusions, Invalid, inappropriate or
conclusions with task [INTERPRET] linked to research conducted at some problems or samples not identified irrelevant conclusions
beginning
Reliability and validity Critical, justified discussion linking Basic, reasonable description, some Superficial, cursory or simplistic Does not satisfy
[EVALUATE] identified samples to analysis if not all samples identified statements, if not all samples descriptors /6
experimentation, critical discussion if identified simplistic discussion
not all samples identified only
Improvements and extensions Logically derived from analysis of Related to analysis of evidence Ineffective or irrelevant
[EVALUATE] evidence
Communication 2 1 0 Mark
Scientific language and representations, Genre Fluent and concise, Competent
Does not satisfy
conventions, Referencing conventions Very well constructed layout, legible Layout appropriate and legible,
descriptors
and high quality Only minor problems
Good quality references Some references
Layout extremely
unclear or illegible
/2
No references
Comments: