 Summary of Marker’s Report 

HKALE Chemistry (1990 – 2002)

[Physical Chemistry]
Section 1 Atom, Molecules and Stoichiometry

Some candidates did not realize that the average kinetic energy of gaseous particles is directly
proportional to the absolute temperature. (1990)

Many candidates did not point out that the mass spectrometer responds to the mass to charge ratio.
(1990)

Many candidates incorrectly stated that α-particles are helium atoms.

Some candidates did not emphasis that the electrons in β-particles are moving very fast. (1991)

Many candidates wrongly assigned the unit a.m.u. to the relative atomic mass. (1996)

Many candidates did not give a precise definition for ‘electron affinity’. They did not point out that the
electron affinity of an element X is the molar enthalpy change when atoms of X in the gaseous state
take up electrons to form X-(g) ions under standard conditions. (1996)

Many candidates did not know that 'molar mass' has units while 'relative molecular mass' is
dimensionless. Some candidates obtained incorrect numerical answers because they used incompatible
units in their calculations. (1999)

Section 2 The Electronic Structure of Atoms and the Periodic Table

Many of those who did describe the shape of an s-orbital described it as circular and that of a p-orbital
as the number 8, showing that they lacked a 3-dimensional picture. (1989)

Most candidates were able to give the correct shape of the 1s-orbital, however, they failed to describe
the variation of electron density as a function of distance from the nucleus. (1991)

Only a handful of candidates were able to explain clearly the meaning of the spherical shape of the 1s
orbital and its physical significance, i.e. the most simple description of the surface of the sphere
represents the probability of finding, say 90%, of the 1s electron. A majority of the candidates did not
make the important point that orbitals should be thought of as shapes with fuzzy and indistinct edges,
like clouds in reality. (1992)
It was surprising to find that many candidates could not distinguish between electron affinity and
electronegativity. (1994)

Many candidates were unable to point out that the energy difference between two energy levels are not
the same and hence the spectral lines in the emission spectrum are not equally spaced. (1995)

Many candidates had the misconception that the atomic radius of an element is the distance between
the nucleus and its outermost electron(s). (1996 HKASL)

1
Few candidates would precisely define the term 'electron shell'. Some could not distinguish between the
terms 'electron shells' and 'electron subshell'. (1997)

Few candidates correctly arranged the chemical species in the order of increasing ionization enthalpy,
i.e. O < N < N+. Candidates should know that the ionization enthalpy of a species depends on its size,
its electronic configuration and the effective nuclear charge on the electron to be removed. (1998)

Many candidates did not know that the second ionization energy of an element is always greater than
its first ionization energy. (1999 HKASL)

Many candidates did not point out that the energy of an electron in an atom is quantized. Some
candidates did not understand the relationship between “energy level” and “spectral line”. (1999)

The failure to state that the spectral lines become progressively closer to each other as frequency
increases because the energy difference between energy levels decreases with increase in principal
quantum number. (2000)

The failure to indicate that the ionization enthalpy (I.E.) equals to hL, where h is the Planck constant,
is the frequency of the convergence limit and L is the Avogadro constant. (2000)

The failure to indicate in the graph the (2, 3, 3) pattern in the trend of the first I.E. for the Period 3
elements. (2000)

The failure to indicate that Ne has a higher first I.E. than Ar, and that Na has the smallest first I.E.
among the elements from Ne to Ar. (2000)

The electronic configuration of a copper atom at ground state should be presented as [Ar] 3d10 4s1
instead of [Ar] 4s1 3d10. (2002)

Section 3 Energetics

Many errors arose as a result of a poorly constructed Born-Haber cycle. (1990)

Generally experimental details were poor and measuring temperature change was taken as measuring
enthalpy change. (1990)

Many candidates could not explain fully what happens when an ionic compound is dissolved in water.
(1991)

Many candidates did not include temperature and pressure in their definition of standard enthalpy of
formation. (1992)

Many candidates erroneously said that diamond was the more stable allotrope of carbon. This indicated
that their concept of 'energetic stability' was quite confused and/or that they could not relate the sign of
enthalpy terms to the stability of compounds. (1994)

2
Enthalpy level diagram was poorly presented and in particular, many candidates failed to include the
physical states of the species involved. (1994 HKASL)

Many candidates confused energy cycle with enthalpy level diagram. State symbols were frequently
missed out. (1995 HKASL)

Many candidates did not know that the standard enthalpy change of formation of a compound refers to
the enthalpy change when one mole of the compound is formed from its constituent elements under
standard conditions. Some candidates confused the sign conventions used in chemical energetics.
(1998 HKASL)

Many candidates mistakenly omitted the negative sign in enthalpy change of combustion.
(1999 HKASL)

Many candidates failed to relate the solubility of an ionic compound to the relative magnitudes of its
lattice enthalpy and the hydration enthalpies of its constituent ions. (2002)

Section 4 Bonding and Structure

Some of the common difficulties are summarized as follows:

(i) Most candidates were able to point out that the formation of chemical bond is a result of electron
rearrangement, but failed to recognize that such a rearrangement of electrons leads to the
attainment of a state of lower energy.
(ii) Many candidates had difficulty in giving correct spelling for words like "octet", "covalent",
"electrostatic", etc.
(iii) Some candidates could not differentiate bondings between atoms and interactions between
molecules. (1991)

Candidates were expected to know that the orbital occupied by the two electrons in the H 2 molecule
can be obtained by taking the sum of two H 1s atomic orbitals, and that in the region between the two
nuclei where there is appreciable overlap of the two 1s orbitals, the resultant electron density has
increased amplitude.
(1992)

Many candidates mistakenly stated that the strength of the van der Waals forces was affected by
molecular mass instead of molecular size. (1991)

Many candidates were unable to express their intuitive understanding of the term 'hydrogen bonding'.
They were expected to write that the hydrogen atom is situated between two (small, non-metallic)
electronegative atoms, and that one of these has a lone pair of electrons.
A common misconception was that hydrogen bonds are (only) intermolecular. (1994)

Many candidates could not give the correct structure for CO. (1995)

Packing types of ionic crystals were confused with those of metals, so that ionic lattices, such as CsCl,
were referred to as body-centred cubic. The correct description is that the lattice of CsCl is formed by
the interpenetration of two primitive cubic lattices, one of Cs+ and the other of Cl- ions. The term

3
intermolecular forces was applied to ionic and covalent compounds. Giant covalent structures were
incorrectly termed giant molecular structures. The term oxidation number and coordination number
were confused. The terms ions, atoms and molecules were used interchangeably. (1996)

Many candidates knew that hydrogen bonding exists in ice, but failed to reckon that each water
molecule is surrounded tetrahedrally by four other water molecules to form an open structure. (1996
HKASL)

Most of the candidates did not have a proper understanding of the terms 'dipole' and 'dipole moment'.
(1997)

Many candidates wrongly used the term 'bond' for 'intermolecular attraction'.
(1997)

Candidates were weak in drawing three-dimensional structures. Many candidates wrongly considered
the shape of BF3 as pyramidal instead of trigonal planar. Many did not recognize that a dative bond is
formed between the atoms N and B in the adduct. (1998)

Not many candidates could give a precise definition of the electronegativity of an element. (1998
HKASL)

Common mistakes also included:

~ Failure to account for the formation of the delocalized electron cloud in the benzene ring,

~ Omission of the fact that the sp2 hybrid orbital of C overlaps with the s-orbital of H form a σ bond,
and writing sp2 instead of sp2.

~ The intermolecular force in liquid H2S is stronger than that in liquid SiH4 because there is a dipole
moment in H2S and no net dipole moment in the symmetrical SiH4 molecule. Therefore, the boiling
point of H2S is significantly higher. (1999)

Most candidates failed to give a correct description of the nature of intermolecular attraction in the
noble gases in terms of instantaneous dipole-induced dipole attraction between gas molecules. Some
candidates gave superficial answers that van der Waals' forces exist between the molecules without
proceeding to explain the origin of these forces. (1999
HKASL)

Incorrect description of the intermolecular attraction between C2H5OC2H5 molecules as hydrogen bond
instead of van der Waals’ forces. (2000)

The failure to point out that H2O has a higher boiling point than C2H5OH because H2O forms two
hydrogen bonds per molecule whereas C2H5OH forms only one hydrogen bond per molecule. (2000)

It is surprising to notice that a lot of candidates did not know that the hybridization state of C in CO 2
and of Si in SiO2 are sp and sp3 respectively. (2002)

Section 5 Chemical Kinetics

4
The graphs should have time as abscissa and 1/ [ B ] and log[ A ] as ordinates respectively. (1990)

Many candidates failed to point out explicitly that only in gas-phase reactions would an increase in
pressure lead to an increase in reaction rate. (1990)

Some candidates did not realize that the average kinetic energy of gaseous particles is directly
proportional to the absolute temperature. (1990)

Some weaker candidates failed to realize that the absolute temperature should be used in the
calculation. (1991)

Candidates continued to fail to clearly explain the meaning of the various features of the Maxwell-
Boltzmann distribution curve. (1992)

Many candidates gave wrong units for the rate constant. (1992)

Some candidates could not do the calculation of the rate constant, due to their unfamiliarity in handling
exponential values. (1993)

The question intended to test the candidates’ knowledge of reaction rates in terms of collision theory
and the role played by a catalytic surface. In reality, most candidates did simply wrote down everything
they knew about the Haber process. Some candidates even wrote 1 to 2 pages on the factors affecting
‘equilibrium’ which were totally irrelevant. (1994)

Quite a large number of candidates were not familiar with the integrated forms of the rate equations for
first order and second order reactions. (1994)

Many candidates wrongly labeled the x-axis as ‘kinetic energy’ although ‘molecular speed’ was
mentioned in the question. (1996)

Common mistakes included: the failure to use an appropriate method to quench the reaction, the failure
to realize that the initial rate is the rate at t=0, wrong spelling of the term ‘colorimeter’ as ‘calorimeter’.
(1997)

Some candidates did not realize from the information provided that the rate also depends on the
concentration of H+(aq) ions and thus they started their calculation with the expression, rate=k
[CH3COCH3]x [I2]y. (1997)

Some candidates did not know the Arrhenius equation. To obtain the activation energy for the reaction,
a graph of ln(k) against (1/T) should be plotted. Many candidates omitted the unit for Ea. (1998)

Some candidates erroneously reversed the labels for the two axes in the plot for the distribution of
molecular kinetic energy. (1998)

Few candidates correctly mentioned that at elevated temperature, the number of effective collisions
would increase. (1998)

5
Some candidates did not indicate, in the reaction profile for the catalysed reaction, the presence of the
intermediate. Some candidates wrongly stated that the catalyst lowers the activation energy of the
reaction instead of providing an alternative reaction pathway with a lower activation energy. (1998)

Some candidates just stated the rate equation without showing the steps involved in the deduction.
(1999)

The unit of the rate constant was often missed out. (1999)

Some candidates did not realize that, having established that reaction
A+B  product
Is first-order, it cannot be a single step reaction. Moreover, the x- and y-axes of the energy profile,
reaction coordinate and potential energy respectively, were often labeled wrongly. (1999)

Very few candidates correctly pointed out that it is necessary to keep the initial concentrations of the
reactants unchanged. Many suggested measuring the rate constant at different temperature. In fact, it is
the initial rate which should be measured. (2000)

Candidates should pay greater attention to the units of reaction rate constants. In this case, second order
reaction, the units are mol-1dm3s-1. (2000)

The unit for the rate constant of the reaction was given wrongly in many cases. (2002)

The diagrams produced by candidates were mostly of poor quality. Some candidates suggested set-ups,
which were not workable. Common mistakes included:
‧ drawing diagrams of a closed system,
‧ incorporating a fractionating column in the set-up of a simple distillation,
‧ indicating wrongly the direction of water flow in the condenser (2002)

Many candidates did not know how to use the given data to plot a graph to show that the reaction is
first order with respect to benzenediazonium chloride. Many wrongly plotted a graph of ln v against t.
(2002)

Many candidates were unable to give a precise definition of the term 'catalyst'. Most failed to point out
that a catalyst remains chemically unchanged at the end of the reaction. (ASL2002)

Section 6 Chemical Equilibria

Diagrams of a hydrogen electrode were generally not well drawn. Only about a third of the candidates
mentioned the use of platinized platinum or platinum black, and even fewer considered the depth of its
immersion in the solution containing hydrogen ions. (1990)

Few candidates were able to answer that a solution of Na 2CO3has a higher pH value than that of a
solution of NaHCO3 because the hydrolysis of CO32- and HCO3- takes place to a different extent; and
that at thee higher pH, phenolphthalein exists in a from which has a resonance structure and the
solution becomes pink. (1990)

6
Some candidates mistakenly used the initially given concentration rather than the equilibrium
concentration in their calculation of equilibrium constant. (1990)

Some weaker candidates failed to give the correct unit for the equilibrium constant (1990)

Many candidates did not give state symbols in the half equation. (1990)

Most candidates failed to represent the cell correctly using the IUPAC convention. Omission of the Pt
electrode and H+ from the cell was common. (1990)

Many candidates did not realize that there is only one concentration for each species in the solution
even though such species are involved in successive dissociations. (1990)

Many candidates did not notice that the sum of dissociated and undissociated ethanedioic acid is 0.02M
and that this figure should be used in the calculation. (1990)

Over half of the candidates gave OH-as the product in one or both of the half reactions. They also
confused the anode and the cathode and the direction of overall reaction. (1991)

Many candidates did not distinguish kinetics from chemical equilibria some candidates related the
order of reaction to activation energy. (1991)

Some candidates failed to recognize that the given reaction takes place in basic medium. (1991)

Most candidates were not able to write balanced equations for the half-reactions which take place in
basic medium. (1991)

Most candidates were not able to work out the final pH of solution T. (1991)

Very few candidates recognized that MnO4- is reduced to MnO2 in alkaline medium. (1991)

Many candidates described standard hydrogen electrode, reference electrodes, electrochemical cells,
the use of salt-bridge, the measurement and the calculation of the cell e.m.f. Few discussed the uses of
electrode potential data, e.g. in the prediction of equilibrium of redox reactions, and the calculation of
solubility products. (1992)

Many candidates did not differentiate between “e.m.f.” and “voltage”. Words like “Daniell”, “Nernst”,
“calomel”, and “”potentiometer” were often wrongly spelt. (1992)

Copper (I) disproportionate in aqueous solution. Many candidates wrote an equation for this process.
Other stated that “copper (I) is oxidized to copper(II)”. (1992)

The chromate (VI)-dichromate(VI) equilibrium is not a redox reaction, as stated by some candidates.
(1992)

A number of candidates failed to point out that esterification is reversible and the yield of product
depends on the equilibrium position of the reaction. Some candidates confused equilibrium and rate of
reaction thinking that by changing reaction conditions to increase the rate of reaction would make the
reversible reaction go to completion. (1992)
7
A surprisingly large number of candidates could not do the balancing of equation for redox reactions
which should be basic work for A-level candidates. (1993)

Most candidates could get the two equilibria involving HCO3-and OH-indicating that the candidates
were not familiar with the interplay between ka and kb of the respective conjugate acid and conjugate
base. (1993)

Most candidates arranged the order of the basicity of the three oxides correctly but few gave a good
explanation. (1993)

Few candidates gave the right cell diagram. Many candidates were not aware that in writing cell
diagrams, a vertical line “I”, instead of a comma “,”, should be used to denote a phase boundary.
(1993)

Many candidates started with wrong equations so that they were not able to obtain the correct final
answer. The balancing of equations for the redox reactions should be given more attention. (1993)

The equation for nitric (V) acid acting as an acid was given correctly, but few candidates gave the
correct equation for it acting as a base. (1994)

Most candidates were not familiar with the use of a colorimetric method in the determination of
equilibrium constants. A large number of candidates did not mention the calibration of the colorimeter.
(1994)

Many candidates were not aware of the fact that the dissociation of water is an endothermic process.
Some candidates erroneously pointed out that the low pH of water at 323 K was caused by the
dissolution of some acidic gases. (1994)

Very few candidates mentioned the fact that an acid-base indicator is a weak acid or weak base. They
also failed to relate the colour of the indicator to its pH range. (1994)

A large number of candidates put down the highest oxidation state of iodine as +5. (1994)

Although most candidates correctly pointed out the formation of carbon dioxide, many of them did not
give a correct balanced equation to describe its formation from NaHCO3. (1994)

The expression was not properly written in many cases. Some candidates gave an expression for K c
instead of that for Kp (1996)

Common mistakes included the incorrect calculation of the composition of the equilibrium mixture and
the failure to use partial pressures in the calculation. (1996)

Many candidates wrote answers which were too general such as “rainwater will cause the iron
container to rust”. (1996)

Candidates were weak in electrochemistry and in writing cell diagrams for electrochemical cells. Many
candidates confused the terms “anode”, “cathode”, “positive terminal” and “negative terminal” of an
electrochemical cell. (1996)
8
When using an Arabic number to represent a positive oxidation state, candidates often omitted the
positive sign in front of the number. Many candidates gave wrong examples for a compound in which
Br is in its highest oxidation state (1996)

Candidates were not able to use values of standard potentials to predict the thermodynamic feasibility
of redox reactions. Some candidates paid no attention to the sign or unit of the electrode potential
values. (1996)

Many candidates calculated the mole fractions of the components wrongly and hence they did not
obtain the correct partial pressures. The units for Kp was wrong in many cases. (1997)

Many candidates were not aware that Kp is a function of temperature only and that an increase in
pressure would not affect the value of Kp (1997)

Some candidates did not answer the question properly. They pointed out the direction of equilibrium
shit but did not state that the percentage dissociation would decrease. (1997)

Some candidates did not know that value of k would change when the reaction took place in a buffer
solution of pH 4. (1997)
The half-equation for the anodic reaction was wrong in most answers. Few candidates were able to give
the correct cell diagram for the electrochemical cell. (1997)

Many candidates did not know what ‘galvanized iron’ is. They wrongly thought that Al or Mg was
coated onto an iron object. (1997)

Most candidates did not know that H2O acted both as a BrØnsted acid and as a BrØnsted base. (1997)

Candidates were weak in calculations involving chemical equilibrium. Some candidates could not even
give a correct expression for the Kc. (1998)

These candidates might not have a proper understanding of the action of a buffer solution. (1998)

Most candidates did not realize that both solutions, at their respective equivalence points of the
titrations, contained the same concentration of sodium lactate and should have the same pH. (1998)

Many candidates did not realize that the e.m.f. value as well as its sign should be included in the cell
diagram. (1998)

Few candidates knew that there is no loss of materials within a rechargeable cell. (1998)

The reaction involves the conversion of CrO42- to Cr2O72-, but many candidates wrongly thought that
redox reaction had occurred. (1998)

Many candidates did not realize that Mn2+ acts a catalyst in the reaction. Some wrongly explained the
phenomenon in terms of equilibrium shift. (1999)

Many candidates were not able to sketch the titration curve required. (1999)

9
Many candidates failed to give an explanation for choosing thymolphthalein as the indicator, i.e. the pH
range of colour change of thymolphthalein falls into the steepest part of the titration curve. (1999)

Many candidates were unfamiliar with the method of double indicator in acid-base titrations. Some
read the question carelessly. They wrongly thought that two solutions, one containing Na2CO3 and the
other containing NaHCO3, were provided and suggested two separate titrations instead of one. (1999)

Many candidates did not state the standard conditions. Some failed to mention that standard reduction
potentials were measured with reference to the standard hydrogen electrode. (1999)

Some candidates gave incorrect units for the Kc. (1999)

Most candidates failed to explain the acidity of the acids in terms of the relative stability of the
conjugated acids and the conjugated bases formed. (1999)

The oxidation state of V in VO2+ should be written as +5 but not 5+. (2000)

Many candidates did not realize that the concentrations of HIn(aq)and In-(aq) are comparable and that
the indicator would appear green. (2000)

Many candidates failed to indicate the correct conditions for a standard hydrogen electrode, viz. H2(g)
at 1 atm pressure and concentration of H3O+(aq) at 1.0M. The cell diagram was often written
incorrectly. When writing the e.m.f. of the cell, many omitted the sign, which indicates the polarity of
the right hand electrode. (2000)

Most candidates correctly calculated Ka of H2CO3(aq) and the ratio of concentrations of HCO3–(aq) and
H2CO3(aq) in blood. The weaker candidates did not know the relationship:
pH = pKa + log10([salt] / [acid] (2002)

Some candidates did not know how to calculate Kp for the dissociation of N2O4(g). Some even confused
Kp with Kc. (2002)

Most candidates were unable to account for the observations in terms of the changes in concentrations
of the species [Cu(H2O)6]2- and [Cu(NH3)4]2+. These candidates probably did not have a good grasp
of the dynamic nature of chemical equilibrium. (2002)

Many candidates failed to recognize that in Fe3O4, iron exists in oxidation states of +2 and +3. (2002)

When the equivalence point is reached, the addition of a drop of excess KMnO4(aq) would impart a
permanent pale pink colour. However, some candidates haphazardly wrote that the colour of the
solution changes from pink to colourless.

Many candidates were weak in the treatment of data in titrimetric analysis. The titre 23.90 cm3, which
deviates significantly from the others, should be discarded in the calculation of the mean titre of
KMnO4(aq).

Many candidates were unable to produce a correct drawing of the fuel cell. (2002)

10
The fuel cell uses potassium hydroxide as an electrolyte. Many candidates wrongly wrote half-
equations which include the species H+(aq). (2002)

Dilute sulphuric (VI) acid was added to increase the electrical conductivity of the electrolytic bath.
Some wrongly wrote that it acts as a buffer. (ASL2002)

Section 7 Phase Equilibria

Very few candidates could correlate vapour pressure with the number of molecules in the gas phase.
(1990)

Most candidates were not able to point out that the vapour pressure of the solution could be higher or
lower than that of the pure solvent. (1991)

Careless mistakes in the calculation of made fractions were common. (1991)

Some candidates confused ideal gas law with Raoult’s Law for ideal solution. (1992)

Many did not know the difference between reflux and fractional distillation. (1992)

Use of separating funnel ---- very weak. (1992)

Most answers had no solvent (ether) for example. (1992)

Many candidates were not able to get the final answers correct because they did not realize that the
ratio of partial pressures of A to B in the first distillate was the same as the mole ratio of A to B in the
condensed phase. This indicated that the underlying principles of fractional distillation were not well
understood by these candidates. (1993)

Many candidates were not aware of the relation between intermolecular interactions and non-ideal
behaviour of real solutions. (1993)

Some candidates did not know how to carry out a solvent extraction. (1994)

Many candidates wrongly used the term “bond” for “intermolecular attraction”. Most did not discuss
the significance of the minimum boiling point in curve (II) and the maximum boiling point in curve
(III). (1997)

The “critical temperature” of a substance is the temperature above which isothermal compression of the
substance, in its gaseous state, would not result in condensation to liquid. (1998)

Very few candidates were able to describe precisely the conditions required for the phase changes.
(1998)
Very few candidates correctly pointed out that the thin film of water on the chromatography paper acts
as the stationary phase and that partition is the underlying principle of the separation. (1999)

Some candidates wrongly interchanged the vapour composition and liquid composition curves. Some
did not indicate the azeotrope in the phase diagram. (1999)
11
Most candidates were unable to give a complete description of the changes as the fractional distillation
progressed. (1999)

Common mistakes included drawing diagrams showing set-ups for simple distillation instead of
fractional distillation, and drawing a reflux condenser in place of a fractionating column. (2000)

The term “azeotrope” was wrongly spelt in many cases. (2000)

Many candidates were unable to offer a correct explanation why mixtures of hexane and heptane
behave ideally. Many failed to indicate in their phase diagrams the linear relationship between the
vapour pressure of the mixture and mole fraction in the liquid phase. Some drew two phase diagrams
instead of one. (2000)

Few candidates realized that Rf value of a compound was related to both its solubility in the mobile
phase and its binding strength to the stationary phase. (2000)

The mixture can be separated by fractional distillation. Some candidates simply wrote “distillation”
which was not acceptable. (2002)

[CH3 (CH2 ) 3 NH3 + (aq) ][OH - (aq) ]

The expression for Kb should be written as
[CH3 (CH2 ) 3 NH2 (aq) ]
[CH3 (CH2 ) 3 NH3 + (aq) ][OH - (aq) ]
but some candidates wrongly gave
[CH3 (CH2 ) 3 NH2 (aq) ][H 2 O (l) ]

(ASL2002)

12