Crowdly
Add to Chrome
CHM1011 - Chemistry I - S1 2025
Looking for CHM1011 - Chemistry I - S1 2025 test answers and solutions? Browse our comprehensive collection of verified answers for CHM1011 - Chemistry I - S1 2025 at learning.monash.edu.
Get instant access to accurate answers and detailed explanations for your course questions. Our community-driven platform helps students succeed!
Discussion
This is where you discuss and give meaning to the results. You should also detail any experimental errors and make any other relevant comments about the experiment. Include possible improvements. Ensure you are not re-stating the method.
Discussion points to consider: (Note: The points below are not intended as questions! They are here to give guidance on what to include in your discussion. Do not simply list answers - incorporate them into a full discussion.)
- Can you explain your observations based on the chemical reaction?
- After completing the calibration curves, was any additional data required in order to determine the composition? If so, what was that data, and why was it required?
- What composition of the baking powder would you suggest that Monash University produces to result in the best cake (if we were to assume that the more gas produced, the more the cake will rise)? Can you explain your answer using experimental results and the chemical equation?
- What factors may have affected the final result? What are some sources of error that may have been encountered, and how would they have impacted on the results?
Discussion marking rubric:
| 0 | 1 | 2 |
Relates results to aims. | Interpretation of results not related back to original experimental aims. | Results partially related back to original experimental aims. | Key results interpreted in relation to experimental aims. |
Discussion and interpretation of results. | No interpretation or comparison of results is made. No discussion points are addressed. | Some interpretation or comparison of results is made. Some discussion points are addressed. | Key findings are summarised. Results are interpreted. Results are compared to expected/predicted values. All discussion points are addressed. |
Actual data used to validate statements. | No experimental data used to justify scientific statements/claims. Multiple scientific errors are present. | Some experimental data used to justify scientific statements/claims. Some scientific errors are present. | Experimental data used to justify all scientific statements/claims. The science is correct. |
Factors affecting results discussed. | No errors were raised or were only non-scientific/experimental errors raised. | Only some errors raised or several non-scientific/experimental errors were raised. The impact of the errors was not discussed. | Multiple errors/factors are raised and are scientific/experimental in nature (i.e. NOT human error). The impact of the errors was discussed. |
Writing Style | Many grammatical/spelling/scientific writing errors were noted, and/or discussion was over 300 words in length. | Some grammatical/spelling/scientific writing errors were noted. | The discussion was free of grammatical and spelling errors, was written in the past tense, used full sentences and a passive voice, and was within 300 words. |
Word limit: 300 (± 10%) words.
For guidance on writing a meaningful discussion, please refer to the following resources:
- SoC: Undergraduate Student Handbook
- RLO: Writing a Science Lab Report
- RLO: Writing for Assignments
Sodium bicarbonate reacted with citric acid in 1 L of water, resulting in a temperature decrease of 10.11 C. Calculate the heat absorbed by this reaction.
The specific heat capacity of water is 4.184 J K
q(reaction) = -mcΔT
where m = mass of water
The specific heat capacity of water is 4.184 J K . Give your answer in kJ to two decimal places.
Based on your findings in Q11, what is the heat lost by the calorimeter (i.e. the surroundings)?
Note: q(reaction) + q(calorimeter) = 0
Give your answer in kJ to two decimal places.