GENERIC EXAMINATION FEEDBACK

FORM
Module Code:
Module Title:
Credits:
Module Convenors:
Publish Exam Paper to Eng. Portal
Publish Exam Solutions to Eng. Portal
General Comments (Comments
Regarding Overall Performance
highlighting how students may improve
overall technique to enhance future
results)
Question Specific Comments
(Comments regarding performance on
individual questions highlighting
strategies for improving future results)
Headings below may be changed as
required. Extras can be inserted
BEFORE the 'END'
Question 1

Question 2

Question 3:

Question 4:

Question 5:

Question 6:

END

Please compose all comments in column B. As this spreadsheet will be

imported into a database
J12ANM
Analytical Measurement
10
Chris Somerfield
Yes
No
Ensure that the question is read and the question is answered - It is clear that
some students did not do this - see below for instances. Laying out the answer
in a logical way. Starting new questions on a new page (as instructed on the
front of the booklet) - this reduces the possibility of things being missed.

The average mark for this compulsory question was 15/25. Highest mark 25
lowest mark 1. ai and aii were on the whole, well done. aiii was patchy with
about half knowing the answer and the other half not. bi mean and std dev
mainly well done - the most common issues were for q1bi was a
misunderstanding of whether to use t or z. for bii many did not calculate the
95% conf interval and simply (incorrectly) used the standard deviation given.
Explanations on the whole were OK - but a simple diagram really aids the
explanation here. for b(iii) it was necessary to determine the working range and
then to apply that to calculate(where appropriate) the concentrations in the
samples.
The average mark for this compulsory question was 11/25. Highest mark 22
lowest mark 0. Not at all well done by many. Sadly the impression given is that
students are not following up on laboratory sessions and discussing their results.
Part a and part b. Not answering the question or not knowing their results to
draw general plots was the issue here.
Part c. i and ii Many student did not
give 'reasoning' and answers were too brief. Part c iii and iv . iii was a simple
Ksp calculation and iv applying the answer to calculations that could be done
from a linerar regression. Again mixed answers.
The average mark for this chosen question was 13/25. Highest mark 22 lowest
mark 2. Generally very well done. The answer part e caused the most difficulty
to all.

The average mark for this chosen question was 12/25. Highest mark 22 lowest
mark 3. Part a and b.(7 marks) was done well by most and accounts for 7 of the
11 average. For c) most only scored 1 from 3. 5/15 was awarded (on
average) for the remainder of the question. Explain seems to cause difficulty.
The average mark for this chosen question was 15/25. Highest mark 25 lowest
mark 6. These open ended questions without parts are challenging. However
some really ggod answers with 7 of 23 getting 20 or more out of 25. Only a
very few students (23/137) attempted it. The marks were bi-model.
The average mark for this chosen question was 13/25. Highest mark 21 lowest
mark 2. Generally very well done by some and well done by many. Areas for
improvement is to remember about 'absence' on IR spectra. Some students,
whilst identifying the fragments, put them together in the wrong sequence.
Despite the question sayin there was no N present many proposed struncture
contained it.