2022 IGCSE Past Papers October Chemistry 0620
- IGCSE Chemistry Past Papers for Paper Code 0620 for 2020 October can be downloaded , along with examiner reports, grade thresholds, mark schemes, for all variants.
- The Paper 1 and Paper 3 are only to be solved by students appearing for the core exams
- The Paper 2 and 4 are to be solved by the students appearing for their extended exams.
- The Paper 6 is to be solved by both,the core as well as the extended-exam-students
EXAMINER REPORT AND GRADE THRESHOLD0620_w22_gt.pdf
0620_w22_er.pdf
0620_w22_ci_53.pdf
0620_w22_ci_52.pdf
0620_w22_ci_51.pdf
PAPER 1
QUESTION PAPER
0620_w22_qp_11.pdf / 0620_w22_qp_12.pdf / 0620_w22_qp_13.pdf
MARK SCHEME
0620_w22_ms_11.pdf / 0620_w22_ms_12.pdf / 0620_w22_ms_13.pdf
PAPER 2
QUESTION PAPER
0620_w22_qp_21.pdf / 0620_w22_qp_22.pdf / 0620_w22_qp_23.pdf
MARK SCHEME
0620_w22_ms_21.pdf / 0620_w22_ms_22.pdf / 0620_w22_ms_23.pdf
PAPER 3
QUESTION PAPER
0620_w22_qp_31.pdf / 0620_w22_qp_32.pdf / 0620_w22_qp_33.pdf
MARK SCHEME
0620_w22_ms_31.pdf / 0620_w22_ms_32.pdf / 0620_w22_ms_33.pdf
PAPER 4
QUESTION PAPER
0620_w22_qp_41.pdf / 0620_w22_qp_42.pdf / 0620_w22_qp_43.pdf
MARK SCHEME
0620_w22_ms_41.pdf / 0620_w22_ms_42.pdf / 0620_w22_ms_43.pdf
PAPER 5
QUESTION PAPER
0620_w22_qp_51.pdf / 0620_w22_qp_52.pdf / 0620_w22_qp_53.pdf
MARK SCHEME
0620_w22_ms_51.pdf / 0620_w22_ms_52.pdf / 0620_w22_ms_53.pdf
PAPER 6
QUESTION PAPER
0620_w22_qp_61.pdf / 0620_w22_qp_62.pdf / 0620_w22_qp_63.pdf
MARK SCHEME
0620_w22_ms_61.pdf / 0620_w22_ms_62.pdf / 0620_w22_ms_63.pdf
Learn From Difficult Questions
Check your preparation by comparing your performance to the performance of students who actually sat these exams
- Here, you will find questions that were found to be difficult by most students who appeared for these board exams.
- This section is designed to help you avoid similar mistakes when you take your board exams.
- Learning from other people’s experiences is smart and time-saving—you don’t always need to learn from first-hand experience.
PAPER 1 CORE [ Multiple Choice ]
Paper: October 2022 / Paper 11
Difficult Questions: 7, 10, 15, 24, 26, 31, 36 and 38
Paper: October 2022 / Paper 12
-->
Difficult Questions: 21, 25, 34, 37, 39 and 40
Paper: October 2022 / Paper 13
-->-->
Difficult Questions: s 4, 19, 21, 26 and 39
PAPER 2 EXTENDED [ Multiple Choice ]
Paper: Paper 21:
Difficult Questions: 1, 10, 25, 26 and 37
Paper: October 2022 / Paper 22:
Difficult Questions: 3, 8, 27 and 28
Paper: October 2022 / Paper 23
Difficult Questions: 21 and 39
PAPER 3 CORE [ Structured Theory ]
Paper: Paper 31:
Difficult Questions: 5(c), 5(d)(i)(ii), 6(a), 6(e)(i)(ii), 6(f), 7(b)(ii)(iv), 7(c) and 8(b)(iii).
Paper: 32
Difficult Questions: 1(b), 5(c)(ii), 7(c)(i), 7(c)(iii), 7(d) and 7(e).
Paper:33
Difficult Questions: 1(b), 3(b)(iii), 7(b)(i), 7(b)(ii), 7(c)(i) and 7(c)(ii).
PAPER 4 EXTENDED [ Structured Theory ]
Paper: Paper 41:
Examiner Comments:
- Ionic equations, including half-equations, continue to be an area that needs considerable improvement.
- Where candidates are required to select an answer from a set of choices, such as Question 1, candidates should be encouraged to make sensible guesses rather than leaving an answer blank.
- Candidates should not provide fractions as answers to calculations.
- When determining the Mr of a substance, candidates should clearly state that the number they have determined is in fact the Mr, rather than a random number.
- More precision is needed when drawing arrows on an energy profile diagram.
- Subscripts must be written below the line e.g. CO2 as opposed to CO2. This applies to writing general formulae e.g. CnH2n+2 as opposed to CnH2n+2.
General comments :
- Candidates appeared to have sufficient time for all questions to be answered.
- When drawing diagrams to support a written response, candidates should check that they are labelled clearly and do not contradict their written text. Very few candidates felt the need to write on extra pages.
- If extra pages are used, any responses must be clearly show which question they refer to.
PAPER 4 EXTENDED [ Structured Theory ]
Paper: 42
Examiner Comments:
- Candidates should not use charges when writing chemical equations.
- Candidates should not provide fractions as answers to calculations.
- When determining the Mr of a substance, candidates should clearly state that the number they have determined is in fact the Mr, rather than a random number.
- Candidates need to consider the valencies of atoms; divalent hydrogen atoms and pentavalent carbon atoms were commonly seen in the structures drawn.
General comments :
- Candidates appeared to have sufficient time for all questions to be answered.
- The standard of calculation work seemed better than in previous series.
PAPER 4 EXTENDED [ Structured Theory ]
Paper: 43
Examiner Comments:
- Formulae and equations, including ionic equations and ionic half-equations, were an area of weakness for many candidates.
General comments :
- The paper was generally well answered with only a few candidates gaining very few marks and some candidates gaining full marks.
- Questions about practical work were answered the least well.
- Many candidates gave names of chemicals formed when they were asked to describe observations.
PAPER 5 [ Practicals ]
Paper: Paper 51:
Examiner Comments:
There were too few candidates for a meaningful report to be produced.
Paper: 52
Examiner Comments:
- Candidates should go through their plans when answering Question 3 before writing their response.
- There is no need to list apparatus or variables at the start of the plan.
- When a question asks for the name of a chemical, a correct formula is always acceptable
- However, if a candidate answers with an incorrect formula, then the mark will not be awarded.
- Candidates should be aware that the mark allocation reflects the number of valid points to be made for parts of questions
General comments :
- Most candidates successfully completed all questions and there was no evidence that candidates were short of time.
- The complete range of marks was seen.
- The paper discriminated successfully between candidates of different abilities but was accessible to all.
- The majority of candidates were able to complete tables of results from readings on diagrams and then handle the data obtained as in Question 2.
Examiner Comments:
- It is essential that centres make up solutions and provide apparatus in accordance with the details contained in the Confidential Instructions.
- If there is difficulty in obtaining some substances, then the centre should contact Cambridge for advice.
- Centres should submit a full set of Supervisor’s results that have qualitative results for Question 1 and the observations for each test in Question 2.
- Candidates should go through their plans when answering Question 3 before writing their response.
- There is no need to list apparatus or variables at the start of the plan.
- Readings recorded from a given item of apparatus should all be recorded to the same resolution (the same number of decimal places).
- Where, in a quantitative task, a reagent is added dropwise (or gradually) and then in excess, candidates should give two sets of observation for the dropwise addition and then for the addition in excess, making it clear which observation is for dropwise addition and which is for addition in excess.
- In qualitative analysis, where the question states ‘test any gas produced’, candidates should describe and give the result of any positive gas test they carried out.
- It is recommended that graph scales are chosen so that each major grid line is equivalent to 1, 2, or 5 (or those numbers multiplied by 10n) – this is indicated in the mathematical requirements in the syllabus and by the Association for Science Education (A.S.E.)
- Data points should be plotted using a cross (X) or an encircled dot (?) and should not be obscured by the graph line, which should be drawn using a sharp pencil.
General comments:
- Many candidates successfully attempted all the questions.
- The paper discriminated successfully between candidates of different abilities but was accessible to all.
- The paper was generally well answered, with very few blank spaces.
- A wide variety of approaches was seen in Question 3 (the planning exercise).
- Any approach which would yield appropriate quantitative results could gain full credit.
- In Question 1, most centres obtained results that were in line with those expected given the concentrations of the solutions specified in the Confidential Instructions.
General comments :
PAPER 6 [ Alternativer to Practicals ]
Paper: Paper 61:
Examiner Comments:
- Readings taken from a given item of apparatus should all be recorded to the same resolution (the same number of decimal places).
- Where, in a quantitative task, a reagent is added dropwise (or gradually) and then in excess, candidates should give observations for the dropwise addition and then for the addition in excess; making it clear which observation is for dropwise addition and which is for addition in excess.
- When plotting graphs, points should be plotted as a cross (X) or an encircled dot (?) and not obscured by the graph line, which should be drawn using a sharp pencil. Lines of best fit should be smooth curves or ruler-drawn straight lines; they should not wobble from point to point.
General comments:
- The majority of candidates successfully attempted all of the questions.
- The paper discriminated successfully between candidates of different abilities but was accessible to all. The paper was generally well answered, with very few blank spaces.
- The most common questions to not be attempted were those where candidates had to add to an existing diagram or graph – this could suggest that some candidates looked for the answer lines rather than reading the whole paper carefully. In answering the planning question (Question 4), there is no need for candidates to write a list of apparatus at the start, or the aims of the experiment. Where there is credit available for the use of suitable apparatus, then that will only be awarded if it is stated what the apparatus is used for; credit will not be awarded just for a name in a list of apparatus.
PAPER 6 [ Alternativer to Practicals ]
Paper: Paper 62:
Examiner Comments:
- Candidates should go through their plans when answering Question 4 before writing their response.
- There is no need to list apparatus or variables at the start of the plan.
- When a question asks for the name of a chemical, a correct formula is always acceptable
- However, if a candidate answers with an incorrect formula, then credit will not be awarded.
- Candidates should be aware that the mark allocation reflects the number of valid points to be made for parts of questions.
General comments :
- Most candidates successfully completed all questions and there was no evidence that candidates were short of time.
- The complete range of marks was seen.
- The paper discriminated successfully between candidates of different abilities but was accessible to all.
- The majority of candidates were able to complete tables of results from readings on diagrams and then handle the data obtained as in Question 2.
PAPER 6 [ Alternativer to Practicals ]
Paper: Paper 63:
Examiner Comments:
- Observations are those which you can see. For example, ‘fizzing’ is an observation, whereas ‘a gas was given off’ is not.
- When a question asks for the name of a chemical, a correct formula is always acceptable
- However, if a candidate answers with an incorrect formula, then credit will not be awarded.
- The term ‘amount’ is not the same as volume or mass.
- When describing quantities, in Question 4 for example, mass or volume should be used rather than amount.
General comments :
- Most candidates successfully attempted all the questions and the full range of marks was seen.
- The paper was generally well answered, with very few blank spaces. The paper discriminated successfully between candidates of different abilities but was accessible to all.
- All questions discriminated equally well, although some were more demanding than others. The majority of candidates were able to complete tables of results from thermometer and stop-clock diagrams in Question 2.
- The graph was also well drawn with nearly all candidates choosing a suitable scale.
- A wide variety of approaches was seen in Question 4, the planning exercise, and any approach which would yield appropriate quantitative results could gain full credit.
Write a public review