How do denticities and types of donor atoms of ligands influence the proton ligand formation number and metal ligand formation number of copper (II) aqueous complexes at pH 7, determined through comparative pH metric analysis?SL
Loading scores...
A
Official IB Result
IB Grade: A
Criteria A: Focus and Method
6/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
A.1Topic communication and explanation
Good
A.2Research question formulation and focus
Good
A.3Research methodology
Moderate
Criteria Feedback
- You state a clear research question and keep the investigation broadly centred on copper(II) complexation and ligand comparison.
- You explain the pH-metric approach and the chosen variables with a good sense of purpose.
- You show evidence of deliberate method selection, including pilot work and repeated measurements.
- Some of the chemistry is not precise enough for a top-level explanation.
- The investigation question is still broader than it needs to be because several variables change at once.
- The method has important control issues, especially around standardisation and comparability of the ligand systems.
Criteria B: Knowledge and Understanding
4/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
B.1Application of source material
Moderate
B.2Subject knowledge
Moderate
B.3Use of terminology and concepts
Moderate
Criteria Feedback
- You use a broad range of relevant coordination-chemistry ideas and terminology.
- You include theory that is clearly connected to the investigation, such as protonation, chelation, hydrolysis, and ligand effects.
- You make a genuine attempt to apply source material to the copper(II) system rather than listing facts in isolation.
- Several important explanations are chemically inaccurate or too simplified.
- Some terminology is used loosely or inconsistently, especially around denticity, stability, and formation numbers.
- The source material is not always applied critically enough to support the specific claims being made.
Criteria C: Critical Thinking
12/12
0
6
12
Criteria Strands
C.1Research quality
Poor
C.2Analysis depth
Poor
C.3Discussion and evaluation
Poor
Criteria Feedback
- Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
- Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
- Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
- Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Criteria D: Presentation
4/4
0
2
4
Criteria Strands
D.1Structure appropriateness
Good
D.2Layout considerations
Moderate
Criteria Feedback
- Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
- Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
- Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
- Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.