This site uses cookie tracking technologies. Learn more in our Cookie Policy.
Chemistry Extended Essay Exemplar: Saponification Values and Soap… | RevisionDojo
Loading document preview...
IB Chemistry SL Extended Essay Example
“To what extent do 100.00g of different types of oils (sunflower oil, palm oil, peanut oil, coconut oil, and olive oil) with their saponification values affect the pH, being closest to 7, and rate of curing of soap after 3 weeks of curing during the saponification process, conducted at a constant temperature of 50°C for 30 minutes?
C
Official IB Result
16/34
Was this exemplar helpful?
Want a report just like this?
Free mini report for your own coursework
Fast feedback on what to improve next
Annotated highlights on your writing
General feedback
14/28
0
14
28
6.1·Weakness
Page 20• Click to view
Raw olive oil data table contains blank rows for initial trials, indicating missing data; revisit data completeness.
Criteria A: Focus and Method
5/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
Good
Topic communication and explanation
Good
Research question formulation and focus
Excellent
Research methodology
Criteria Feedback
Clear articulation of topic with contextual relevance (COVID-19 hygiene, skin sensitivity).
Comprehensive methodology: detailed procedures, five replicates per condition and basic statistical treatment.
Well‐justified choice of oils and NaOH masses based on saponification values.
Thorough safety considerations and complete materials and controlled-variables tables supporting reproducibility.
Research question is explicit but overly verbose and could be streamlined for clarity.
Units for NaOH volumes are omitted or ambiguous; conversion between mL and mg/g requires clearer explanation.
Use of pH strips rather than a calibrated pH meter reduces precision of measurements.
Minor formatting issues (irrelevant Latin dates, typographical noise) occasionally detract from clarity.
1.1·Weakness
Page 1• Click to view
Research question is explicit but overly long and complex; consider streamlining to focus on key variables and improve clarity.
1.2·Strength
Page 3• Click to view
Personal anecdote effectively communicates genuine interest and contextualizes the research question, enhancing engagement.
1.3·Weakness
Page 8• Click to view
Independent variable description omits units for NaOH volume; include clear units and justification for chosen volumes.
1.4·Weakness
Page 9• Click to view
Table 1 lists NaOH amounts in mL but saponification values refer to mg NaOH/g; clarify conversion and units for accuracy.
1.5·Weakness
Page 10• Click to view
Use of litmus paper for pH measurement lacks precision; consider using a calibrated pH meter to improve data reliability.
1.6·Strength
Page 11• Click to view
Controlled variables table is comprehensive, detailing multiple factors and how they were stabilized.
1.7·Strength
Page 13• Click to view
Materials table clearly lists both equipment and materials with their tolerances, supporting reproducibility.
1.8·Strength
Page 14• Click to view
Procedure is detailed in logical steps, enabling reproducibility and demonstrating methodological rigor.
1.9·Strength
Page 15• Click to view
Comprehensive safety section addresses ethical and environmental considerations, reflecting awareness of laboratory best practices.
1.10·Strength
Page 18• Click to view
Raw curing weight data table is exhaustive, providing five replicate measurements for each oil.
Criteria B: Knowledge and Understanding
3/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
Poor
Application of source material
Moderate
Subject knowledge
Moderate
Use of terminology and concepts
Criteria Feedback
Correct mechanistic equation and saponification calculation formula demonstrate effective use of source material.
Consistent use of key terminology (‘triglyceride’, ‘ANOVA’, ‘standard deviation’) in most contexts.
Well‐organized raw pH data table aids clear presentation of experimental results.
Overreliance on block quotes and verbatim text limits demonstration of synthesized understanding.
Incorrect factual statement about melting points of saturated vs. unsaturated fatty acids indicates conceptual oversight.
Limited integration of source material into analysis and evaluation; literature is used primarily for background rather than interpretation.
Minor chemical nomenclature errors (e.g., ‘ethanal’ for ethanol) disrupt consistency of terminology.
2.1·Weakness
Page 3• Click to view
Introduction relies on a block quote without integration; paraphrase source material and link it to your experimental rationale.
2.2·Weakness
Page 4• Click to view
Background section includes verbatim text, indicating limited synthesis; rephrase in your own words to demonstrate understanding.
2.3·Strength
Page 5• Click to view
Mechanistic equation is correctly presented with reactants and products, showing clear subject knowledge.
2.4·Weakness
Page 7• Click to view
Statement that saturated fatty acids have a lower melting point than unsaturated is factually incorrect; revise based on thermochemical data.
2.5·Strength
Page 9• Click to view
Saponification calculation formula is provided, demonstrating application of source material to experimental design.
