Cambridge IAS-Level · Analysis & Prediction

2024 Cambridge IAS-Level Chemistry (9701) Past Paper Analysis

An extensive assessment combining a challenging multiple-choice paper, high-yield structured theory questions on periodicity and carbonyls, and a highly quantitative practical paper focused on thermometric titration and gas-loss calculations.

Updated: 12 Jun 2026

Analysis Sample paper

Difficulty 3.5/5

Total marks

140

Duration

270 mins

Most tested

Reacting masses, gas stoichiometry, and quantitative practical calculations

Paper breakdown

Paper 11 Multiple Choice: 40 marks · 75 minsPaper 21 AS Level Structured Questions: 60 marks · 75 minsPaper 31 Advanced Practical Skills 1: 40 marks · 120 mins

Top chapters

Reacting masses and volumes (of solutions and gases) (Atoms, molecules and stoichiometry) · 21 marksChemistry of transition elements · 14 marksChemical energetics (Physical chemistry (AS Level)) · 10 marksPeriodicity of chemical properties of the elements in Period 3 (The Periodic Table: chemical periodicity) · 10 marks

Assessment Overview

This exam series presents a balanced yet rigorous testing of core physical, inorganic, and organic AS Chemistry, alongside transition element tests in the practical paper. Multiple Choice (Paper 11) demands high precision on periodic trends and organic reaction details, while Paper 21 requires detailed mechanism drawing and precise inorganic explanations. The practical paper (Paper 31) relies heavily on precise recording of values and error analysis, making the overall series moderately challenging.

Where the Marks are Won and Lost

Many marks are lost on incomplete definitions, such as defining relative isotopic mass without referring to the 1/12th scale of carbon-12. In the mechanism of nucleophilic addition, failing to draw curly arrows starting exactly from lone pairs or charges is a major examiner pitfall. Practising the distinction between physical intermolecular forces and chemical bonding when explaining melting points of giant covalent structures (e.g., \( \text{SiO}_2 \)) versus simple molecular structures (e.g., \( \text{SiCl}_4 \)) is crucial.

Practical Insights

For Paper 31, precision is key: all thermometer readings must consistently end in .0 or .5. Explainers for experimental modifications—such as why magnesium cannot easily replace sodium carbonate in gas-loss experiments—frequently trip students up due to the low density of hydrogen gas causing high percentage errors. Identifying transition metal oxidation states requires solid familiarity with characteristic test observations.

Exam Strategy & Future Recommendations

Prioritise organic reaction pathways and the precise mechanics of nucleophilic addition. Dedicate study time to periodic trends, particularly Group 2 solubility and carbonate thermal stability, which remain high-yield areas.

Charts

Marks by chapter

See where the marks were concentrated so revision time goes to the highest-value topics.

Question type mix

Compare the mark share of each paper section and question type.

Multiple Choice40 marks · 40 questions
Structured Questions60 marks · 27 questions
Practical Tasks40 marks · 18 questions

Mark accessibility

Estimate which marks were basic, mid-level, or high-difficulty.

79%within easy or medium reach

easy: 50 marksmedium: 60 markshard: 30 marks

Difficulty trend

Compare difficulty across recent years.

Command word frequency

Spot common command words so answers match the expected response style.

Skill weighting

Shows the skill mix this paper tested most heavily.

Study ROI

Bigger bubbles recur more often; higher bubbles carry more marks, helping you rank revision priorities.

Reacting masses, gas stoichiometry and empirical formulas

21 marks · Difficulty 2 · recurrence 95%

Period 3 trends and chemical reactions

10 marks · Difficulty 2.5 · recurrence 90%

Carbonyl compounds reactions and mechanisms

8 marks · Difficulty 3 · recurrence 85%

AS Level isomerism types and identification

6 marks · Difficulty 2.5 · recurrence 80%

Time vs marks

Compare marks with suggested time allocation to plan exam pacing.

marksmins

Next-year prediction

Topics worth watching next year, with the reason shown directly below each bar.

Acyl chlorides (Carboxylic acids and derivatives)85%

Not tested in this series' structured paper; highly recurring in organic synthesis and hydrolysis mechanism questions.

Group 2 carbonates and hydroxides solubility trends80%

Consistently tested through solubility patterns, pH trend comparisons, and thermal decomposition calculations.

Cumulative marks ladder

The line is your running mark total question by question; dashed lines are the estimated grade cut-offs. See which question the line crosses your target grade at, so you know how far you must answer cleanly and which questions decide a band.

Topic-year heatmap

Compare topic weight by year to spot recurring and returning areas.

Jun 2023 (V1)

Jun 2023 (V2)

Jun 2023 (V3)

Nov 2023 (V1)

Nov 2023 (V2)

Nov 2023 (V3)

Jun 2024 (V1)

Jun 2024 (V2)

Jun 2024 (V3)

Nov 2024 (V1)

Atomic structure (Physical chemistry (AS Level))

Electrons, energy levels and atomic orbitals

Ionisation energy

Particles in the atom and atomic radius

Atoms, molecules and stoichiometry (Physical chemistry (AS Level))

Relative masses of atoms and molecules

Reacting masses and volumes

The gaseous state: ideal and real gases and pV = nRT

Formulas

Shapes of molecules

Examiner insights

Official report

Common pitfalls

Defining relative isotopic mass relative to an individual carbon atom rather than the unified atomic mass unit (1/12th of carbon-12).
Forgetting that halogenoalkanes (like chloroform) must first undergo hydrolysis to release halide ions before giving a precipitate with silver nitrate.
Drawing curly arrows in organic mechanisms that do not originate clearly from a lone pair or negative charge, or that point to the wrong atoms.

Misconceptions

Believing that molecular compounds like SiCl4 have higher melting points than giant covalent structures like SiO2 due to covalent bonds, instead of comparing intermolecular forces to strong covalent lattices.
Confusing the low density of hydrogen gas with slow reaction rates when explaining why magnesium is not suitable for mass-loss gas experiments.

Where marks are lost

Leaving out the physical state labels or failing to show correct charges on ions in ionisation energy equations.
Not recording practical thermometer readings to the correct and uniform level of precision (.0 or .5 degrees Celsius).
Failing to state both the observed colour change and the identity of the gas evolved during qualitative analysis tests.

Estimated grade cut-off

Updated: 12 Jun 2026

Source: Cambridge International component thresholds (AS aggregate, derived)

Level	Mark	Percentage
A	92/140	66%
B	76/140	54%
C	66/140	47%
D	55/140	39%
E	44/140	31%

Estimated cut-offs from Cambridge International component thresholds (AS aggregate, derived); may differ from the official boundaries.

Know what the examiners want — now go get those marks

Thinka is an AI practice app used by 100,000+ DSE students to drill questions and get instant feedback on every answer. You already know the high-frequency topics and where marks are lost — now practice those specifically on Thinka and turn this analysis into actual marks.

Start Practising Free See pricing

Know what's tested? Drill those topics on Thinka — AI questions, instant marking.

Start Practising Free