LABORATORY
ASSESSMENT ACTIVITY B.5
THE PROBLEM: Determine if
iron(III) chloride,
FeCl3, or
potassium iodide, KI, is a better catalyst for the
decomposition of a 3% solution of hydrogen
peroxide,
H2O2.
Describe the method you developed to solve this
problem.
ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES
This problem is designed to assess student skill in
designing an experiment to test the
effectiveness of a catalyst. A student must be able to
demonstrate control of variables,
and to know the meaning of the term catalyst.
ONE LIKELY APPROACH
1. The student develops a strategy
for deciding how to determine which is a better
catalyst. A suitable strategy would be to measure
rate of decomposition of
H2O2
for a fixed mass of catalyst, judging the reaction
to be complete when the bubbling stops.
2. The student adds a known, fixed
quantity of each catalyst to a known, fixed volume
of
H2O2
solution and records the time for complete
decomposition. Note: An alternate approach would be
to prepare solutions with the same concentration
for each catalyst, as they both are soluble. Then a
drop of each catalyst solution could be added to a
known, fixed volume of
H2O2
solution and the time recorded as before.
3. The student concludes that a
faster bubbling rate, or a shorter time for
reaction completion, indicates the better
catalyst.
SCORING SUGGESTIONS (BASED ON 5 POINTS)
1. Development of experimental strategy
2 pt
a) The student plans to combine
each catalyst with
H2O2
solution, but fails to control either the mass
of the catalyst or the volume of solution.
0 pt
b) The student plans to combine each
catalyst with
H2O2
solution, but fails to control one of the
variables. 1 pt
c) The student plans to use the
likely approach procedure. 2
pt
2. Carrying out the reactions 2
pt
a) The student runs the
reactions but never decides how to judge the
endpoint. 0 pt
b) The student runs the reactions,
recording time, but does not record how the
endpoint has been judged. 1 pt
c) The student runs the reactions,
using the likely approach procedure.
2 pt
3. Conclusions drawn from experimental
data 1 pt
a) The student does not draw any
conclusions 0 pt
b) The student draws a conclusion, but
no reasonable evidence is cited. 0.5
pt
c) The student draws conclusions based
on the likely approach analysis. 1
pt
Extra credit could
be awarded if the
student
a) writes a chemical equation
for the reaction.
b) discusses the uncertainties and
sources of error in this determination.
MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT
|
Chemicals
|
Equipment
|
Possible Distracters
|
|
3 % hydrogen peroxide,
H2O2
, solution
potassium iodide, KI(s)
iron(III) chloride,
FeCl3
(s)
water
|
Beral-type pipets, micro-tip
reaction plate, 24-well
balance that weighs to 1 mg
timer, clock, or watch with second hand
|
|
|
Notes
1. The hydrogen peroxide solution should be fresh
and tested for reactivity before it is used.
2. The problem can be made more challenging if
yeast is added as a third choice of catalyst.
3. The problem is made considerably more
challenging if the students are asked to prepare the
catalysts by reacting soluble copper, nickel and cobalt
salts with sodium hydroxide. The salt
solutions are not good catalysts, but the insoluble
hydroxides are. Working out the details of this
project might well be a group project, not an individual
assessment.
SPECIAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS
1. Do not use manganese(IV) oxide, MnO2,for a catalyst in this reaction as it is a suspected carcinogen.
YOUR USAGE LOG AND NOTES