Cambridge Chemistry 9701 Paper 5: Current Planning, Analysis and Evaluation Guide

Q: What does Cambridge International Chemistry 9701 Paper 5 assess?
A: Paper 5 is a written Planning, Analysis and Evaluation paper. It assesses higher-order practical reasoning through experimental planning, analysis, conclusions, and evaluation without requiring laboratory facilities during the examination.

TL;DR
Paper 5 lasts 1 hour 15 minutes, has 30 marks, and contributes 11.5% of A Level. It contains two or more questions. Planning receives at least 12 marks, analysis-conclusion-evaluation receives at least 12, and the remaining 6 marks can move across those skills.

Last reviewed: 19 July 2026. This guide follows Cambridge's current 2025-2027 Chemistry 9701 specification. It distinguishes published requirements from study advice and does not predict the exact experiment, reagents, apparatus, graph, or evaluation context in a future paper.

1. Paper 5 at a glance

Paper 5 belongs to the full A Level route. An AS-only entry uses Papers 1, 2, and 3. A valid staged A Level entry adds Papers 4 and 5 after the AS components, while an all-components A Level entry takes Papers 1 to 5 in one series. Confirm the actual entry, series, administrative zone, component code, and carry-forward conditions with the school or examination centre.

Paper 3 remains the candidate-run Advanced Practical Skills component. Paper 5 does not replace it.

2. Published paper and mark structure

Paper 5 focuses on four higher-order experimental skills:

• planning;
• analysis;
• drawing conclusions;
• evaluation.

The detailed allocation can vary. The table does not promise a fixed mark count for one command word, diagram, calculation, graph, limitation, or improvement.

Questions may be less structured and may require extended writing supported by diagrams, flow charts, tables, or equations. A question may ask for a written hypothesis linking variables, a graph of the predicted outcome, or analysis and evaluation of supplied data.

Some contexts may be difficult to investigate in a school laboratory because of cost or safety. Cambridge does not require theory or equipment beyond the expected A Level practical scope and supplies information candidates are not expected to know.

3. Defining the planning problem

Using the information and experimental aim supplied, candidates should be able to:

1. identify a safe, efficient procedure that can produce a reliable result;
2. identify the necessary steps and suitable apparatus;
3. understand the risks;
4. identify the independent and dependent variables;
5. express a prediction in words or as a graph;
6. identify variables that need controlling;
7. explain how and why the proposed procedure will be effective.

The prediction, apparatus, variables, and method must fit the supplied chemistry. Do not insert a memorised concentration range, measurement precision, number of readings, or calculation when the question does not support it.

4. Writing the method

A complete method may include:

• the apparatus arrangement in words or a labelled diagram;
• a logical sequence that reaches the experimental conclusion;
• measuring instruments that give suitable precision;
• suitable reagent volumes and concentrations;
• how the independent variable changes and the dependent variable is measured;
• how other key variables are controlled;
• a control experiment that tests whether the independent variable causes the change;
• predicted outcomes where relevant;
• an appropriately headed results table;
• a proposed graph and explanation of how the data reaches a conclusion;
• points to consider when evaluating the method and results.

Cambridge also expects knowledge of standard laboratory practice where relevant, including making standard solutions, weighing by difference, titration concordance, heating to constant mass, and taking more readings around a graph's inflexion point. This is a published capability list, not a guarantee that every Paper 5 uses each procedure.

5. Safety boundaries

Safety must match the actual hazard and method. The current syllabus gives examples such as:

• a fume hood for hazardous gases;
• a face mask for hazardous particles;
• avoiding naked flames with flammable materials;
• chemically resistant gloves for irritant materials.

Do not attach every precaution to every plan. Identify the relevant risk, choose a suitable control, and keep the procedure workable. Centre and teacher responsibilities for supervised course laboratory work remain separate from the written-paper response.

6. Dealing with supplied data

Candidates should be able to:

• identify the calculations and presentation needed for a conclusion;
• calculate means, percentages, and percentage gain or loss where appropriate;
• use tables and graphs to expose the key points and variability in quantitative data;
• analyse data and draw a supported conclusion;
• plot a graph using the current Paper 3 conventions;
• plot y against x and obtain m and c for y = mx + c;
• choose appropriate axes from the data range;
• calculate the percentage error of a measurement;
• calculate quantities from raw data;
• report calculated quantities to appropriate significant figures.

The current mathematical requirement normally permits the same number of significant figures as, or one more than, the least precise value used. The question and supplied data determine whether a mean, percentage, graph, error calculation, or linear relationship is needed.

7. Conclusions

A source-aligned conclusion should:

1. describe the key features of the data and analysis;
2. state whether the experimental data supports the conclusion or prediction;
3. give a detailed chemical explanation;
4. make a further prediction or suggest an improvement where asked;
5. judge whether an observed discrepancy can be explained by measurement error or another factor.

Use the supplied evidence. A familiar explanation about heat loss, endpoint judgement, escaping gas, or volatility is relevant only when it accounts for the actual method and result.

8. Evaluation

Candidates may need to assess:

• anomalous values, possible explanations, and suitable treatment;
• whether replication is adequate and why it helps;
• whether the data range is adequate;
• how effectively selected variables were controlled;
• weaknesses in the experimental procedure;
• how reagent concentration or experimental conditions affect results;
• consequences of incorrect apparatus use;
• reliability where data follows a best-fit line without anomalies;
• whether the data is suitable to test the prediction;
• where additional readings improve the range;
• the quality, reliability, trustworthiness, and confidence of the outcome.

Link each improvement to the weakness it addresses. A generic list of heat loss, endpoint overshoot, gas escape, or evaporation is not a substitute for evaluating the supplied procedure and data.

9. A source-bounded preparation method

This is study advice, not a Cambridge rule: verify the route, then practise planning from unfamiliar aims, matching apparatus and hazards to a method, building tables and graphs, showing calculations, and writing evidence-led conclusions and evaluations.

Cambridge says candidates need extensive supervised A Level laboratory work. It does not prescribe a commercial provider, weekly schedule, or fixed laboratory or tuition-session count.

10. What this guide does not establish

The specification does not fix a future experiment, reagent, apparatus, variable, graph, anomaly, or weakness. It does not require every plan to use the same volumes, concentrations, safety controls, readings, or calculations; prescribe one universal evaluation phrase; set a fixed preparation count; or guarantee grade improvement from tuition or any other format.

See the Chemistry 9701 Paper 3 guide for the candidate-run component.

References

1. Cambridge International, Chemistry 9701 syllabus, 2025-2027.
2. Cambridge International, Chemistry 9701 overview.