Communicating¶

Syllabus mapping

Working Scientifically outcome — Communicating. Covers using accurate scientific language and correct notation, selecting an appropriate form (text, diagram, graph, equation) for what's being communicated, writing for the intended audience, and referencing sources appropriately.

Outcome codes: CH-11WS-07 (Year 11) and CH-12WS-07 (Year 12) — Communicating. Same outcome wording in both years, with a separate code for each. Wording on this page is paraphrased for teaching use — check the official syllabus before treating any line as verbatim NESA text.

You need to know: correct chemistry isn't the same as a good mark — a right answer written unclearly, in the wrong notation, or without showing the reasoning behind it loses marks just as surely as a wrong one does.

Core¶

Correct terminology and notation¶

Use the exact term the syllabus uses, not a casual substitute. In chemistry, everyday words often mean something different:

Everyday (avoid)	Chemistry (use)
"The salt melted into the water"	The salt dissolved — melting is a solid turning to liquid by heating
"The sugar disappeared"	The sugar dissolved — it's still there, spread through the solution as molecules
"The atoms want a full shell"	Atoms gain or lose electrons to reach a more stable (lower-energy) configuration
"A strong solution"	A concentrated solution
"Particles" (when you know which)	Atoms, molecules or ions — be specific

Notation matters too:

Capital letters in symbols: \(\ce{Co}\) is cobalt; \(\ce{CO}\) is carbon monoxide.
Charges as superscripts with the number first: \(\ce{Mg^{2+}}\), not Mg+2.
State symbols in equations when the question asks for them: (s), (l), (g), (aq).
Units written correctly: mol L⁻¹, g mol⁻¹, kJ mol⁻¹.

Choosing the right mode for the content¶

Some information communicates far better as a diagram, graph, or equation than as a paragraph — and vice versa:

A balanced equation communicates exactly what reacts and what forms, in what ratio — clearer than a sentence.
A labelled diagram communicates a set-up (distillation apparatus, a calorimeter), a structure (an ionic lattice, an electron dot diagram) or an energy profile faster and less ambiguously than words.
A graph communicates a trend or relationship (see Representing Data).
Prose communicates reasoning, cause-and-effect, and evaluation — the why, which an equation or diagram alone can't carry.

A strong extended response usually uses more than one of these together — text that explains, backed by an equation or diagram that shows.

Writing for the audience and the command verb¶

The same content needs a different level of detail depending on what's being asked. A 1-mark "Identify" question wants a short, direct answer; a 7-mark "Evaluate" or "Explain" question expects a genuinely extended, structured response — reasoning built up logically, not a list of disconnected facts. Matching depth to the command verb (see the command verb glossary) is itself a communication skill: a well-written paragraph answering "Describe" when the question said "Explain" still loses marks, because it hasn't communicated the why.

Worked example — before and after

Question: "Explain why sodium chloride has a high melting point."

Weak answer: "Because it has strong bonds."

Stronger answer: "Sodium chloride is an ionic compound: a lattice of \(\ce{Na+}\) and \(\ce{Cl-}\) ions held together by strong electrostatic attraction between oppositely charged ions. Each ion is surrounded by six ions of the opposite charge, so the attractions act in every direction throughout the whole lattice. Melting requires breaking a very large number of these strong attractions, which needs a lot of energy — so the melting point is high (801 °C)."

The stronger answer names the type of bonding, describes the structure, uses correct terms (ionic lattice, electrostatic attraction, oppositely charged ions), and explains the mechanism — why strong bonds mean a high melting point. The weak answer reaches a true statement but doesn't show understanding.

Referencing sources¶

Any claim, data set, image, or idea that isn't your own original work or common knowledge needs to be acknowledged — in a depth study, in a secondary-source investigation, or anywhere you've used someone else's data or explanation. A reference needs enough information that someone else could find the same source: author/organisation, title, publication or website name, year, and the URL if it's online. Referencing isn't just about avoiding plagiarism — it's what lets a reader independently check a claim, which is a core part of how science works.

Advanced

Integrating multiple Working Scientifically skills into one coherent extended response. A strong answer to a large-mark question doesn't address planning, processing and evaluating as separate boxes to tick — it moves between them fluidly: stating a claim, backing it with data or a calculation, addressing a limitation, and drawing a conclusion, all as one continuous argument. This is what separates a Band 5 extended response (correct content, presented as a list of points) from a Band 6 one (the same content, structured as a connected argument) — worth practising as its own skill.

Extension

Beyond the syllabus for this course — won't appear in the HSC, included for interest / depth study inspiration.

📎 Depth study idea

A depth study doesn't have to be a traditional written report — NESA allows non-traditional formats, and translating a technical finding for a general audience (a short video, a podcast episode, a public-facing article or infographic — e.g. "what's actually in your tap water?") is a different, valuable communication skill from writing for an examiner. Science communication to a non-specialist audience means keeping the chemistry accurate while stripping out jargon and rebuilding the explanation around everyday context. Doing it well (accurate and accessible) is harder than it looks.

Video/visual resources¶

🎥 TODO: source a video on scientific writing and referencing for school science reports.

Check yourself¶

Rewrite this using correct terminology: "The sugar melted into the tea and disappeared."

Answer

E.g. "The sugar dissolved in the tea: the sugar molecules separated and spread evenly through the water, forming a solution. The sugar is still present — you can't see it because the molecules are far too small."
A student answers a "Compare" question about ionic and covalent molecular substances by writing one paragraph about each, with no direct comparison between them. Explain what's missing.

Answer

"Compare" asks for similarities and differences identified directly against each other (see the command verb glossary). Two separate descriptions don't do that. The answer needs sentences that connect them: "unlike ionic substances, covalent molecular substances have low melting points because…", "both can dissolve in water, but…".
You used lead levels from a government water-quality report in a depth study. Explain what information your reference should include.

Answer

Enough for someone else to find the same source: the organisation that published it (the author), the report's title, the year of publication, the publisher/website, and the URL and the date you accessed it if it's online — in whatever referencing style your school uses.