Hint 1: Standard Conditions
Standard conditions are necessary for most quantitative determinations in chemistry. For example, in order to find the exact concentration of a gas, the determination would have to take place under standard conditions of temperature and pressure. To determine exact electrochemical potentials, half-cell concentrations should be the same concentration (according to the Nernst equation). Calorimetric determinations require standard pressure and exact stoichiometric quantities.

Basically: When you're determining stuff, make sure you use standard or otherwise necessary conditions.

Hint 2: To be or not to be...Volumetric

Not all glassware is suitable for measuring exact volumes of liquids, at least to some known degree of prevision. In order to be considered appropriate for volumetric measurements, the capacity of the specific piece of glassware must be calibrated. Based on the calibration, the scale, or single volume line, are positioned according to these exact capacities. The scale itself reflects the amount of prevision with which a volume measurement can be determined. Glassware calibrated for capacity should never be heated.
Graduated cynlinders, burets, and graduated pipettes are calibrated and marked with a single line to indicate a single volume capacity. These last two pieces of glassware offer greater prevision than graduated pieces. Volumetric pieces should never be used to house possible reactions because of the heat that might be released.
Erlenmeyer flasks and beakers are not examples of volumetric glassware, but are by far the most commonly used items for working with liquids in the lab, usually solutions of water.
Erlenmeyer flasks are ideal for swirling and performing reactions because the conical shape prevents spillage and loss of heat and contents during reactions. Beakers are very versatile. They have wide openings, which makes it easy to pour into and add to when assembling chemicals. Furthermore, their spouts make them especially suitable for pouring. Where heat loss and containment may not be of great concern, they can also be used for reactions, heating and cooling.

Basically: Don't perform reactions in stuff that's volumetric. Volumetric vessels have a SINGLE volume indicator line and are calibrated. Don't use non-volumetrically calibrated glassware for measuring exact volumes.

Hint 3: Non-Standard Conditons

Many chemical determinations are made under standard conditions of temperature, pressure, and/or concentration, and can, in most cases, be ignored from the calculations.
For example, electrochemical cell potentials are determined from half-cells containing 1M solutions of each electrolyte. In these cases, the voltage reading of the cell should equal the electrochemical cell potential. As well, Gibb's Free Energy (delta G) for a chemical reaction can be determined from the standard Gibb's Free Energy of Formation for each reactant and product according to Hess's Law, only under standard conditions of temperature.
What if the conditions were not standard? In most cases, supplementary formulas have been devised to accomodate the non-standard conditions. For example, if the concentrations of each of the electrolytes were not 1M each, then you should have to employ the Nernst Equation to predict a non-standard electrochemical cell potential (refer to P707...don't know if this is the gr12 or oac text, probably 12). As well, delta G for a chemical reaction at any temperature can be determined using the Gibbs-Helmholtz equation. (Refer to p502 of your text...again don't know if this is 12 or OAC)

Hint 4: Preparing Glassware

When preparing glassware for a lab in chemistry, the word "clean" can take on very different meanings, depending on the nature of the lab (qualitative or quantitative), the nature of the materials (organic solvents, standard solutions), and the type of chemistry (analytical, organic).
Most people think that glassware is cleanest when scrubbed with copious amounts of soap, winsed with water, and dried, most likely, with paper towels. It is important, however, to remember that all of these materials are also chemicals themselves. Under certain circumstances, each one of these could alter the results of the lab as a source of error.
For example, soap is a base. The slightest residue can turn phenolphthalein pink, prematurely, and affect the quality of a titration. As well, a final rinse with water can introduce error to a quantitative lab in two ways: ions in tap water can interfere with some chemicals and alter their effects, and water residues can dilute a solution that is being analyzed for precise concentration. Finally, the lint left by paper towels can react with an iodine indicator and alter the quality of a rate determination.
While the preparation of glassware can go to extremes (oven drying and then desiccating in analytical labs), a relatively easy method can ensure high quality in most qualitative and quantitative labs:
Step 1: Wash glassware (scrub only if absolutely necessary) with dilute soapy water.
Step 2: Rinse thorougly with water. Shake to remove as much water as possible.
Step 3: Rinse with the stock solution that will be contained therein.

The glassware in most labs will contain residues of aqueous solutions. If so, the pieces can be rinsed with water before storing to reduce the need for soap and scrubbing in subsequent labs.

Hint 5:Preparing stock solutions

Write general procedures for prepating solutions in the following two ways:
1) A 2.0 M solution of a dry solid (for example NaOH or CuSO4 5H2O)
2) a 0.50 M solution of the same as above.

In addition, describe use of any specific glassware or equipment required in each procedure, as well as any technique tips for ensuring greatest accuracy.

Both the gr. 12 and OAC Chemistry textbooks might be helpful.

Hint 6: Theories Predict; Experiments Verify

A. Use valence bond theory to determine whether a double or triple bond exists between carbon and oxygen in carbon monoxide. Draw an orbital diagram (electron cloud diagram) of your findings.

B. Given your findings in A., explain why it is important to back up theoretical predictions with expermental determinations.

C. What kind of experimental evidence would you need in this case to make your final verdict?

Hint 7: Uncertainty, Precision, and Significant Digits.

All measurements involve uncertainty. It is erroneous to believe that uncertainty is a source of error in experimentation.
One source of uncertainty is the measuring device itself. All equipment, while more quantitative than your five senses, is still limited by a certain degree of precision. This limitation is (or should be) reflected in the measurement value itself. Another source of uncertainty is your ability to read a scale, or obtain a digital reading. In fact, you cannot measure anything with complete certainty, nor is this expected of you. That is why, in every measurement value, the last digit is always the "estimate" digit.
All measured values are recorded using "signiticant digits" ("significant figures", "sig digs"), the numerals in a measurement that include those you are certain about plus one last uncertain digit that you estimate. For example, 5.36cm has three significant digits. The first two digits 5 and 2 are certain because there are scale markings for each of those place values. The last digit, the 6, is your estimate of where the edge of the measurement actually is, beyond the last scale marking. Estimates are made between the smallest scale markings, or "tick" marks. Admittedly, most modern scientific equipment has gone digital - with an effortless push of a button, readings, of built-in precision, appear on a liquid crystal display. Understand, then, that the last digit of any digital display is the estimate digit according to the built-in degree of precision. Whenever you are reading a digital display on an especially precise instrument, the last digit may fluctuate, leaving you to make the final decision about that digit. This does not mean that the equipment is faulty, rather, it is merely evidence of his high degree of precision, and therefore, sensitivity to its surroundings.
Nevertheless, many non-electronic instruments are still used, and their measurements must be obtained from reading the position of a needle, pointer, or marking. Start noting now how the equipment you use affects the precision of your measurements.

Hint 8: The Difference Between Accuracy and Precision

Many people often use "accuracy" and "precision" to mean the same thing. In science, however, these terms are related to certainty, and each one has a very specific meaning. Accuracy refers to how close a measurement is to an accepted or predicted value, more often referred to as the absolute value. The best way to express the accuracy of an experimental value compared to an absolute value is by calculating the percentage error:

[insert fomula for % error here]

Precision refers to the exactness, or consistency, of a measurement. It is easy to assess the precision of experimental results by running several trials of an experiment. If the experimental values in the trials come in close agreement with each other, the precision is high. In a quantitative experiment, this would yield a mean value with a low standard deviation (the average distance away of each of the values from the average of all the values). If the variance among the results is large, the precision is low. Experiments should be repeated until the results of at least three trials are in close agreement with each oher. It is erroneous to believe that only 3 trials total will suffice, regardless of how close they are to each other.
Oftentimes, close agreement can also ensure high accuracy, especially if it persists over time and under new sets of conditions (different experimentors, new lab conditions, etc). In short, persistant close agreement means an overall reduction in error.
The following bull's-eye scenario might help you to remember the different between accuracy and precision.
E:\picsite\2002-12-03\hint8b.jpg

Which bull's eye diagram best represents each of the following scenarios?

1. Five trials with a high standard deviation.
2. Five trials with a subset of 3 trials of low standard deviation.
3. Class of five groups, each with an average of low standard deviation but a high class average with high standard deviation.
4. Class of five groups, each with an average of low standard deviation, and a class average with low standard deviation.
5. Class of five groups, each with relatively high standard deviations, and a class average with low standard deviation.

Answers.

Hint 9: What would be the electron configuration and quantum numbers of imaginary element #114? Answer.

Hint 10: Like a Water Drop, or Oily Film?
A) What is surface tension?
B) Which substance would have a higher surface tension, BrCl3 or BCl3 and why?
C) Name the compounds in B.
D) Does electrolytic activity affect surface tension?

Hint 11: Downsizing to microscale
Microchemistry lab procedures offer many advantages. The most obvious one involves an overall reduction of chemical usage in lab activities: less used, less wasted.
Well-plates alone offer several advantages. Many trials can be set-up at once and control samples are visually close at hand. As well, dumping out the well-plate into a waste container and cleaning it for the next set of tests involve much less hassle and time-consuming effort than full-scale procedures that require an infinite number of test tubes and other equipment.
But the one reason that makes using microchemistry so helpful, especially in high school labs, is the time factor. It takes a fraction of the time to run a set of tests in microscale, meaning there will be enough time to complete multiple part tests, to repeat tests for certainty and/or to repeat tests that might have been ruined.
That doesn't mean to say there are no disadvantages. Well-plates cannot be heated and cooled. As well, the plastic ones are susceptible to certain organic solvents and can be irreversibly ruined. While they are handy for many qualitative tests, it is often difficult to discern some colour changes and the presence of absence of some other observations (ex formation of a gas).
While microchemistry techniques have been developed for quantitative tests, the amount of success varies inversely with compounding experimental error. That is, the effect of experimental error grows as the procedure scales down.

Can you think of any other advantages and disadvantages?