Chemistry Extended Essay Exemplar: How does the concentration of… | RevisionDojo

Loading document preview...

IB Chemistry SL Extended Essay Example

How does the concentration of hydrogen peroxide (1.000%, 2.000%, 3.000%, 5.000%, 10.000%) affect the initial rate of oxygen evolution (mol s-1) during its decomposition catalyzed by manganese oxide, potassium iodide, and catalase at the temperature of 21.0°C ± 0.1°C?SL

Official IB Result

IB Grade: B

Criteria A: Focus and Method

5/6

Criteria Strands

A.1Topic communication and explanation

Excellent

A.2Research question formulation and focus

Good

A.3Research methodology

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

You communicate a clear chemical focus and maintain it throughout the investigation.
Your research question is explicit, quantitative, and connected to the experimental design.
You show a thoughtful choice of methods and controls, including replication and statistical testing.

Some contextual material is more expansive than necessary and slightly dilutes the focus.
A few method details are not fully standardized, especially for comparing catalyst types fairly.
The wording around efficiency and rate would be stronger if it were more tightly operationalized.

Criteria B: Knowledge and Understanding

4/6

Criteria Strands

B.1Application of source material

Moderate

B.2Subject knowledge

Moderate

B.3Use of terminology and concepts

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

You demonstrate solid understanding of the reaction, catalysis, and the relevant kinetic ideas.
You use a good range of subject-specific terminology and chemical concepts.
You apply a broad range of source material to support the background, mechanisms, and discussion.

Some mechanism explanations are not written with enough precision or balance to be fully convincing.
A few important calculations and units are handled inconsistently, which weakens the credibility of the numerical chemistry.
Several source-based explanations are used a little too confidently for the level of control in the experiment.

Criteria C: Critical Thinking

10/12

Criteria Strands

C.1Research quality

Poor

C.2Analysis depth

Poor

C.3Discussion and evaluation

Poor

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Criteria D: Presentation

3/4

Criteria Strands

D.1Structure appropriateness

Good

D.2Layout considerations

Good

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Loading scores...

Official IB Result

IB Grade: B

Criteria A: Focus and Method

5/6

Criteria Strands

A.1Topic communication and explanation

Excellent

A.2Research question formulation and focus

Good

A.3Research methodology

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

You communicate a clear chemical focus and maintain it throughout the investigation.
Your research question is explicit, quantitative, and connected to the experimental design.
You show a thoughtful choice of methods and controls, including replication and statistical testing.

Some contextual material is more expansive than necessary and slightly dilutes the focus.
A few method details are not fully standardized, especially for comparing catalyst types fairly.
The wording around efficiency and rate would be stronger if it were more tightly operationalized.

Criteria B: Knowledge and Understanding

4/6

Criteria Strands

B.1Application of source material

Moderate

B.2Subject knowledge

Moderate

B.3Use of terminology and concepts

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

You demonstrate solid understanding of the reaction, catalysis, and the relevant kinetic ideas.
You use a good range of subject-specific terminology and chemical concepts.
You apply a broad range of source material to support the background, mechanisms, and discussion.

Some mechanism explanations are not written with enough precision or balance to be fully convincing.
A few important calculations and units are handled inconsistently, which weakens the credibility of the numerical chemistry.
Several source-based explanations are used a little too confidently for the level of control in the experiment.

Criteria C: Critical Thinking

10/12

Criteria Strands

C.1Research quality

Poor

C.2Analysis depth

Poor

C.3Discussion and evaluation

Poor

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Criteria D: Presentation

3/4

Criteria Strands

D.1Structure appropriateness

Good

D.2Layout considerations

Good

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.