Physics Extended Essay Example: Rutherford Scattering Gold Nucleus… | RevisionDojo

Loading document preview...

IB Physics HL Extended Essay Example

To What Extent Does Rutherford-Geiger-Marsden Scattering Serve as a Method that Accurately Obtains the Radius of the Nucleus of Gold in Comparison to the Davisson-Germer Method of Electron Diffraction, with Reference to its Literature Value Yielded by the “National Nuclear Data Center”?HL

Official IB Result

IB Grade: B

Criteria A: Focus and Method

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Topic clarity and communication

Good

A.2Research question formulation and focus

Good

A.3Methodology appropriateness and completeness

Poor

Criteria Feedback

The student identifies a clear investigation topic and keeps the report anchored to a specific comparison throughout.
The student shows an attempt to use a quantitative method rather than relying on description alone.
The student includes relevant scientific context and some discussion of uncertainty and limitations.

The student's research question assumes both methods can validly measure the same physical quantity.
The procedure is not detailed enough for another reader to reproduce the work confidently.
The method is not physically secure in its treatment of electron diffraction as a route to nuclear radius.

Criteria B: Knowledge and Understanding

2/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Subject knowledge application

Poor

B.2Use of terminology and concepts

Poor

Criteria Feedback

The student uses a range of relevant physics terms and equations.
The student shows awareness of key ideas such as Coulomb interaction, scattering, diffraction, and relativistic effects.
The student generally attempts to connect theory to calculation.

Several constants and physical relationships are inaccurate or inconsistently applied.
The explanation sometimes treats a derived distance as though it were automatically the nuclear radius.
The diffraction model is not used in a physically reliable way for the quantity the student is trying to measure.

Criteria C: Critical Thinking

9/12

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Research analysis and evaluation

Poor

C.2Discussion and argument development

Poor

C.3Critical 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 StrandsPro

D.1Structure and formatting

Excellent

D.2Layout and visual elements

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

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Topic clarity and communication

Good

A.2Research question formulation and focus

Good

A.3Methodology appropriateness and completeness

Poor

Criteria Feedback

The student identifies a clear investigation topic and keeps the report anchored to a specific comparison throughout.
The student shows an attempt to use a quantitative method rather than relying on description alone.
The student includes relevant scientific context and some discussion of uncertainty and limitations.

The student's research question assumes both methods can validly measure the same physical quantity.
The procedure is not detailed enough for another reader to reproduce the work confidently.
The method is not physically secure in its treatment of electron diffraction as a route to nuclear radius.

Criteria B: Knowledge and Understanding

2/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Subject knowledge application

Poor

B.2Use of terminology and concepts

Poor

Criteria Feedback

The student uses a range of relevant physics terms and equations.
The student shows awareness of key ideas such as Coulomb interaction, scattering, diffraction, and relativistic effects.
The student generally attempts to connect theory to calculation.

Several constants and physical relationships are inaccurate or inconsistently applied.
The explanation sometimes treats a derived distance as though it were automatically the nuclear radius.
The diffraction model is not used in a physically reliable way for the quantity the student is trying to measure.

Criteria C: Critical Thinking

9/12

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Research analysis and evaluation

Poor

C.2Discussion and argument development

Poor

C.3Critical 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 StrandsPro

D.1Structure and formatting

Excellent

D.2Layout and visual elements

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.