How Consistent Is Wastewater Based Epidemiology (WBE) in Testing for the Prevalence Of Narcotics in New York City with Other, Traditional Narcotic Habits Data such as Crime Data and Overdose Rates?HL
Loading scores...
B
Official IB Result
IB Grade: B
Criteria A: Focus and Method
4/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
A.1Topic identification and communication
Good
A.2Research question formulation
Moderate
A.3Methodology selection and justification
Moderate
Criteria Feedback
- The student communicated a clearly bounded interdisciplinary topic that combines chemistry and public health.
- The student selected a workable research question that identifies a location and multiple evidence streams.
- The student explained their overall method with enough detail for the reader to follow the comparison.
- The student's research question is not fully operationalized, so the standard for judging consistency stays vague.
- The student's method compares different years, units, and geographical boundaries without enough normalization.
- The omission of Staten Island weakens the citywide framing of the investigation.
Criteria B: Knowledge and Understanding
4/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
B.1Source material selection and relevance
Moderate
B.2Knowledge demonstration and application
Moderate
B.3Use of terminology and concepts
Good
Criteria Feedback
- The student shows sound knowledge of wastewater-based epidemiology and the chemistry behind the measurements.
- The student uses relevant terminology such as metabolites, LC-MS, internal standards, and quality control.
- The student draws on appropriate source material to support borough-level comparisons.
- The student sometimes treats concentration data as if it were direct evidence of prevalence.
- Some concepts are blurred, especially when comparing overdose, arrest, and wastewater indicators.
- The student's source use is informative, but not always deeply integrated into the interpretation.
Criteria C: Critical Thinking
9/12
0
6
12
Criteria StrandsPro
C.1Research quality and relevance
Moderate
C.2Analysis and conclusions
Moderate
C.3Argument structure and evaluation
Moderate
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
4/4
0
2
4
Criteria StrandsPro
D.1Academic structure
Excellent
D.2Visual elements
Good
D.3Referencing and formatting
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.