Biology IA Exemplar: How does exposure to varying concentrations of… | RevisionDojo

Loading document preview...

IB Biology HL Internal Assessment Example

How does exposure to varying concentrations of sodium chloride solution, (0.00, 0.20, 0.40, 0.60 and 0.80 ( ± 0. 01) mol dm⁻³ influence the percentage change in mass of 3.00 g ( ± 0. 01 ) Solanum Tuberosum cylinders of 1.5 cm diameter and 2.0 cm ( ± ± 0.1 ) height within 1800 s ( 1) immersion under 25 °C ?HL

Official IB Result

IB Grade: 7

Criteria A: Research Design

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Research question context

Excellent

A.2Methodological considerations

Moderate

A.3Methodology description

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

The student defined a focused, quantitative question with clear variables and a relevant biological context.
The student's investigation was framed in a real-world context that made the topic meaningful and appropriate.
The student's method includes several controlled variables and enough detail that the core idea of the investigation is understandable.

The reasoning for some methodological choices is still too brief, especially the concentration range and the chosen immersion time.
There are important inconsistencies in the procedure, including the mismatch between the stated and actual immersion times.
Some practical details needed for full reproducibility are missing, such as a standardized blotting procedure and complete solution-preparation information.

Criteria B: Data Analysis

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Communication of data recording and processing

Moderate

B.2Consideration of uncertainties

Poor

B.3Data processing quality

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

The student recorded raw results and processed them into means, percentage changes, and spread measures.
The student's data presentation makes the overall trend easy to follow, with a clear decrease in mass change as NaCl concentration increases.
The student included repetition, which gives the analysis a stronger basis than a single set of measurements would provide.

Some labels and calculations are inconsistent, especially where the spread column does not clearly match the values shown.
One of the mean values appears to have been miscalculated or misreported, which affects the interpretation of the trend.
The graphical presentation would be stronger with plotted uncertainty and a clearer distinction between measured points and trend representation.

Criteria C: Conclusion

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Conclusion relevance and consistency

Moderate

C.2Scientific context comparison

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: Evaluation

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

D.1Methodological weaknesses

Moderate

D.2Improvements

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.

Loading scores...

Official IB Result

IB Grade: 7

Criteria A: Research Design

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Research question context

Excellent

A.2Methodological considerations

Moderate

A.3Methodology description

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

The student defined a focused, quantitative question with clear variables and a relevant biological context.
The student's investigation was framed in a real-world context that made the topic meaningful and appropriate.
The student's method includes several controlled variables and enough detail that the core idea of the investigation is understandable.

The reasoning for some methodological choices is still too brief, especially the concentration range and the chosen immersion time.
There are important inconsistencies in the procedure, including the mismatch between the stated and actual immersion times.
Some practical details needed for full reproducibility are missing, such as a standardized blotting procedure and complete solution-preparation information.

Criteria B: Data Analysis

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Communication of data recording and processing

Moderate

B.2Consideration of uncertainties

Poor

B.3Data processing quality

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

The student recorded raw results and processed them into means, percentage changes, and spread measures.
The student's data presentation makes the overall trend easy to follow, with a clear decrease in mass change as NaCl concentration increases.
The student included repetition, which gives the analysis a stronger basis than a single set of measurements would provide.

Some labels and calculations are inconsistent, especially where the spread column does not clearly match the values shown.
One of the mean values appears to have been miscalculated or misreported, which affects the interpretation of the trend.
The graphical presentation would be stronger with plotted uncertainty and a clearer distinction between measured points and trend representation.

Criteria C: Conclusion

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Conclusion relevance and consistency

Moderate

C.2Scientific context comparison

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: Evaluation

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

D.1Methodological weaknesses

Moderate

D.2Improvements

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.