Biology IA Exemplar: How does the colour of a lateral light source… | RevisionDojo

Loading document preview...

IB Biology SL Internal Assessment Example

How does the colour of a lateral light source (blue, green, yellow, orange, red) affect the auxin-mediated, positive phototropic response, indicated by the angle of curvature in Lepidium sativum (garden cress), measured using a protractor after 48 hours of light exposure?SL

Official IB Result

IB Grade: 7

Criteria A: Research Design

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Research question context

Excellent

A.2Methodological considerations

Good

A.3Methodology description

Good

Criteria Feedback

The research question is specific, focused, and biologically appropriate, with a clear organism, variable setup, and time frame.
The student gives a substantial and well-justified scientific context for phototropism, including the role of phototropins, auxin redistribution, and practical relevance to controlled agriculture.
The method is communicated in enough detail that the investigation could be reproduced with only minor ambiguity.

The design does not fully explain how it will obtain sufficient independent data, because multiple stems within one bed are treated as though they were independent replicates.
The impact of filter-induced changes in light intensity and photon flux is not adequately controlled or explained.
Some procedural details needed for full reproducibility are missing, such as standardization of the seed batch, planting density, and pre-exposure conditions.

Criteria B: Data Analysis

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Communication of data recording and processing

Excellent

B.2Consideration of uncertainties

Good

B.3Data processing quality

Good

Criteria Feedback

The raw and processed data are presented clearly, with units, means, standard deviations, and a readable graph.
The student shows appropriate awareness of variation and uncertainty, including error bars, instrumental uncertainties, and discussion of outliers and biological spread.
The processing is generally accurate and relevant to the research question, and the treatment means are calculated consistently.

The analysis overstates what the data can support because it treats five treatment means from non-independent beds as if they were enough for a strong causal claim.
The filters are polychromatic and not intensity-matched, so the processing cannot confidently attribute the pattern to wavelength alone.
Some statistical communication is imprecise, such as the mismatch between the table title and the values actually shown, and uncertainty is not fully separated into biological and instrumental components.

Criteria C: Conclusion

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Conclusion relevance and consistency

Good

C.2Scientific context comparison

Excellent

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

Good

D.2Improvements

Excellent

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

Good

A.3Methodology description

Good

Criteria Feedback

The research question is specific, focused, and biologically appropriate, with a clear organism, variable setup, and time frame.
The student gives a substantial and well-justified scientific context for phototropism, including the role of phototropins, auxin redistribution, and practical relevance to controlled agriculture.
The method is communicated in enough detail that the investigation could be reproduced with only minor ambiguity.

The design does not fully explain how it will obtain sufficient independent data, because multiple stems within one bed are treated as though they were independent replicates.
The impact of filter-induced changes in light intensity and photon flux is not adequately controlled or explained.
Some procedural details needed for full reproducibility are missing, such as standardization of the seed batch, planting density, and pre-exposure conditions.

Criteria B: Data Analysis

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Communication of data recording and processing

Excellent

B.2Consideration of uncertainties

Good

B.3Data processing quality

Good

Criteria Feedback

The raw and processed data are presented clearly, with units, means, standard deviations, and a readable graph.
The student shows appropriate awareness of variation and uncertainty, including error bars, instrumental uncertainties, and discussion of outliers and biological spread.
The processing is generally accurate and relevant to the research question, and the treatment means are calculated consistently.

The analysis overstates what the data can support because it treats five treatment means from non-independent beds as if they were enough for a strong causal claim.
The filters are polychromatic and not intensity-matched, so the processing cannot confidently attribute the pattern to wavelength alone.
Some statistical communication is imprecise, such as the mismatch between the table title and the values actually shown, and uncertainty is not fully separated into biological and instrumental components.

Criteria C: Conclusion

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Conclusion relevance and consistency

Good

C.2Scientific context comparison

Excellent

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

Good

D.2Improvements

Excellent

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.