Biology IA Exemplar: How does the soaking time (0,4,6 hours) and… | RevisionDojo

Loading document preview...

IB Biology SL Internal Assessment Example

How does the soaking time (0,4,6 hours) and Temperature (25°C and 80°C) of Kombu (Laminaria japonica) affect the amount of iodine remaining in the Kombu before consumption using colorimetric determination with 1.0% starch indicator?SL

Official IB Result

IB Grade: 7

Criteria A: Research Design

6/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Research question context

Excellent

A.2Methodological considerations

Good

A.3Methodology description

Good

Criteria Feedback

The student's research question is focused, quantitative, and clearly anchored in a real-world context.
The student explains relevant biological background and why kombu soaking time and temperature matter for iodine retention.
The student includes enough procedural detail that another student could broadly follow their investigation.

Some methodological choices are not fully justified in terms of whether they produce valid and sufficient data.
There are internal inconsistencies in the calibration/dilution information.
The treatment of the 0-hour condition and the analysis plan could be stated more clearly to avoid ambiguity.

Criteria B: Data Analysis

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Communication of data recording and processing

Good

B.2Consideration of uncertainties

Moderate

B.3Data processing quality

Poor

Criteria Feedback

The student records repeated measurements and processes them into means and standard deviations.
The student includes calibration data and shows the main route from absorbance to concentration.
The student's tables and graphs generally make the data flow understandable.

Some labels and notation are inconsistent, which reduces precision.
The calibration values and equation are not fully trustworthy because they do not align cleanly with the stated preparation scheme.
The student's uncertainty treatment does not fully account for the largest sources of error in the final concentrations.

Criteria C: Conclusion

6/6

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

Excellent

D.2Improvements

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: 7

Criteria A: Research Design

6/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Research question context

Excellent

A.2Methodological considerations

Good

A.3Methodology description

Good

Criteria Feedback

The student's research question is focused, quantitative, and clearly anchored in a real-world context.
The student explains relevant biological background and why kombu soaking time and temperature matter for iodine retention.
The student includes enough procedural detail that another student could broadly follow their investigation.

Some methodological choices are not fully justified in terms of whether they produce valid and sufficient data.
There are internal inconsistencies in the calibration/dilution information.
The treatment of the 0-hour condition and the analysis plan could be stated more clearly to avoid ambiguity.

Criteria B: Data Analysis

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Communication of data recording and processing

Good

B.2Consideration of uncertainties

Moderate

B.3Data processing quality

Poor

Criteria Feedback

The student records repeated measurements and processes them into means and standard deviations.
The student includes calibration data and shows the main route from absorbance to concentration.
The student's tables and graphs generally make the data flow understandable.

Some labels and notation are inconsistent, which reduces precision.
The calibration values and equation are not fully trustworthy because they do not align cleanly with the stated preparation scheme.
The student's uncertainty treatment does not fully account for the largest sources of error in the final concentrations.

Criteria C: Conclusion

6/6

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

Excellent

D.2Improvements

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.