What is the relationship between Topshell (phorcus lineatus) abundance and height above chart datum on Jetty Beach’s rocky shore, and how does this relate to the percentage cover of macroalgae and lichensHL
Loading scores...
6
Official IB Result
IB Grade: 6
Criteria A: Research Design
5/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
A.1Research question context
Excellent
A.2Methodological considerations
Excellent
A.3Methodology description
Moderate
Criteria Feedback
- The investigation is placed in a specific ecological context with a clear research question linked to a named species, site, and intertidal conditions.
- The student explains several methodological choices well, including the pilot study, repeated sampling, quadrat design, and ethical handling of organisms.
- The design shows awareness of how field conditions and data type affect method choice, such as using non-parametric statistics for ecological data.
- Some important sources of bias are acknowledged but not fully controlled, especially rock structure, crevices, and other microhabitat differences.
- The sampling procedure is not fully reproducible because key details are vague or inconsistent, including the interval used and how quadrats were repositioned.
- A few design decisions are justified, but the explanation stops short of fully showing how they ensure sufficient, relevant data for the question.
Criteria B: Data Analysis
4/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
B.1Communication of data recording and processing
Excellent
B.2Consideration of uncertainties
Moderate
B.3Data processing quality
Good
Criteria Feedback
- The raw data and processed results are presented in a generally clear and traceable way, with tables, means, standard deviations, and graphs.
- The student's choice of Spearman’s rank is appropriate for ecological field data and shows good alignment between method and data type.
- The processing addresses the main relationships in the research question rather than staying at the level of raw observation.
- There are significant processing limitations, including inconsistent sign reporting, tied-rank handling issues, and some overstatement in the interpretation of significance.
- The uncertainty treatment is incomplete and sometimes not methodologically secure, especially where adjustments are introduced without a clear basis.
- The analysis is not fully comprehensive because some variable relationships are graphed but not processed statistically in the same level of detail.
Criteria C: Conclusion
4/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
C.1Conclusion relevance and consistency
Good
C.2Scientific context comparison
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.
Criteria D: Evaluation
5/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
D.1Methodological weaknesses
Excellent
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.