IB Chemistry SL Internal Assessment Example

Research question is placed in a specific and appropriate chemical‐kinetic context linking collision theory to activation energy estimation.

Independent, dependent and controlled variables are clearly identified, and a pilot trial with risk assessment demonstrates thoughtful planning.

Methodology is described in sufficient detail (reagent concentrations, glassware sizes, instrumental uncertainties) to allow reproduction with few ambiguities.

Background discussion contains some repetition and could be more tightly synthesized to support rationale.

Minor ambiguities remain (e.g. exact immersion times, swirl vigour) that prevent a fully flawless reproduction.

Uncertainties for some apparatus (ice container, water bath) and equilibration times are not specified, weakening precision claims.

Raw and processed data tables are clearly labelled with consistent units, uncertainties and appropriate significant figures.

Data processing (1/t, ln k) and construction of an Arrhenius plot are correctly executed and clearly communicated.

Graphs are legible and support the extraction of activation energy via the slope.

The Arrhenius equation is misformatted, indicating a notation error.

Uncertainty propagation is oversimplified (direct sum of percentages) rather than using root‐sum‐square methods.

No error bars or uncertainty on the slope/Eₐ are presented, and tolerance thresholds for uncertainties are not justified.