Chemistry IA Exemplar: Voltage and Copper Deposition Rate | RevisionDojo

Loading document preview...

IB Chemistry SL Internal Assessment Example

How does varying the voltage applied during electroplating with 1 mol dm^-3 of aqueous copper(II) sulfate and a current of 2A for 180 seconds impact the rate of reaction as measured by the mass of copper deposited onto a 20g brass electrode?SL

Official IB Result

IB Grade: 6

Criteria A: Research Design

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Research question context

Excellent

A.2Methodological considerations

Good

A.3Methodology description

Good

Criteria Feedback

Your research question is tightly focused on a specific electrochemical system and clearly identifies the variables and measured outcome.
You provide strong chemical context, including relevant half-equations and competing reactions, which makes the investigation feel purposeful and scientifically grounded.
Your control choices and replication show thoughtful planning and awareness of what could influence the results.

The investigation does not fully explain how the current was actually maintained or verified at the stated value across different voltages.
Some methodological choices are justified, but the logic is not always developed deeply enough to show why each control fully protects the validity of the design.
A few procedural details are still missing for complete reproduction, especially around consistency of setup and electrode handling.

Criteria B: Data Analysis

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Communication of data recording and processing

Excellent

B.2Consideration of uncertainties

Good

B.3Data processing quality

Good

Criteria Feedback

Your raw and processed data are presented clearly, with good use of tables, units, and stated uncertainties.
You show your processing transparently, including sample calculations, normalization, means, standard deviations, and fitted trendlines.
Your graphs are well labeled and easy to interpret, with error bars and regression information that support the analysis.

Your treatment of uncertainty is thoughtful but not fully complete, especially when it comes to propagating uncertainty into the fitted relationship.
Some statistical choices, such as how mean uncertainty is handled, are not fully robust and would benefit from a more rigorous approach.
A few processing decisions, including how one anomalous result is handled, would be stronger with a more quantitative justification.

Criteria C: Conclusion

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Conclusion relevance and support

Excellent

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

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

D.1Methodological weaknesses

Good

D.2Suggested improvements

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: 6

Criteria A: Research Design

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Research question context

Excellent

A.2Methodological considerations

Good

A.3Methodology description

Good

Criteria Feedback

Your research question is tightly focused on a specific electrochemical system and clearly identifies the variables and measured outcome.
You provide strong chemical context, including relevant half-equations and competing reactions, which makes the investigation feel purposeful and scientifically grounded.
Your control choices and replication show thoughtful planning and awareness of what could influence the results.

The investigation does not fully explain how the current was actually maintained or verified at the stated value across different voltages.
Some methodological choices are justified, but the logic is not always developed deeply enough to show why each control fully protects the validity of the design.
A few procedural details are still missing for complete reproduction, especially around consistency of setup and electrode handling.

Criteria B: Data Analysis

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Communication of data recording and processing

Excellent

B.2Consideration of uncertainties

Good

B.3Data processing quality

Good

Criteria Feedback

Your raw and processed data are presented clearly, with good use of tables, units, and stated uncertainties.
You show your processing transparently, including sample calculations, normalization, means, standard deviations, and fitted trendlines.
Your graphs are well labeled and easy to interpret, with error bars and regression information that support the analysis.

Your treatment of uncertainty is thoughtful but not fully complete, especially when it comes to propagating uncertainty into the fitted relationship.
Some statistical choices, such as how mean uncertainty is handled, are not fully robust and would benefit from a more rigorous approach.
A few processing decisions, including how one anomalous result is handled, would be stronger with a more quantitative justification.

Criteria C: Conclusion

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Conclusion relevance and support

Excellent

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

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

D.1Methodological weaknesses

Good

D.2Suggested improvements

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.