Chemistry IA Exemplar: Hydrogen Peroxide Decomposition | RevisionDojo
Loading document preview...
IB Chemistry SL Internal Assessment Example
Investigating the decomposition of Hydrogen PeroxideSL
Loading scores...
4
Official IB Result
IB Grade: 4
Criteria A: Research Design
4/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
A.1Research question context
Good
A.2Methodological considerations
Good
A.3Methodology description
Moderate
Criteria Feedback
The student chose a focused and scientifically meaningful investigation linking temperature, rate, and activation energy.
The student included relevant theory such as the Arrhenius relationship and a clear rationale for using oxygen volume as a proxy for reaction progress.
The student identified several important controlled variables and showed awareness of practical conditions that affect reliability.
The student's method is detailed enough that much of the investigation could be followed and repeated.
The scientific context is not fully secure because key fixed conditions beyond volume are not clearly established.
The role of the yeast catalyst is not explained in enough detail for the system being studied.
The method does not fully justify how the temperature of the reacting mixture is maintained or measured during transfer.
Some procedural details needed for fully reliable reproduction, such as equilibration time and exact rate extraction, are missing.
Criteria B: Data Analysis
3/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
B.1Communication of data recording and processing
Moderate
B.2Consideration of uncertainties
Moderate
B.3Data processing quality
Poor
Criteria Feedback
The student presents their data in a way that is mostly understandable, with labelled tables and graphs that show the main trend clearly.
The student includes error bars and attempts to propagate uncertainty rather than ignoring it.
The student carries out several relevant processing steps, including averaging repeats and using a linearised relationship to estimate activation energy.
The student's processed data is organised in a way that helps the reader follow the flow from raw measurements to a final result.
Some headings and labels are imprecise, making it harder to distinguish raw measurements from calculated values.
The student's rate calculation method is not fully valid for kinetic analysis because it uses an endpoint-based average rather than an initial gradient.
The uncertainty treatment contains mathematical weaknesses, especially in the logarithmic transformation and the handling of the repeated measurements.
The final activation-energy result would be more convincing if the student reported it with a clear uncertainty range.
Criteria C: Conclusion
3/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
C.1Conclusion relevance and support
Moderate
C.2Scientific context comparison
Moderate
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
3/6
0
3
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.