IB Physics HL Internal Assessment Example

The student's research question is focused, testable, and clearly connected to the physics of wind-driven motion.

The student chose a specific experimental context and identified the key variables in a way that makes the investigation easy to follow.

The student included several relevant methodological controls, such as repeated trials, fixed apparatus features, and a calibration scale.

The student showed awareness that the way acceleration is obtained needs to be linked more explicitly to the investigation.

The wording of the question leaves some conceptual ambiguity about how acceleration is defined and extracted.

A few methodological choices are described, but not quite in enough detail for exact replication.

The method does not fully explain why the selected data are sufficient to test the proposed relationship.

Some details, such as release procedure and exact measurement positions, need to be stated more precisely.

The student communicates the main dataset through tables, graphs, sample calculations, and screenshots in a way that shows the overall pattern clearly.

The student makes a genuine attempt to include uncertainty through repeated readings, error bars, and uncertainty propagation.

The student's processing does address the research question by comparing acceleration with wind speed and with squared wind speed.

The analysis is generally organized around a sensible physical relationship rather than unrelated calculations.

Some tables and headings are confusing, and one table is empty, which weakens the traceability of the data.

A few numerical uncertainties are incorrect or not fully consistent with the raw measurements.

The Tracker-based acceleration processing is not transparent enough for the reader to verify every value.

Important parts of the processing chain, such as the missing trial data and some unit issues, reduce confidence in the final results.