Login
Sign up
Open navigation menu
Features
Subjects
Pricing
Schools
More
Login
Sign up
Physics IA Exemplar: Pendulum Release Angle and Perceived Frequency | RevisionDojo
Back
IB Physics HL Internal Assessment Exemplar
Scores
Rubric
Similar Examples
10
Chat
How does the angle of release of a pendulum emitting a fixed sound frequency affect the perceived frequency at its equilibrium position?
Loading scores...
Overall Score:
12/24
Verified
Moderated
IB Grade:
4
Was this exemplar helpful?
Want a report just like this?
Free mini report for your own coursework
Fast feedback on what to improve next
Annotated highlights on your writing
Review my coursework for free
General feedback
12/24
0
12
24
5.1
·
weakness
Page 1
• Click to view
The proportional simplification
f
′
∝
1
−
u
1
omits proper inclusion of the sound speed
v
and misstates the derived relation; clarify each algebraic step.
5.2
·
suggestion
Page 17
• Click to view
Bibliography is comprehensive but lacks consistent styling; apply a uniform citation format (e.g., APA or MLA).
Criteria A: Research Design
5/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
View Full Rubric
Excellent
Research question context
Good
Methodological considerations for collecting data
Good
Methodological considerations
Criteria Feedback
Research question embedded in a highly specific, well-motivated context linking amusement-park observations to pendulum Doppler measurements.
Detailed apparatus list and procedure including controlled-variable table and justification of measurement intervals.
Clear discussion of error sources (e.g. using first oscillation to minimise damping, sound-proof room) demonstrating strong methodological awareness.
Minor omissions in operational detail (e.g. exact microphone placement, ambient conditions).
Uncertainty estimates missing for string length and stand height.
Intermediate steps in theoretical derivations are elided, reducing full reproducibility.
Comments
Criteria B: Data Analysis
4/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
View Full Rubric
Excellent
Communication of data recording and processing
Moderate
Consideration of uncertainties
Good
Data processing quality
Criteria Feedback
Data recorded and processed in clearly labelled tables with uncertainties; graphs include error bars, best-fit lines and R² values.
Sample calculations are shown step-by-step with appropriate significant figures.
Processing choices (e.g. √(1–cosθ) fit) demonstrate thoughtful analysis.
Significant omissions in uncertainty propagation (string length, theoretical curve).
Inconsistencies in stated instrument uncertainty and omitted outlier criteria.
Duplicate table numbering and some manual rather than software-based uncertainty analysis.
Comments
Criteria C: Conclusion
2/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
View Full Rubric
Good
Conclusion relevance and support
Moderate
Scientific context comparison
Criteria Feedback
Conclusion accurately restates observed trends and links to energy conversion and Doppler theory.
Includes a relevant comparison to published work (Nuryantini et al.).
Does not quantify the non-zero intercept or systematically assess agreement with theory.
Literature comparison remains qualitative without numerical benchmarking.
Misses deeper contextualisation in broader scientific or small-angle approximation frameworks.
Comments
Criteria D: Evaluation
1/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
View Full Rubric
Moderate
Methodological weaknesses
Moderate
Suggested improvements
Criteria Feedback
Identifies multiple specific methodological weaknesses with associated impacts.
Proposes realistic, pragmatic improvements tied to each weakness.
Improvements are not prioritised or explained in terms of expected error reduction.
No feasibility assessment or quantitative justification of how suggested changes would improve results.
Lacks discussion of trade-offs or relative gain from each improvement.
Comments