Overall Score: 18/24
IB Grade: 6
Was this exemplar helpful?
Criteria A: Research Design
5/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
Excellent
Research question context
Excellent
Methodological considerations for collecting data
Good
Methodological considerations
Criteria Feedback
- Clear and specific research question situated in a concrete engineering context
- Comprehensive step-by-step procedure with apparatus layout, angles, distances and repeat counts enabling reproducibility
- Precise linkage of theoretical mechanics equation to experimental variables
- Minor wording awkwardness in methodology description
- Implicit treatment of beam weight distribution and pivot friction without full explanation
- Lack of quantitative rationale for chosen distance increments
Criteria B: Data Analysis
4/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
Excellent
Communication of data recording and processing
Good
Consideration of uncertainties
Excellent
Data processing quality
Criteria Feedback
- Accurate linear regressions and derivation of key parameters (k, g) with uncertainty propagation
- Well-organized data tables and graphs with error bars and best-fit lines
- Clear communication of combined uncertainties in final result
- Omission of uncertainty for the independent variable (distance D) and instrumental angle measurements
- Some unit and formatting inconsistencies (e.g., missing units in table headers, typographical slips)
- Significant omissions in the uncertainty analysis methodology (e.g., no quadrature for independent errors)
Criteria C: Conclusion
4/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
Excellent
Conclusion relevance and support
Good
Scientific context comparison
Criteria Feedback
- Conclusion restates the governing equation and aligns findings with the theoretical model
- Direct comparison of experimental g to the accepted value, maintaining consistency with data analysis
- Superficial treatment of the non-zero y-intercept without quantitative discussion of its physical origin
- Limited depth in evaluating systematic errors and their effect on the conclusion
Criteria D: Evaluation
5/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
Excellent
Methodological weaknesses
Excellent
Suggested improvements
Criteria Feedback
- Identification of multiple specific methodological limitations with clear explanation of their relative impacts
- Realistic and relevant improvement suggestions directly addressing identified weaknesses
- Demonstrates evaluative insight by linking each improvement to error reduction
- Lack of quantified estimation of improvement benefits
- Minor notation errors in variable labels