Overall Score: 15/24
IB Grade: 5
Was this exemplar helpful?
General feedback
15/24
0
12
24
5.1·strength
Page 1
The title clearly states the investigation focus on temperature dependence of resistivity, providing an immediate overview of the study’s scope.
5.2·suggestion
Page 3
Consider breaking the long introductory paragraph into smaller sections to improve readability and guide the reader through context, significance, and aim more clearly.
5.3·suggestion
Page 5
The use of the Maxwell–Boltzmann formula for particle speed in gases warrants a caveat when applied to solids; add a sentence discussing this assumption’s limitations.
5.4·suggestion
Page 7
Control of wire diameter is implied but not specified; record the exact gauge or diameter value to ensure replicability.
5.5·suggestion
Page 8
The method omits the time allowed for the oil and wire to equilibrate at each temperature; specify an equilibrium period before recording data.
Criteria A: Research Design
4/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
Excellent
Research question context
Good
Methodological considerations for collecting data
Moderate
Methodological considerations
Criteria Feedback
- Clear framing of the research question within a specific global and personal engineering context
- Detailed circuit diagram and apparatus description aiding reproducibility
- Explicit statement of independent and dependent variables with stated uncertainties
- Wire diameter is left as a placeholder and equilibration time is not specified
- Number of repeats per temperature point is not defined
- Minor methodological ambiguities (increment sizes implied rather than stated)
Criteria B: Data Analysis
3/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
Excellent
Communication of data recording and processing
Moderate
Consideration of uncertainties
Excellent
Data processing quality
Criteria Feedback
- Data recording and processing are communicated step-by-step with clear tables and a worked example
- Processing of raw data (Rₓ calculation, resistivity derivation, R² determination) is accurate
- Initial uncertainty propagation for Rₓ is correctly applied
- Uncertainties are not propagated to final resistivity values and error bars are missing on graphs
- Systematic effects (e.g. cable resistance) are only discussed qualitatively later
- Consideration of uncertainties has significant omissions
Criteria C: Conclusion
5/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
Excellent
Conclusion relevance and support
Excellent
Scientific context comparison
Criteria Feedback
- Conclusion is fully consistent with analysis, restating the linear relationship and quoting gradient with R²
- Comparison to Gilev’s literature data is justified and contextualised scientifically
- Discussion could be slightly expanded to acknowledge minor deviations or uncertainty influence
- No additional scientific contexts beyond the Gilev comparison are explored
Criteria D: Evaluation
3/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
Good
Methodological weaknesses
Moderate
Suggested improvements
Criteria Feedback
- Specific methodological weaknesses (thermometer resolution, stove control, cable resistance) are identified
- Relevant and realistic improvements (digital thermometer, controlled bath, shorter cables) are proposed
- Impact of identified weaknesses is not quantified
- Improvements lack detailed implementation plans and expected effect magnitudes