Physics IA Exemplar: The relationship between the temperature of a… | RevisionDojo

Loading document preview...

IB Physics HL Internal Assessment Example

The relationship between the temperature of a copper wire and its resistance “How does varying the temperature of a copper wire (20.0, 30.0, 40.0, 50.0, 60.0, 70.0, 80.0 °C) impact the resistance (Ω) measured by a multimeter and a digital thermometer?”HL

Official IB Result

IB Grade: 7

Criteria A: Research Design

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Research question context

Good

A.2Methodological considerations for collecting data

Moderate

A.3Methodological considerations

Good

Criteria Feedback

The student places the investigation in a meaningful real-world context and shows why temperature-dependent resistance matters in engineering and electronics.
The student includes relevant physics ideas and justifies several practical design choices, including repeated measurements and improvements after a preliminary trial.
The student's method is structured enough that another student could follow the main steps of the investigation.
The student shows awareness of important design issues such as heating uniformity and control of variables.

The student's research question is not fully precise, especially around the variables, temperature range, and the role of the instruments.
Some important procedural details are missing, so the investigation cannot be reproduced without uncertainty.
The student's explanation of why certain design choices matter could be more developed, especially around thermal equilibrium and contact effects.

Criteria B: Data Analysis

6/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Communication of data recording and processing

Good

B.2Consideration of uncertainties

Good

B.3Data processing quality

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

The student presents raw and processed data in a generally clear structure, with repeated trials, mean values, and uncertainty estimates.
The student uses a graph, best-fit line, and gradient-based uncertainty approach to communicate the trend effectively.
The student shows real effort to treat uncertainty seriously, including error bars and limiting-gradient ideas.
The student's processing is mostly appropriate for the investigation and leads to a coherent numerical result.

Some units, labels, and notation are inconsistent, which reduces precision and makes parts of the analysis harder to trust.
A few uncertainty sources are not fully combined or carried through to the final value.
There are conceptual errors in how the graph parameters are interpreted, especially around the gradient and intercept.
The analysis would be stronger if the calculation pathway for the final values were shown more transparently.

Criteria C: Conclusion

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Conclusion relevance and support

Excellent

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

6/6

Criteria StrandsPro

D.1Methodological weaknesses

Moderate

D.2Suggested improvements

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.

Loading scores...

Official IB Result

IB Grade: 7

Criteria A: Research Design

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Research question context

Good

A.2Methodological considerations for collecting data

Moderate

A.3Methodological considerations

Good

Criteria Feedback

The student places the investigation in a meaningful real-world context and shows why temperature-dependent resistance matters in engineering and electronics.
The student includes relevant physics ideas and justifies several practical design choices, including repeated measurements and improvements after a preliminary trial.
The student's method is structured enough that another student could follow the main steps of the investigation.
The student shows awareness of important design issues such as heating uniformity and control of variables.

The student's research question is not fully precise, especially around the variables, temperature range, and the role of the instruments.
Some important procedural details are missing, so the investigation cannot be reproduced without uncertainty.
The student's explanation of why certain design choices matter could be more developed, especially around thermal equilibrium and contact effects.

Criteria B: Data Analysis

6/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Communication of data recording and processing

Good

B.2Consideration of uncertainties

Good

B.3Data processing quality

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

The student presents raw and processed data in a generally clear structure, with repeated trials, mean values, and uncertainty estimates.
The student uses a graph, best-fit line, and gradient-based uncertainty approach to communicate the trend effectively.
The student shows real effort to treat uncertainty seriously, including error bars and limiting-gradient ideas.
The student's processing is mostly appropriate for the investigation and leads to a coherent numerical result.

Some units, labels, and notation are inconsistent, which reduces precision and makes parts of the analysis harder to trust.
A few uncertainty sources are not fully combined or carried through to the final value.
There are conceptual errors in how the graph parameters are interpreted, especially around the gradient and intercept.
The analysis would be stronger if the calculation pathway for the final values were shown more transparently.

Criteria C: Conclusion

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Conclusion relevance and support

Excellent

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

6/6

Criteria StrandsPro

D.1Methodological weaknesses

Moderate

D.2Suggested improvements

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.