Sports, exercise and health science (SEHS) IA Exemplar: Hand… | RevisionDojo

Loading document preview...

IB Sports, exercise and health science (SEHS) SL Internal Assessment Example

How does the level of asymmetry of simple reaction time between dominant and non dominant hands vary among biological male and female recreational team sport athletes, recreational individual sport athletes and non athletes aged 16-18?SL

Official IB Result

IB Grade: 6

Criteria A: Personal Engagement

2/2

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Evidence of personal engagement and independent thinking

Excellent

A.2Justification and personal significance

Excellent

A.3Personal input and initiative

Excellent

Criteria Feedback

You show genuine personal curiosity by linking the investigation to your own sporting experience and to a real performance question.
You adapted your method after piloting the initial test, which shows independent thinking and initiative.
You included reflective observations about participant behaviour and motivation, which adds authenticity to the investigation.

Your hypothesis could have been more specific about the direction of the expected result and the mechanism behind it.
Some of your personal rationale is present, but the connection between your own background and the exact variable choices could have been made even clearer.
You could have explained more explicitly which design decisions came directly from your own testing and reflection.

Criteria B: Exploration

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Research question focus and relevance

Excellent

B.2Background information quality

Good

B.3Methodology appropriateness

Good

B.4Safety and ethical considerations

Excellent

Criteria Feedback

Your research question is focused, relevant, and clearly measurable.
You include appropriate background on reaction time, dominance, and inter-limb asymmetry to support the investigation.
Your method is generally suitable for the question, with repeated trials, clear group comparisons, and a sensible statistical approach.
You show strong awareness of ethical and safety issues, including consent, screening, anxiety, and possible photosensitivity concerns.

Your sampling procedure leaves some room for self-selection bias, and the final selection logic could have been explained more clearly.
Some background discussion becomes broader than necessary and could be more tightly tied to the exact variables in your study.
A few methodological weaknesses remain, especially around participant classification and the risk of unsupervised testing.

Criteria C: Analysis

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Raw data quality and quantity

Excellent

C.2Data processing and accuracy

Good

C.3Consideration of measurement uncertainty

Good

C.4Data interpretation and conclusion validity

Good

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

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

D.1Conclusion relevance and support

Good

D.2Comparison to scientific context

Good

D.3Discussion of limitations and errors

Excellent

D.4Suggestions for improvement

Excellent

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 E: Communication

3/4

Criteria StrandsPro

E.1Clarity of presentation

Excellent

E.2Structure and organization

Excellent

E.3Focus and relevance

Excellent

E.4Use of terminology and conventions

Excellent

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: 6

Criteria A: Personal Engagement

2/2

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Evidence of personal engagement and independent thinking

Excellent

A.2Justification and personal significance

Excellent

A.3Personal input and initiative

Excellent

Criteria Feedback

You show genuine personal curiosity by linking the investigation to your own sporting experience and to a real performance question.
You adapted your method after piloting the initial test, which shows independent thinking and initiative.
You included reflective observations about participant behaviour and motivation, which adds authenticity to the investigation.

Your hypothesis could have been more specific about the direction of the expected result and the mechanism behind it.
Some of your personal rationale is present, but the connection between your own background and the exact variable choices could have been made even clearer.
You could have explained more explicitly which design decisions came directly from your own testing and reflection.

Criteria B: Exploration

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Research question focus and relevance

Excellent

B.2Background information quality

Good

B.3Methodology appropriateness

Good

B.4Safety and ethical considerations

Excellent

Criteria Feedback

Your research question is focused, relevant, and clearly measurable.
You include appropriate background on reaction time, dominance, and inter-limb asymmetry to support the investigation.
Your method is generally suitable for the question, with repeated trials, clear group comparisons, and a sensible statistical approach.
You show strong awareness of ethical and safety issues, including consent, screening, anxiety, and possible photosensitivity concerns.

Your sampling procedure leaves some room for self-selection bias, and the final selection logic could have been explained more clearly.
Some background discussion becomes broader than necessary and could be more tightly tied to the exact variables in your study.
A few methodological weaknesses remain, especially around participant classification and the risk of unsupervised testing.

Criteria C: Analysis

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Raw data quality and quantity

Excellent

C.2Data processing and accuracy

Good

C.3Consideration of measurement uncertainty

Good

C.4Data interpretation and conclusion validity

Good

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

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

D.1Conclusion relevance and support

Good

D.2Comparison to scientific context

Good

D.3Discussion of limitations and errors

Excellent

D.4Suggestions for improvement

Excellent

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 E: Communication

3/4

Criteria StrandsPro

E.1Clarity of presentation

Excellent

E.2Structure and organization

Excellent

E.3Focus and relevance

Excellent

E.4Use of terminology and conventions

Excellent

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.