Sports, exercise and health science (SEHS) IA Example: To what… | RevisionDojo

Loading document preview...

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

To what extent does hamstring flexibility (±0.5 cm), measured using the sit and reach test, or ankle flexibility (±0.5 cm), measured using the knee to wall test, have a stronger relationship with agility performance (±0.5 s), measured by time taken to complete the Illinois Agility Test, in male U19 Varsity and Junior Varsity High School football players at an international school in Singapore?HL

Official IB Result

IB Grade: 6

Criteria A: Research design

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Research question context

Excellent

A.2Methodological considerations

Excellent

A.3Reproducibility of methodology

Good

Criteria Feedback

The student framed the investigation in a focused and appropriate football context, with a clearly defined participant group and variables.
The student explained a wide range of methodological choices and controls, showing strong awareness of validity, reliability, and feasibility.
The student included enough procedural detail for most of the investigation to be repeated, supported by diagrams and annotations.

A few procedural details are still missing or ambiguous, especially around the knee-to-wall and sit-and-reach procedures.
Some small method choices could be justified more explicitly, particularly where bilateral measures or comparison choices affect the research question.

Criteria B: Data analysis

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Communication of data

Good

B.2Consideration of uncertainties

Good

B.3Processing quality

Good

Criteria Feedback

The student presents raw and processed data in a structured way, with units, repeated trials, means, standard deviations, and graphical summaries.
The student shows a clear awareness of uncertainty through instrumental error, spread in repeated trials, and discussion of possible human timing and reading error.
The student uses statistical processing that is relevant to the question, including correlation, regression, and significance testing.

Some presentation choices reduce clarity, especially the rotated tables/graphs and a few formatting inconsistencies.
The student's treatment of uncertainty and outliers is helpful but not fully rigorous, and some statistical claims go a little beyond what the evidence supports.
The comparison between the two flexibility measures is not established with a direct statistical test, so the stronger relationship cannot be fully justified from the analysis alone.

Criteria C: Conclusion

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Relevance and support

Good

C.2Scientific context comparison

Good

C.3Practical implications

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 D: Evaluation

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

D.1Weaknesses and limitations

Excellent

D.2Improvements

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: Research design

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Research question context

Excellent

A.2Methodological considerations

Excellent

A.3Reproducibility of methodology

Good

Criteria Feedback

The student framed the investigation in a focused and appropriate football context, with a clearly defined participant group and variables.
The student explained a wide range of methodological choices and controls, showing strong awareness of validity, reliability, and feasibility.
The student included enough procedural detail for most of the investigation to be repeated, supported by diagrams and annotations.

A few procedural details are still missing or ambiguous, especially around the knee-to-wall and sit-and-reach procedures.
Some small method choices could be justified more explicitly, particularly where bilateral measures or comparison choices affect the research question.

Criteria B: Data analysis

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Communication of data

Good

B.2Consideration of uncertainties

Good

B.3Processing quality

Good

Criteria Feedback

The student presents raw and processed data in a structured way, with units, repeated trials, means, standard deviations, and graphical summaries.
The student shows a clear awareness of uncertainty through instrumental error, spread in repeated trials, and discussion of possible human timing and reading error.
The student uses statistical processing that is relevant to the question, including correlation, regression, and significance testing.

Some presentation choices reduce clarity, especially the rotated tables/graphs and a few formatting inconsistencies.
The student's treatment of uncertainty and outliers is helpful but not fully rigorous, and some statistical claims go a little beyond what the evidence supports.
The comparison between the two flexibility measures is not established with a direct statistical test, so the stronger relationship cannot be fully justified from the analysis alone.

Criteria C: Conclusion

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Relevance and support

Good

C.2Scientific context comparison

Good

C.3Practical implications

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 D: Evaluation

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

D.1Weaknesses and limitations

Excellent

D.2Improvements

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.