To what extent does the position played in rugby (Winger vs. Lock) affect aerobic fitness (as measured by VO2 Max) (± 3%) in high-school rugby varsity males between the ages of 16-18?HL
Loading scores...
7
Official IB Result
IB Grade: 7
Criteria A: Research design
0/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
A.1Research question context
Excellent
A.2Methodological considerations
Excellent
A.3Reproducibility of methodology
Good
Criteria Feedback
- The student identifies a focused, testable comparison between two clearly defined player groups and links it to a relevant sports-science context.
- The student describes several important controls and safety considerations, including screening, standardization, and calibration.
- The student provides enough procedural detail in places for another researcher to understand the basic testing approach.
- The question is sometimes phrased causally even though the design only supports comparison.
- Several methodological details are inconsistent or unclear, including hydration volume, ethics wording, and the criterion for confirming a true maximal test.
- Some parts of the method still need more precision so the investigation could be reproduced without ambiguity.
Criteria B: Data analysis
0/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
B.1Communication of data
Good
B.2Consideration of uncertainties
Poor
B.3Processing quality
Good
Criteria Feedback
- The student presents raw and processed data clearly enough for the reader to follow the main pattern in the results.
- The student attempts to address uncertainty and includes variation measures such as standard deviation and coefficient of variation.
- The student uses a statistical test and graphing to move beyond simple description.
- The uncertainty treatment is inconsistent and not fully justified, so the precision of the measurements is not always clear.
- The statistical reporting needs more complete detail, including clearer assumptions, test information, and a more careful presentation of probability values.
- Some visual choices, especially axis scaling and labeling, make the data harder to interpret objectively.
Criteria C: Conclusion
0/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
C.1Relevance and support
Excellent
C.2Scientific context comparison
Poor
C.3Practical implications
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
0/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
D.1Weaknesses and limitations
Good
D.2Improvements
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.