Individual Biology Investigation

Individual investigation writing instructions Ms. Pooja V.
Instructions for writing individual investigations:
General Instructions:
 The internal assessment task will be one scientific investigation taking about 10 hours and the
write-up should be about 6 to 12 pages long. Investigations exceeding this length will be
penalized in the communication criterion as lacking in conciseness.
 Your individual investigation is a formal document. The presentation of the same should be like
a scientific research paper. The language used must be subject- specific, crisp and precise to the
points. Every possible small detail needs to be included. The ideal way to write an individual
investigation is writing a rough draft first and then working on it again and again till it is perfect.
 All individual investigations must be printed out on A4 paper with at least a 20mm margin on
the left of the page. It is better to have 20 mm margins both left and right as this allows space
for comments. Stick to a basic font (Arial, Calibri, Times New Roman) that is large enough to
read (10 or 12pt).
 Work on the header and footer first. The header should have your candidate number in the right
corner in the font size of 9. The footer should have the page numbers and name of the
experiment in brief, for example, “osmosis”, “plant growth” etc.
 Don’t write in the first person. This means that you should not write using “I”, “We”, “Us” etc.
Use the 3rd person and in passive form. For example, don’t write “I think it is going to jump…..”
use something like “It is believed that….”, “It was observed that….”, “It was found that…..”
 You can also cite outside sources as a way of avoiding the first person. “Based on the findings of
-----& ----- (2008), it is predicted that…….”
 Figures (pictures, diagrams and photographs), Tables & Graphs must all have a specific number
and have a clearly understandable and focused descriptive title. For example, don’t write
“Graph showing data from Table on next page”. Use something like “Graph 3: Line graph
showing the relationship between the length of bean sprouts and the application of varying
concentrations of phosphorous over 10 days”.
 It is absolutely crucial to meet the deadlines while submitting the individual investigation. Both,
a typed and printed hard copy and a soft copy [ManageBac] are to be submitted.
Note: This document is taken from OCC and has been modified for use in EMWS Page 1
Choice of the possible tasks include:

 a hands-on laboratory investigation
 using a spreadsheet for analysis and modelling
 extracting data from a database and analyzing it graphically
 producing a hybrid of spreadsheet/database work with a traditional hands-on
investigation
 using a simulation provided it is interactive and open-ended.
Some tasks may consist of relevant and appropriate qualitative work combined with
quantitative work.
Internal assessment details
Internal assessment component

Duration: 10 hours
Weighting: 20%
Internal assessment criteria

The new assessment model uses five criteria to assess the final report of the individual
investigation with the following raw marks and weightings assigned:
How to score maximum in every criterion:

Given below are the statements in the rubric of every criterion required for
maximum score, followed by how to achieve it.
 First, the Title: It must reflect the research question and should be
engaging.
Personal engagement
The evidence of personal engagement with the exploration is clear with significant
independent thinking, initiative or creativity.
The justification given for choosing the research question and/or the topic under
investigation demonstrates personal significance, interest or curiosity.
There is evidence of personal input and initiative in the designing, implementation or

presentation of the investigation.
 Sell your IA idea here. Convince the reader that it is ‘your’ choice and even though it is picked
up randomly from internet or any other resource, you have your own reason for selecting that
particular topic.
 Why did you choose this topic? What’s your interest in it? Why should it be important for
others? Why is it worth working on? Does it have any application in the real world? Talk
about importance of the topic. References will be very important here.
Exploration
The topic of the investigation is identified and a relevant and fully focused research question
is clearly described.
The background information provided for the investigation is entirely appropriate and
relevant and enhances the understanding of the context of the investigation.
The methodology of the investigation is highly appropriate to address the research question
because it takes into consideration all, or nearly all, of the significant factors that may
influence the relevance, reliability and sufficiency of the collected data.
The report shows evidence of full awareness of the significant safety, ethical or
environmental issues that are relevant to the methodology of the investigation*.
 Write the research question as follows:
A clearly stated research question or problem
The research question needs to be specific and focused. You need to indicate the variable chosen for
the investigation. Think about this very carefully. A poor question would be “How does phosphorous
affect plant growth”. A good research question would be “How does changing the concentration of
available phosphorous in irrigation water affect the growth of the marine grass Sporobolus
virginicus?” If you want to see how professional scientists write research questions just look at the
titles of articles in journals (on the web) such as Science, Nature, PLOS and Ecology & Society.
 Background information
This sets the scene for the whole of the individual investigation. It only needs to be 2-3 paragraphs
long and should be about the topic being investigated. For example, if you are investigating the
influence of Nitrogen on plant growth, you would write a brief account of what is known about the
effects of this nutrient on the growth of plants. Your choice of plant, the growth conditions required,
special requirements if any. If it is about correlation between blood pressure and obesity, then facts
about working and efficiency of cardiovascular system, factors affecting it etc. must be included.
Don’t write irrelevant information here; be specific to your topic. This paragraph should help the
reader to understand the course of the experiment in a better way.
 Hypothesis
This is not compulsory if your investigation is first of its kind. You may answer your research question
without any prediction or assumption.
But, if there is research already done on the topic, then writing a hypothesis becomes a must.
An hypothesis should be clearly stated as a prediction – “Based on the work of Collar & Webb (2002), it is
predicted (in this investigation) that……..”.
It should be quantitative if at all possible.
If there is a clear mathematical relationship between the Independent Variable (IV) and the Dependent
Variable (DV) this needs to be stated in your hypothesis.
 A scientific justification of your hypothesis
Applicable only if hypothesis is written.
You must show that you have done some research on the subject through the justification of your
hypothesis. You will need to provide reasons for why you think your hypothesis will be the outcome – this
is not a personal view, it is a view based on sound scientific judgments based on your research. You
should cite sources listed in your bibliography. The justification (scientific explanation) may require
discussion of equations, general principles, laws and published examples.
 A clearly laid out section on variables
The rule for hypothesis applies here too  you don’t have to write these if your investigation is first of
its kind.
But, this is where you have the greatest potential to get low grades in the exploration criterion. Make
sure you put in the time to get it right.
This is what the IB says about variables:
“Variables are things we measure, control or manipulate in an investigation. Independent variables are
those that are manipulated, whereas dependent variables are measured or registered. The variable one
decides to manipulate is independent, the variable that depends on the manipulation is dependent. Thus,
in a calorimetry investigation, where a candidate measures the temperature every 30 seconds, time is
the independent variable, and temperature is the dependent variable. Similarly, in a rate investigation,
where the candidate measures the time taken to collect certain volumes of gas, volume is independent,
and time is dependent.”
This section should include information on:
Independent Variable (IV) – name it, include units of measure, describe it. Include a statement of the
range of the data values that will be tested. Explain the IV, write how it will be manipulated and what is
actually measured – e.g. the power of magnification (4, 10 and 40X) is an independent variable because
it was changed manually and it changed the field of observation directly.
Dependent Variable (DV) – name it, include units of measure, and describe it. If there is a mathematical
relationship easily understood in an equation give this here. Explain how you derive the DV – e.g. plant
growth, measured as the height of plant in cm, and the number of leaves.
Controlled or Fixed Variables – List (name) the variables that you will actually control. Provide a brief
description of each variable and the parameters of the control (how you will control the variable)– e.g.
‘Light will be controlled using a fixed intensity of light (100W) and a daily rhythm of 12 hours of light and
12 hours of dark’. In your description include information on why you need to control the variable. Be
specific and focused.
** Uncontrolled variables: You should be able to account for any influence of these uncontrolled
variables on your data if relevant. : e.g. atmospheric conditions outside.
 Procedure
 Materials
Provide a list of all the equipment used in the investigation. This should include the quantities required,
the sizes of the different beakers etc, the chemicals required (named) and quantities and types of
materials (e.g. distilled water, tap water). Be specific but don’t be pedantic. A tabular format can be
used.
 Diagram or photograph of your experimental set-up
You can include a diagram or a photograph of the experimental set up if you find it necessary. Please
remember that if you use a picture it is referred to as Figure # (with a descriptive title) and you must
discuss it in the text somewhere. Otherwise it is just a picture in your individual investigation.
 Procedure
This is a numbered list of clear, exact steps to follow – described in a brief and focused manner. Nobody
likes reading this part, so be clear and brief. The steps in the experiment should either be self-evident or
briefly explained. You should aim to describe a method that would enable someone to carry out the
experiment.
You need to explain the different variables (to a certain degree redundant if you have done it well in the
variables section but you will find this section will be very easy then).
Explain how to change or manipulate the IV (and measure giving units)
Explain how to measure the IV (units and errors)
Explain how to control the CV/FV.
For example, if you are weighing samples you need to state that you collected the data using the same
balance every time. Or you controlled temperatures by using a waterbath set at 24°C.
Check that your described method allows you to record all the relevant data that would be required to
determine whatever quantitative value is being investigated. You must include instructions on the range
of values for the IV (treatments) (these should cover a wide range rather than be too close together), the
number of repeat measurements for each value (number of trials) and that you are clear about any
mathematical equations or formulae that need to be used in the processing of the data.
Give special attention to the following:
Relevance = direct link with research question
Reliability = number of replicates (5 per condition must)
Sufficiency = number of readings (5 of each replicate must, better if more)
If above requirements are not followed for any particular reason; then that explanation must be included
in the evaluation later.
 A Raw Data Table
To show how you would collect your data.
Analysis
The report includes sufficient relevant quantitative and qualitative raw data that could
support a detailed and valid conclusion to the research question.
Appropriate and sufficient data processing is carried out with the accuracy required to enable
a conclusion to the research question to be drawn that is fully consistent with the
experimental data.
The report shows evidence of full and appropriate consideration of the impact of
measurement uncertainty on the analysis.
The processed data is correctly interpreted so that a completely valid and detailed conclusion
to the research question can be deduced.
 DATA TABLES
Tables
Tables are designed to lay out the data ready for analysis. The table should have an explanatory
title. “Table of results” is not an explanatory title, whereas “Table to show the time taken to
produce 1 cm3 of oxygen at different concentrations of carbon dioxide by Elodea” describes the
nature of the data collected. Other points to note are:
 units should only appear in cell headings rather than in the body of the table
 error for the instrument used or the accuracy of the reading should appear in the cell
heading if relevant
 the independent variable should be in the first column
 subsequent columns should show the results for the dependent variable
 decimal places should be consistent throughout a column
 mean values should not have more decimal places than the raw data used to produce
them.
The methods used to process the data should be easy to follow and the processed data may be
included in the same table as the raw data, there is no need to separate them.
There are 2 types of tables –
Raw Data Tables which comprise the data collected in the field or lab, which typically get included in the
appendix, and
Processed or Final Data Tables which are a synthesis of the data in the Raw Table. Final data tables
summarize raw data, show any data transformations performed and the results of any statistical tests.
You must include both.
All tables must be self-explanatory; the reader shouldn’t need to go back to the main write-up to
understand the table.
All tables must have a number and a title. Example: Table 5: ANOVA analysis of the association
between the winter catch rate for mudfish Gala tribolius and four habitat parameters. In science there is
a convention that the title goes above the table.
In investigation where there is pooled/group data, you need to identify your own data clearly.
All tables must be numbered in sequence so that you can refer to them easily in the text.
All columns in tables must have a heading and units.
IV is in the first column and recorded data in subsequent columns across the rows
Errors (and uncertainties) where applicable should be included in a column heading or a separate column
Tables must show the quantitative data collected. All quantitative results must be recorded to the
appropriate level of accuracy and must be recorded consistently (sig.fig and dec.places).
MUST have the qualitative observations included either in a specific column or as notes appended to the
relevant table.
MUST include Fixed Variable data, usually in the Raw Data table but can be in a table of fixed values.
Within a column all the data must be shown with the same number of decimal places or significant
figures.
Decimal places in the processed data must match the raw data. You cannot have processed data to 3
decimal places when you collected the raw data rounded to one unit!
Where you included statistical data you should indicate those statistical values that are significant and
those that are not (and at what level e.g. P<0.5).
Tables must be neat, logical and organized.
 CALCULATIONS
Students are expected to be able to go beyond simple arithmetic calculations such as means and
aggregated totals. You should however, know how to use or interpret simple descriptive statistics such
as the mean, median, mode, range, frequency, percentages, ratios, approximations and reciprocals.
You are required to use standard notation, e.g. 3.6 x 104.
You should be able to apply basic statistics such as:
Standard Deviation
Student’s T-test
You need to show (and explain briefly) all calculations that are done on the raw data. You are only
required to show one example of each calculation to show that you understand the calculation. This is
important for the 2 statistical tests given above.
If you use an equation you must show one example calculation for this formula.
Take care to use the correct number of significant figures and/or decimal places in all calculations.
 GRAPHS
 Graphs should be clear, easy to read and interpret with an explanatory title. If IT software
is used, the graph should have clearly identifiable data points and demarcated and
labelled axes of a suitable scale.
 Adjacent data points should be joined by a straight line and the line should start
with the first data point and end with the last one, as there should be no
extrapolation beyond these points. Lines of best fit are only useful if there is good
reason to believe that intermediate points fall on the line between two data points. The
usual reason for this is the collection of a large amount of data, which is often not
possible given the time constraints of investigations at this level. Likewise, extrapolation
of the line will only make sense if there is a large amount of data and a line of best fit is
predicted or there is reference made to the literature values. Students should exercise
caution when making assumptions.
 Finally, the type of graph chosen should be appropriate to the nature of the data collected.
Graphs show trends or patterns in the data. Be sure to choose the correct type of graph and allocate
enough page space for it in your lab report.
Every graph should have a number and a descriptive caption or title. Numbering must be sequential. In
science that convention is that the caption goes below the graph.
Graphs should be printed large (at least half the page).
Remove the title provided by Excel and move the key to under the x-axis. This gives you more room on
your graph.
Scale the graph axes appropriately. The axes should go beyond the points on the graph
Label all axes and include units
Keys should be provided either in the title, on the graph or as a note attached to the graph.
Decimal place values on the axes of the graph must be consistent with the data in the tables.
Trend lines should be given as a line of best fit (showing r values and intercept – but move these if they
interfere with the data points or graph in any way).
Use error bars where appropriate. If error bars are too small to be seen, this should be explained in the
graph title/caption with quantitative examples of the error bar size.
Present basic graphs first (i.e. show the fundamental data first) and then (if appropriate) present
combined data projections, transformations and other complex graphs.
If using Excel use only graphic presentation options that print well in black and white. Do not use dark
colored backgrounds with colored lines. Black and white graphs with distinct data points are best.
Show gridlines at an appropriate scale.
This section is, however, not just a series of tables, calculations and graphs. You need to highlight some
of the key findings in short bridging paragraphs following tables and graphs.
You should keep your statements of important findings brief and you should only include results here –
there is no discussion of the actual results. For example, “Mean summer water depths were only 3.6cm in
areas with mudfish, compared to 39.5 cm at those sites with no mudfish”.
Refer directly to your tables and graphs in the text and you can highlight important differences between
your results and any published results (you should not discuss these, merely highlight them). For
example, “The results for the analysis of total dissolved solids (TDS), dissolved oxygen (dO) and secchi
disc depths (cm) are given in Table 3.1. These were similar at all tests sites, in contrast to the findings of
Miller (2001) who found that TDS was higher at sites with mudfish than at those sites without mudfish”.
Include units for all data references, e.g. “Total catch rates for all sites are similar (geometric mean 0.70
fish per trap per night: Table 5.3)”.
These bridging statements and references to your tables and graphs make it easier for you to discuss
your results later and for the reader to understand that you know what is going on in your investigation.
Error
There are sources of error at a number of stages of any investigation. The chosen method should
try to address as many as possible by considering the control of variables, but despite this, many
will remain. Students should not be discouraged by this, experimental results are only samples
(see NOS section 3, “The objectivity of science” in the Biology guide), but rather take them into
consideration when analysing the data and drawing conclusions. A thorough evaluation of the
sources of uncertainty and error will also help to gain perspective on the investigation in general
and to suggest potential improvements and extensions.
Random variation and normal variation
In biological investigations, errors can be caused by changes in the material used or by changes
in the conditions under which the experiment is carried out. Biological materials are particularly
variable. For example, the water potential of potato tissue may be calculated by soaking pieces of
tissue in a range of concentrations of sucrose solutions. However, the pieces of tissue will vary in
their water potential, especially if they have been taken from different potatoes. Pieces of tissue
taken from the same potato will also show variations in water potential, but they will probably
show a normal variation that is less than that from samples taken from different potatoes.
Random errors can, therefore, be kept to a minimum by careful selection of material and by
careful control of variables. For example, use of a water bath to reduce the random fluctuations
in ambient temperature.
Human errors
Making mistakes is not an acceptable source of error if they could have been easily avoided with
more due care and attention. Data loggers can be used if a large number of measurements need to
be made, to avoid errors arising due to loss of concentration. Careful planning can help reduce
this risk.
The act of measuring
When a measurement is taken, this can affect the environment of the experiment. For example,
when a cold thermometer is put into a test tube with only a small volume of warm water in it, the
water will be cooled by the presence of the thermometer so it would be sensible to scale up the
volume or have the thermometer in the solution from the start. If the behaviour of animals is
being recorded, the presence of the experimenter may influence the animals’ behaviour.
Although there are ways to reduce the impact of observer influences, it may have to be
something that is taken into account later.
Systematic errors
Systematic errors can be reduced if equipment is regularly checked or calibrated to ensure that it
is functioning correctly. For example, a thermometer should be placed in an electronic water bath
to check that the thermostat of the water bath is correctly adjusted. A blank should be used to
calibrate a colorimeter to compensate for the drift of the instrument.
Degrees of precision and uncertainty in data
Students must choose an appropriate instrument for measuring such things as length, volume, pH
and light intensity. This does not mean that every piece of equipment needs to be justified, and it
can be appreciated that, in a normal science laboratory, the most appropriate instrument may not
be available.
For the degrees of precision, the simplest rule is that the degree of precision is plus or minus (±)
the smallest division on the instrument (the least count). This is true for rulers and instruments
with digital displays.
The instrument limit of error is usually no greater than the least count and is often a fraction of
the least count value. For example, a burette or a mercury thermometer is often read to half of the
least count division. This would mean that a burette value of 34.1 cm3 becomes 34.10 cm3 (±0.05
cm3). Note that the volume value is now cited to one extra decimal place so as to be consistent
with the uncertainty.
The estimated uncertainty takes into account the concepts of least count and instrument limit of
error, but also, where relevant, higher levels of uncertainty as indicated by an instrument
manufacturer which is usually obtainable online, or qualitative considerations such as parallax
problems in reading a thermometer scale, reaction time in starting and stopping a timer, or
random fluctuation in an electronic balance read-out. Students should do their best to quantify
these observations into the estimated uncertainty.
Other protocols exist and no specific protocol is preferred as long as it is clear that recording of
uncertainties has been undertaken and the uncertainties are of a sensible and consistent
magnitude.
Propagating errors
Propagating errors during data processing is not expected but it is accepted provided the basis of
the experimental error is explained.
Replicates and samples
Biological systems, because of their complexity and normal variability, require replicate
observations and multiple samples of material. As a rule of thumb, the lower limit is five
measurements within the independent variable, with three runs for each. This will produce five
data points for analysis. So in an investigation into the effect of temperature on the rate of
reaction of an enzyme, temperature is the independent variable (IV) and the rate of reaction the
dependent variable (DV). The IV would need to be assessed three times at five different
temperatures at the very least. Obviously, this will vary within the limits of the time available for
an investigation. Some simple investigations permit a large number of measurements, or a large
number of runs. It is also possible to use class data to generate sufficient replicates to permit
adequate processing of the data in class, non-assessed practical work.
The standard deviation is the spread of the data around the mean. The larger the standard
deviation the wider the spread of data is. Standard deviation is used for normally distributed data.
This makes it useful for showing the general variation/uncertainty around a point on a line graph,
but it is less helpful for identifying potential anomalies.
Error bars that plot the highest and the lowest value for a test, joined up through the mean that
will form the data point plotted on the graph with a vertical line, will allow the
variation/uncertainty for each data set to be assessed. If the error bars are particularly large, then
it may show that the readings taken are unreliable (although reference to the scale might be
needed to determine what large actually is). If the error bars overlap with the error bar of a
previous or subsequent point, then it would show that the spread of data is too wide to allow for
effective discrimination. If trend lines are possible, then adding the coefficient of determination
(R2) can be helpful as an indication of how well the trend line fits the data.
Statistics
An effective presentation of the data goes a long way to assessing whether or not a trend is
emerging. This is, however, not the same as using statistics to assess the nature of such a trend
and whether it is significant—in other words, whether a trend, judged subjectively from a graph,
is actually valid. Students are encouraged to use a statistical test to assess their data, but should
briefly explain their choice of test, outline the working hypothesis and put the results of the test
into the context of their investigation. For statistical tests the correct protocol should be
presented including null and alternative hypotheses, degrees of freedom, critical values and
probability levels.
Evaluation
A detailed conclusion is described and justified which is entirely relevant to the research
question and fully supported by the data presented.
A conclusion is correctly described and justified through relevant comparison to the accepted
scientific context.
Strengths and weaknesses of the investigation, such as limitations of the data and sources of
error, are discussed and provide evidence of a clear understanding of the methodological
issues* involved in establishing the conclusion.
The student has discussed realistic and relevant suggestions for the improvement and
extension of the investigation.
This section is a real challenge – it is where you are required to show that you can apply your knowledge,
interpret your findings and propose further work. In other words, you have to show that you know what
you have been doing.
In this section of a report you are required to interpret your results in the context of the specific questions
you set out to answer in the investigation. You should place your findings in the framework of any
broader relevant issues (often with reference to findings or data from published sources). You must be
prepared to discuss any unexpected or conflicting results. Once you have interpreted the data and given
an account of your findings (discussion) you then develop a concluding statement that directly addresses
your research question and hypothesis and how/why the results support or do not support your
hypothesis. The evaluation section of the report is often difficult. You are required to critically evaluate
any problems with your study design, unexpected and conflicting results, how and why these results may
have come about and to propose realistic improvements or extensions to the investigational procedure.
 CONCLUSION
The concluding statement should be particularly detailed; it should address your research question and
your hypothesis. You must write the scientific explanation of your conclusion, it is a synopsis of your
findings and how your findings fit in with your research questions and hypothesis.
Your conclusion should include:
Restating the research question and the predicted hypothesis
A statement of what the results mean, particularly the relationship between the IV and the DV
A statement of whether the results support the hypothesis or not.
A brief statement of why this relationship exits (support or not). You can bring in outside research to
assist your interpretation.
Write the interpretation of your results. Support your statements with reference to Tables, Graphs and
data in the analysis section. Some of the details that you should include are:
A discussion of the errors/anomalies in the data
Any random errors and how they affected your data
Any systematic errors and how they affected your data
A discussion of the precision and accuracy of the data. This should include an overall statement about
the quality of the results and how confident you are in your results
This section must explain the relevance of the results of the investigation.
Do not introduce new results in this section. You should have highlighted the relevant data in the
Analysis section. You can, however, provide supporting or contrasting results from published studies but
these must be cited using in-text referencing.
This section needs to be clear and well-reasoned. In other words, it should have a logical and
progressional structure. For example, Graph 1/Table 1, progress to Graph 2/Table 2 etc – building up the
information to support your conclusion.
You need to show a broad understanding of the context. You need to have done some research beyond
your direct investigation. This may be as simple as stating how the results support what has been
discussed in class/in your textbook.
You need to be sure to explain the implications of your results in a broad context. For example, if you are
studying the effects of pH on plant growth, how do your findings fit in with what is known about acid
rain.
 EVALUATION
This section of the report causes considerable problems for students. Look to do it in a structured,
focused way and it will be a lot easier. The purpose of this section is to identify any problems,
weaknesses, limitations or errors in your experiment and then to make recommendations as to how to
improve the process the next time you do the experiment. It is a section where you are saying “watch
out for this”, “fix that” and “this could be better”.
The evaluation should include a brief discussion of the weaknesses, impacts and improvements in the
following areas:
The experimental design: The focus here is the variables – were they appropriate, could they be better
controlled, were the units of measure and the errors appropriate to the experiment.
The equipment you used. What problems, errors, corrections, standardizations etc.
The method/procedure you designed. This is where most of the comment usually comes in and should
include a careful evaluation of:
Good procedures, bad procedures and improvements
How to improve the control of variables
How to reduce random errors
Your use of time. Be brief and to the point – don’t spend 3 paragraphs confessing to not doing the work
and how you are going to be better next time! This is about how you could improve your use of available
time by improving the methodological approach not your personal organization.
Keep the following structure for this section:
1. Outline the actual problem that you have identified and how it came about. Be quantitative (use
numbers/data) to illustrate the problem
2. What did it mean in terms of the results that you have collected? - If you need to point out the
error/problem in a graph or table.
3. How are you going to fix the problem? Be realistic and specific. This does not include saying “buy
better equipment’, “be more organized”. . If appropriate, state if the improvement is going to improve
accuracy, precision, reduces random error etc.
C OMMUNICATION
The presentation of the investigation is clear. Any errors do not hamper understanding of the
focus, process and outcomes.
The report is well structured and clear: the necessary information on focus, process and
outcomes is present and presented in a coherent way.
The report is relevant and concise thereby facilitating a ready understanding of the focus,
process and outcomes of the investigation.
The use of subject-specific terminology and conventions is appropriate and correct. Any
errors do not hamper understanding.
REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY
A full set of references in the correct format (MLA is preferred). These must be consistent and done in
alphabetical order. In text referencing must follow a clear and unequivocal standard.
If you have followed each and every word of this document thoroughly , then be assured of the highest
score in this criterion.
All the best!
Personal engagement
This criterion assesses the extent to which the student engages with the exploration and makes it their own.
Personal engagement may be recognized in different attributes and skills. These could include addressing
personal interests or showing evidence of independent thinking, creativity or initiative in the designing,
implementation or presentation of the investigation.
Mark Descriptor
0 The student’s report does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1 The evidence of personal engagement with the exploration is limited with little independent
thinking, initiative or creativity.
The justification given for choosing the research question and/or the topic under investigation does not
demonstrate personal significance, interest or curiosity.
There is little evidence of personal input and initiative in the designing, implementation or
presentation of the investigation.
2 The evidence of personal engagement with the exploration is clear with significant independent
thinking, initiative or creativity.
The justification given for choosing the research question and/or the topic under investigation
demonstrates personal significance, interest or curiosity.
There is evidence of personal input and initiative in the designing, implementation or presentation of
the investigation.
Exploration
This criterion assesses the extent to which the student establishes the scientific context for the work, states a
clear and focused research question and uses concepts and techniques appropriate to the Diploma
Programme level. Where appropriate, this criterion also assesses awareness of safety, environmental, and
ethical considerations.
Mark Descriptor
1–2 The topic of the investigation is identified and a research question of some relevance is stated but it is
not focused.
The background information provided for the investigation is superficial or of limited relevance and
does not aid the understanding of the context of the investigation.
The methodology of the investigation is only appropriate to address the research question to a very
limited extent since it takes into consideration few of the significant factors that may influence the
relevance, reliability and sufficiency of the collected data.
The report shows evidence of limited awareness of the significant safety, ethical or environmental
issues that are relevant to the methodology of the investigation*.
3–4 The topic of the investigation is identified and a relevant but not fully focused research question is
described.
The background information provided for the investigation is mainly appropriate and relevant and aids
the understanding of the context of the investigation.
The methodology of the investigation is mainly appropriate to address the research question but has
limitations since it takes into consideration only some of the significant factors that may influence the
relevance, reliability and sufficiency of the collected data.
The report shows evidence of some awareness of the significant safety, ethical or environmental
issues that are relevant to the methodology of the investigation*.
5–6 The topic of the investigation is identified and a relevant and fully focused research question is clearly
described.
The background information provided for the investigation is entirely appropriate and relevant and
enhances the understanding of the context of the investigation.
The methodology of the investigation is highly appropriate to address the research question because it
takes into consideration all, or nearly all, of the significant factors that may influence the relevance,
reliability and sufficiency of the collected data.
The report shows evidence of full awareness of the significant safety, ethical or environmental issues
that are relevant to the methodology of the investigation*.
* This indicator should only be applied when appropriate to the investigation. See exemplars in TSM.
Analysis
This criterion assesses the extent to which the student’s report provides evidence that the student has
selected, recorded, processed and interpreted the data in ways that are relevant to the research question and
can support a conclusion.
Mark Descriptor
1–2 The report includes insufficient relevant raw data to support a valid conclusion to the research
question.
Some basic data processing is carried out but is either too inaccurate or too insufficient to lead to a
valid conclusion.
The report shows evidence of little consideration of the impact of measurement uncertainty on the
analysis.
The processed data is incorrectly or insufficiently interpreted so that the conclusion is invalid or very
incomplete.
3–4 The report includes relevant but incomplete quantitative and qualitative raw data that could support a
simple or partially valid conclusion to the research question.
Appropriate and sufficient data processing is carried out that could lead to a broadly valid conclusion
but there are significant inaccuracies and inconsistencies in the processing.
The report shows evidence of some consideration of the impact of measurement uncertainty on the
analysis.
The processed data is interpreted so that a broadly valid but incomplete or limited conclusion to the
research question can be deduced.
5–6 The report includes sufficient relevant quantitative and qualitative raw data that could support a detailed
and valid conclusion to the research question.
Appropriate and sufficient data processing is carried out with the accuracy required to enable a
conclusion to the research question to be drawn that is fully consistent with the experimental data.
The report shows evidence of full and appropriate consideration of the impact of measurement
uncertainty on the analysis.
The processed data is correctly interpreted so that a completely valid and detailed conclusion to the
research question can be deduced.
Evaluation
This criterion assesses the extent to which the student’s report provides evidence of evaluation of the
investigation and the results with regard to the research question and the accepted scientific context.
Mark Descriptor
1–2 A conclusion is outlined which is not relevant to the research question or is not supported by the data
presented.
The conclusion makes superficial comparison to the accepted scientific context.
Strengths and weaknesses of the investigation, such as limitations of the data and sources of error, are
outlined but are restricted to an account of the practical or procedural issues faced.
The student has outlined very few realistic and relevant suggestions for the improvement and
extension of the investigation.
3–4 A conclusion is described which is relevant to the research question and supported by the data
presented.
A conclusion is described which makes some relevant comparison to the accepted scientific context.
described and provide evidence of some awareness of the methodological issues* involved in
establishing the conclusion.
The student has described some realistic and relevant suggestions for the improvement and extension
of the investigation.
5–6 A detailed conclusion is described and justified which is entirely relevant to the research question and
fully supported by the data presented.
A conclusion is correctly described and justified through relevant comparison to the accepted scientific
context.
discussed and provide evidence of a clear understanding of the methodological issues* involved in
establishing the conclusion.
The student has discussed realistic and relevant suggestions for the improvement and extension of the
investigation.
*See exemplars in TSM for clarification.
Communication
This criterion assesses whether the investigation is presented and reported in a way that supports effective
communication of the focus, process and outcomes.
Mark Descriptor
1–2 The presentation of the investigation is unclear, making it difficult to understand the focus,
process and outcomes.
The report is not well structured and is unclear: the necessary information on focus, process and
outcomes is missing or is presented in an incoherent or disorganized way.
The understanding of the focus, process and outcomes of the investigation is obscured by the
presence of inappropriate or irrelevant information.
There are many errors in the use of subject-specific terminology and conventions*.
3–4 The presentation of the investigation is clear. Any errors do not hamper understanding of the
focus, process and outcomes.
The report is well structured and clear: the necessary information on focus, process and outcomes is
present and presented in a coherent way.
The report is relevant and concise thereby facilitating a ready understanding of the focus, process and
outcomes of the investigation.
The use of subject-specific terminology and conventions is appropriate and correct. Any errors do not
hamper understanding.
*For example, incorrect/missing labelling of graphs, tables, images; use of units, decimal places. For issues of referencing
and citations refer to the “Academic honesty” section.

Individual Biology Investigation

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Individual Biology Investigation

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Individual investigation writing instructions Ms. Pooja V.

Instructions for writing individual investigations:

Choice of the possible tasks include:

Internal assessment details

Internal assessment component

Internal assessment criteria

How to score maximum in every criterion:

There is evidence of personal input and initiative in the designing, implementation or

 Write the research question as follows:

A clearly stated research question or problem

It should be quantitative if at all possible.

 A scientific justification of your hypothesis

Applicable only if hypothesis is written.

 A clearly laid out section on variables

This is what the IB says about variables:

This section should include information on:

 Diagram or photograph of your experimental set-up

Explain how to change or manipulate the IV (and measure giving units)

Explain how to measure the IV (units and errors)

Explain how to control the CV/FV.

Give special attention to the following:

Relevance = direct link with research question

Reliability = number of replicates (5 per condition must)

Sufficiency = number of readings (5 of each replicate must, better if more)

 A Raw Data Table

To show how you would collect your data.

There are 2 types of tables –

All columns in tables must have a heading and units.

Tables must be neat, logical and organized.

You are required to use standard notation, e.g. 3.6 x 104.

You should be able to apply basic statistics such as:

Graphs should be printed large (at least half the page).

Label all axes and include units

Show gridlines at an appropriate scale.

Random variation and normal variation

The act of measuring

Degrees of precision and uncertainty in data

Replicates and samples

Your conclusion should include:

Restating the research question and the predicted hypothesis

A statement of whether the results support the hypothesis or not.

A discussion of the errors/anomalies in the data

Any random errors and how they affected your data

Any systematic errors and how they affected your data

Good procedures, bad procedures and improvements

How to improve the control of variables

How to reduce random errors

Keep the following structure for this section:

All the best!

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen