GROUP 4 SCIENCES

BIOLOGY

THE INDEPENDENTLY ASSESSED PRACTICAL INVESTIGATION (IA)

GUIDE for STUDENTS

Contents:1. Internal Assessment details from IB course guide - criteria & components2. Check-list for completion of IA write-up3. Write-up template

Internal assessment details

Internal assessment component

Duration: 10 hours

Weighting: 20%

Individual investigation.

This investigation covers assessment objectives 1, 2, 3 and 4.

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:

PersonalExplorationAnalysisEvaluationCommunicationTotal

engagement

2 (8%)6 (25%)6 (25%)6 (25%)4 (17%)24 (100%)

Levels of performance are described using multiple indicators per level. In many cases the indicators occur together in a specific level, but not always. Also, not all indicators are always present. This means that a candidate can demonstrate performances that fit into different levels. To accommodate this, the IB assessment models use markbands and advise examiners and teachers to use a best-fit approach in deciding the appropriate mark for a particular criterion.

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.

MarkDescriptor

0 The students 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 insight.

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 insight.

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.

MarkDescriptor

0The students report does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

12The 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*.

34The 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*.

56The 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.

Analysis

This criterion assesses the extent to which the students 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.

MarkDescriptor

0The students report does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

12The 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.

34The 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.

56The 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 students report provides evidence of evaluation of the investigation and the results with regard to the research question and the accepted scientific context.

MarkDescriptor

0The students report does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

12A 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.

34A 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.

Strengths and weaknesses of the investigation, such as limitations of the data and sources of error, are 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.

56A 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.

Communication

This criterion assesses whether the investigation is presented and reported in a way that supports effective communication of the focus, process and outcomes.

MarkDescriptor

0The students report does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

12The 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*.

34The 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.

IB Biology Individual Investigation ChecklistIn order to be able to achieve high marks for the individual investigation criteria you need to be able to answer YES to the following questions.

PERSONAL ENGAGEMENTQUESTIONSYES

Does the report show evidence of your personal engagement with the chosen topic?

Does your report demonstrate clear evidence of independent thinking, initiative and insight?

Have you justified your reasons for choosing the topic you are investigating?

Does your report demonstrate personal input and initiative in the design, implementation and presentation of the investigation?

EXPLORATIONQUESTIONSYES

Does the title clearly identify what the investigation is about?

Is the research question relevant and fully focused?

Is the research question carefully worded to include the dependent and independent variables?

Are the dependent, independent and controlled variables fully specified in detail?

Is your research question accompanied by appropriate, relevant and properly referenced background theory that enhances the context of the investigation?

You may write a hypothesis but you must explain it.

Has all the apparatus been listed to include details of sizes and uncertainties of measurement?

Is there a clear, labelled diagram of the experimental apparatus?

Have you stated the reasons for using the apparatus chosen?

Have all chemicals and materials been listed with specific amounts, units and concentrations?

Does your report show appropriate evidence of the significant safety, ethical and environmental issues that are relevant to the methodology of the investigation?

Have you stated the dependent variable clearly and specified precisely what you will be measuring? (NB it must be quantitative)

Have you stated the independent variable(s) clearly and specified details of quantities/concentrations/temperatures etc?

Are there at least 5 different independent variable groups?

Are there at least 5 repeats of each independent variable group?

Are all relevant controlled variables stated and how they are to be kept constant explained?

Have you explained the likely effects of these variables on the results and conclusions expected?

Are all the runs and repeats of the experiment clearly stated?

Have you included any preliminary experimental evidence in your planning?

Is you method clear and does it include all relevant details?

ANALYSISQUESTIONSYES

Does your report include sufficient relevant quantitative and qualitative raw data that will support a detailed and valid conclusion to the research question?

Is the raw data presented in neat and easy to follow tables with appropriate titles, clear row and column headings and units?

Is each table printed on one page only?

Are all uncertainties of measurement and degrees of precision of any measuring devices used (+/-) clearly stated?

Does the report fully and appropriately consider the impact of measurement uncertainty on the analysis of the data?

Is the use of decimal places consistent throughout?

Has any relevant descriptive/qualitative data been included?

Has the raw data been properly and appropriately processed with the degree of accuracy required to enable a conclusion to the research question to be drawn that is fully consistent with the experimental data?

Have you described the processing (state the formulae used and give sample calculations) and given reasons for your choice?

Calculations of means and standard deviations and the drawing of graphs should be done as a matter of course. Other relevant data processing can included statistical analysis (t-test, X-squared, correlation coefficients, rate calculations, diversity index etc.)

Is the processed data presented properly in tables and/or graphs?

Are the graph axes clearly labelled with units and uncertainties?

Do the graphs have clearly identified error bars?

EVALUATIONQUESTIONSYES

Have you analysed the raw and processed data to identify any trends and patterns?

Have you described your findings?

Have you described and justified a clear conclusion which is relevant to the research question and supported by the data presented?

Have you scientifically justified your conclusion and compared your findings and conclusions to the accepted scientific context (eg literature values)?

Have you properly referenced the literature used in footnotes on each page and in the references stated at the end of the account?

Have you stated the strengths and weaknesses in the experimental method that may impact on the conclusion reached?

Have you discussed the quality, reliability and limitations of the data collected and presented and considered any possible sources of error?

Have you discussed any systematic and random errors present in the experimental design or in the data collected?

Have you suggested realistic and relevant modifications and improvements to the experiment?

Are these modifications and improvements directly related to the weaknesses identified earlier?

Are your suggestions for improvement specific and detailed?

Have you suggested possible ways in which the investigation could be extended?

COMMUNICATIONQUESTIONSYES

Is the presentation of your investigation clear so that a reader can fully understand the methodology, data, conclusions and evaluation?

Are there any errors that hamper the readers understanding of the focus, process and outcomes of the investigation?

Is your report well structured and clear with all relevant information on focus, process and outcomes presented in a coherent way?

Is your report relevant and concise so that it facilitates a ready understanding of the focus, process and outcomes of the investigation?

Is your use of subject specific terminology appropriate and correct?

Have you followed the correct conventions for presentation of raw and processed data?

Have you followed the correct conventions for length of report (6 to 12 pages), references, footnotes, page numbering, appendices?

BIOLOGY INTERNAL ASSESSMENT - FORMAT FOR THE LAB REPORT

Type the lab report on A4 paper. The complete report (excl. Title page) should max at 12 pages. No Abstract is required. Write the report in the past or passive tense. Use full sentences whenever possible, and also use sub-headings, numbered sections and bullet points. Footnote all your sources of information and make a complete bibliography. The Lab Report is a form of communication, so note the three C's: CLARITY, COHERENCE and CONCISENESS. Your teacher will advise you through the lab investigation and will review your draft lab report once only, making suggestions for improvement

TITLE (Page)

Include essential information: date, supervisor, place, candidate number.

Use the title and date as a repeating page header in the write-up.

PREPARATION & CONTEXT

1. IntroductionPurpose or setting or background: Why undertake this investigation? What makes this investigation unique and special to you? Ownership.Research question or problem: A statement of the problem to be investigated.

Hypothesis: A testable if-then statement, followed by its justification.

Prediction: Brief statement of the general procedure and method employed to answer the research question and test the hypothesis, with expected results.

EXPERIMENTAL PLANNING & ACTIONA description of how the investigation was carried out. The goal is that the investigation is described in such a way that another researcher could follow these instructions and obtain equivalent results. The design of the investigation should be able to achieve statistically useful, quantitative results.

1.MethodMaterials & Equipment

Variables - table, incl. how controlled variables are handled .

Procedures

Risk Assessment & Safety

Ethical and environmental considerations

2.ResultsResults should be tabulated and then treated - graphed and statistically manipulated - and described. Results may be qualitative but should always be quantitative.Raw Results Tables - titles; units of measurement; clarity.

Treatment of resultsStatistical manipulation.Graphing - all graphs should have a title and a brief sentence or two of explanation.

Statements drawing attention to patterns, trends and relationships (but not discussion).

3.Errors and limitations

EVALUATION1.Conclusions: possibly a simple statement of support for, or rejection of, the hypothesis.

2.Discussion: justification for the conclusion, supported by summaries of the results and analysis of results.

3.Interpretation and implications: What is the meaning of these results and conclusions?4.Proposals for extension: questions which need further investigation.

5.Modifications and improvements: how the errors and limitations listed previously could be reduced or eliminated - be scientific and exact in this section.

BIBLIOGRAPHYThis should be a complete list of all resources and references used, including all that have been footnoted. Copy/paste URL's of web pages used. Follow a convention for referencing journals and books.7