Samirul Hasan
Science Coursework – Electricity:
Resistance
Introduction:
In this experiment I am going to investigate the length of a wire.
Prediction:
My prediction for this experiment is that the longer the length of the wire, the higher the resistance and the shorter the length of the wire, the lower the resistance.
What Will I Change?
The only thing I will change in this experiment is the length of the wire.
What Will I Keep The Same?
The things I will keep the same in this experiment are the thickness of the wire, temperature of the wire and also the number of batteries used.
Preliminary Work
This is a preview of the whole essay
Peer Reviews
Here's what a star student thought of this essay
Quality of writing
Minor grammatical errors in places, but most spelling, grammar and punctuation fine. The layout of the essay is good with concise text and clear subheadings, but the methods in both instances should have been set out in bullet points.
Level of analysis
The candidate sets out what they are going to do concisely and make an accurate prediction for the later experiment. What the candidate fails to do is explain the scientific reasoning behind their hypothesis or why they are keeping certain factors such as temperature the same. If the candidate was to include scientific reasoning, this would indicate a deeper understanding of the topic and show that they understand the concepts for why they are actually carrying out the experiment. The candidate carries out preliminary work which is good to ascertain if their method of working is correct, but their results are extensive and I'm not sure this is needed as the idea of preliminary tests are just to get an idea of how to actually carry out the experiment. In this, their method presented is not clear, and their is no diagram included so it is hard to follow what the candidate actually did, and why they changed their method for the actual experiment is not included. This should have been better done as it would have shown better understanding that the candidate lacked in the first place. The method in the actual experiment is outlined in continuous prose. The information would have been presented clearer and been easier to read with bullet points. The candidate is also wrong is thinking there is any significant anomalous results. Their evaluation is not very well rounded as they do not consider many problems or solutions, they do not explain the science behind their results at any stage and do not seem to understand the concept of 'reliable.' This is not due to the results being taken unfalsely.
Response to question
The response to the question is adequate. The candidate carries out the experiment accurately and proves that their prediction is correct. The candidate lacks anything to make their work stand out though. The main thing the candidate should improve is the scientific reasons behind their work as this is not shown at any stage. For now it seems like the candidate robotically followed a method to get an answer without any scientific thought involved.
