This subject report is listed under Physics in the 2012 examination archive. The catalogue session is May 2012. The information below helps you identify the document before opening the complete PDF. Subject, year and session labels come from the archive catalogue; the original cover remains the reference if a label differs. A file is not automatically suitable for your current syllabus simply because its subject name matches.
For coursework research, read this document as a reference rather than a template to submit. Notice how the question, evidence and explanation connect. If a paired commentary or subject report is available, compare it with the original work instead of assuming a polished essay received a particular mark. Historical examples may belong to an earlier assessment framework.
The public preview contains file information and, where reliable text extraction is available, a limited opening excerpt. It is not a summary of unseen questions or a replacement for the original document. Create a free email account to read or download the complete file. No payment is required to unlock this archive resource.
This original usage overview is based on the archive metadata. It does not claim to summarise the complete file.
Opening excerpt
Opening text only, limited to at most 20% of pages, two page-equivalents and 2,200 characters. Clearly labelled personal identifiers have been removed. Text extraction may omit equations, tables or figures.
May 2012 extended essay reports
Page 1
PHYSICS
Overall grade boundaries
Grade: E D C B A
Mark range: 0 - 7 8 - 15 16 - 22 23 - 28 29 - 36
The range and suitability of the work submitted
There was clear evidence that a majority of students received relevant information from their
supervisor as well as more good advice. The enthusiasm and dedication of the majority of
students was evident. Many supervisors used observations (always appreciated) from the
viva voce to illustrate their comments on the cover sheet. From these comments, ther e was
also evidence that a majority of supervisors took their role seriously and had the success of
their students at heart.
In general, the topics were well chosen, even for those candidates who did not manage to
fully develop, throughout the essay, what they had initially planned. A wide range of essays
varied in standard from excellent to very poor. Some students presented experimental work
more suited to an internal assessment investigation easily carried out in a single laboratory
session. The choice o f some topics or RQ was unwise making it difficult to achieve initial
goals. Highly unsuitable topics were rare and often predictable. In some cases, it seemed that
students chose not to follow advice or were not provided with key information. Some student s
clearly waited too long before starting seriously hence could not cross the finish line on time.
In some cases, physics theory was neglected; data were not effectively used and/or analyzed.
A wide range of topics covered different areas of physics for ex amples: Particle size and flow
rate; Temperature and Doppler Effect ; Soap bubble longevity ; Effect of velocity on meteor
crater; Light dispersion in salt; Ferro-fluids in magnetic field ; Fading of Cassiopeia A at 1420
MHz; Soccer ball size effects ; Sound p itch in bowls ; Guitar sound holes & Helmholtz ;
Temperature effects on a diode ; Friction between the intertwined pages of two phone books ;
Frequency and flute length ; Efficiency of spinning beyblade top launcher ; Effect of aging ring
density on thermal diff usivity of wood ; Thermal convection cells ; Greatest force in a tennis
File information
Subject
Physics
Document type
Subject report
Year
2012
Session
May 2012
Level
Not labelled in the archive
Paper
Not labelled
Examination zone
Not labelled in the archive
Language
English
File size
133 KB
Pages
10
FREE FULL RESOURCE
Read the complete document.
Register or sign in with your email to unlock the full PDF. No payment, password or membership is needed.