Coaching Centre
Research project review
A summary of the whole research project chapter, a checklist to use on your own project, key words, and a mixed test on questions, sources, design, risk, ethics, uncertainty, graphs, evaluation and report writing.
Use this page two ways: as a revision summary before a test, and as a checklist while you work on your own project.
Chapter summary
| Topic | What you need to know |
|---|---|
| 8A Question | Types of investigation: controlled experiment, field study, secondary data, model, design and build. A research question is testable, measurable, safe, ethical and doable, with one IV and one DV (with units). Narrow a broad topic step by step. Timeline with pilot test, approval and spare time; dated logbook with raw data and every change. |
| 8B Sources | Primary data (yours) vs secondary; primary literature (original papers) vs secondary sources. Peer review, then replication. Judge sources by who, evidence, when and why; read laterally. Don't cite chatbots or unread papers. Literature review shows the gap. Credit First Nations knowledge; ask permission for anything unpublished. APA referencing: (Author, year) plus a reference list. |
| 8C Design | Hypothesis: if…then…because; supported, never proved. Control group (no treatment) vs controlled variables. At least five well-spread IV values including zero. Replicates overcome natural variation. Randomise to avoid confounding variables; blind and double-blind testing; placebos. Make data quantitative. |
| 8D Risk | Hazard vs risk. Risk = likelihood × consequence on a matrix. Hierarchy of controls: eliminate, substitute, engineering, administrative, PPE (last). Safety data sheets. Plan disposal and emergencies; extra care at home and in the field. |
| 8E Ethics | Respect, minimise harm, fairness. People: informed voluntary consent, privacy, anonymity, grouped reporting, no harm. Animals: Australian code, 3Rs (replace, reduce, refine); no harm to vertebrates in school projects. ICIP: ask the right people, consent, attribution, benefit sharing (True Tracks, AIATSIS Code). |
| 8F Uncertainty | Accuracy (close to true value), precision (close together), reliability (consistent on repeating), validity (tests what it claims). Uncertainty: ½ smallest division (analogue), 1 in last digit (digital), ½ range (repeats). % uncertainty = uncertainty ÷ value × 100%. Systematic errors shift results (fix the method); random errors scatter them (repeat, average, measure bigger). % error = (experimental − accepted) ÷ accepted × 100%. |
| 8G Graphs | Tables: IV first, trials, mean, units in headings. Column graph for categories, histogram for one continuous variable in ranges, line/scatter for two continuous variables. Line of best fit, not dot-to-dot; investigate outliers. Gradient = rise ÷ run, with units, gives a rate. Interpolate safely; extrapolate with caution. |
| 8H Evaluate | Trend: direction, shape, strength, with numbers; r from −1 to +1. Correlation ≠ causation: hidden variables, reverse causation, chance. Controlled randomised experiments show cause. Discussion: describe, explain, compare, anomalies, evaluate, further research. Specific evaluations with effect and fix. Conclusion answers the aim with data. |
| 8I Report | Title, abstract (written last), introduction, method (repeatable, past tense), results (no explanation), discussion, conclusion, references, appendices. Exact, concise language; captions. No plagiarism or fabrication; follow AI rules. Posters: one big graph, few words. |
Your project checklist
- My question names one independent variable and one dependent variable with units, and my teacher has approved it.
- I have at least five reliable sources, written into my logbook as references, and none of them is a chatbot.
- My hypothesis has a scientific reason.
- I have a control group (if it makes sense), a list of controlled variables, enough replicates and a plan to randomise.
- My risk assessment is signed, and any ethics issues (people, animals, cultural knowledge) are dealt with.
- I ran a pilot test and fixed the method.
- Raw data is in my logbook, dated, with units.
- My table and graph follow the rules, and I calculated means and uncertainties.
- My discussion explains, compares with research and evaluates specifically.
- My conclusion answers the aim with numbers, and every source is referenced.
Putting it together
Every skill in this chapter serves one goal: an answer you can trust. A sharp question (8A) and good research (8B) make sure you are testing something worth knowing. A controlled, randomised design with enough replicates (8C) makes the test valid, and doing it safely (8D) and ethically (8E) makes it acceptable. Understanding uncertainty and error (8F) tells you how much your numbers can be trusted; graphs and gradients (8G) reveal the pattern; and honest evaluation, careful about correlation and causation (8H), tells you how far the conclusion can go. Finally, a clear report (8I) lets someone else check your work, which is how science corrects itself.
Key words
abstract · accuracy · anonymity · attribution · blind test · confounding variable · consent · control group · controlled variable · correlation · correlation coefficient · dependent variable · double-blind · engineering control · extrapolation · gradient · hazard · hierarchy of controls · histogram · hypothesis · ICIP · independent variable · interpolation · lateral reading · line of best fit · literature review · logbook · outlier · peer review · percentage error · percentage uncertainty · pilot test · placebo · plagiarism · PPE · precision · primary source · qualitative · quantitative · random error · randomisation · reliability · replicate · resolution · retraction · risk · risk matrix · safety data sheet · secondary source · systematic error · 3Rs · uncertainty · validity
Test yourself
Which question is best suited to a Year 10 controlled experiment?
One IV, one measurable DV, safe and doable.
In a fertiliser experiment, plants given no fertiliser are the
They show what happens without the treatment.
A thermometer reads 1.5 °C too high every time. This is
Every reading is shifted the same way.
Which control is highest on the hierarchy of controls?
Substitution is above engineering, administrative controls and PPE.
A line of best fit on a mass–volume graph passes through (10 cm³, 27 g) and (40 cm³, 108 g). The gradient is
(108 − 27) ÷ (40 − 10) = 81 ÷ 30 = 2.7 g/cm³ (aluminium).
Countries that eat more chocolate win more Nobel Prizes per person. This shows
Richer countries can afford both more chocolate and more research.
Using knowledge shared by an Aboriginal community in a published report requires
ICIP principles: consent, attribution and benefit sharing.
Label the sections of a report.
Which stage of a project does each task belong to?
A quick trial run of a method is a test. Results that agree with a hypothesis it. Whether a method tests what it claims is its . A dummy treatment is a . Gloves and glasses are the line of defence in the hierarchy of controls.
Kai investigated whether the height a tennis ball is dropped from affects its bounce height. He dropped one ball once from each of 20, 40, 60, 80 and 100 cm onto the school's concrete courtyard, judged the bounce heights by eye against a metre ruler, and concluded "higher drops cause higher bounces, proving my hypothesis". Evaluate Kai's investigation and conclusion, and describe how he could improve its validity, reliability and accuracy.
Kai's independent variable was drop height and his dependent variable was bounce height. Choosing five evenly spaced heights was sensible. However, the investigation has problems. Reliability: he did only one drop from each height, so he has no way of knowing whether a reading was typical; bounces vary because of small differences in release and where the ball lands. He should do at least five drops per height and calculate the mean and uncertainty (half the range). Accuracy: judging a moving ball's highest point by eye is very imprecise: the ball is at its peak for only an instant and viewing from above or below the ruler causes parallax error, so readings could easily be several centimetres out. He should film the drops with a phone at eye level, beside a metre ruler, and use slow-motion playback to read the top of the bounce, or use a sound or motion sensor app. Validity: the test is only fair if the same ball, the same patch of concrete and the same release method (dropped, not thrown, from the bottom of the ball) are used, at a similar temperature, because a warm ball bounces higher. He should state these controlled variables. Conclusion: "proving" is wrong; results can support a hypothesis but not prove it. Because this was a controlled experiment in which only the height changed, a strong positive trend would support the idea that drop height affects bounce height, but with single, eyeballed readings the evidence is weak. With repeats, video measurement, controlled variables and a graph with a line of best fit, he could describe the relationship confidently, for example whether bounce height is a constant fraction of drop height.