Conclusion

🎯 CRITERION C: CONCLUSION (6 marks total)

✅ 1. A Justified Conclusion that Directly Addresses the Research Question

Your conclusion must:

• Clearly and specifically answer your research question

• Be based on the data you processed

• Avoid vague or generic statements

✔️ What to Do:

• Restate your research question and clearly answer it.

• Base your answer on the numerical trends or patterns in your data.

• If applicable, express your conclusion in terms of mathematical relationships (e.g. “The relationship between x and y is linear”).

🧠 Example:

RQ: “How does the length of a pendulum affect its period?”

Conclusion: “The investigation showed that the period of the pendulum increases with the square root of its length. The best-fit line for the graph of $T$ vs. √L​ had a correlation coefficient of 0.998, indicating a strong linear relationship. This supports the hypothesis and theoretical equation T=2π √L/g”

✅ 2. Consistency with the Analysis, Considering Uncertainties

Your conclusion must:

• Reflect the uncertainties and errors in your data

• Avoid overconfident or overly precise claims if uncertainty is large

• Show that you’re thinking like a scientist: results are always interpreted within limits

✔️ What to Do:

• Mention how uncertainties affect the reliability of your findings

• State whether the data supports the hypothesis—but with appropriate caution if results are inconclusive

• Reference error bars, standard deviations, or overlaps in uncertainty ranges

🧠 Example:

“While the trend between $T$ and √L​ was strongly linear, the uncertainty in the measured period (±0.03 s) introduces a 2.4% variation, which limits the precision of the calculated value of $g$. Nevertheless, the data supports the theoretical relationship within the bounds of experimental error.”

✅ 3. Supported Through Comparison to Accepted Scientific Context

Your conclusion should connect your results to:

• Textbook physics theories (e.g., Ohm’s Law, Newton’s Laws, Hooke’s Law)

• Established values (e.g., gravitational acceleration = 9.81 m/s²)

• Previous studies (if mentioned in your background section)

✔️ What to Do:

• Compare your results with theoretical predictions or accepted values

• Mention any deviations and suggest why they occurred

🧠 Example:

“The calculated value for gravitational acceleration from the pendulum data was 9.72±0.11 m/s², which is within 0.9% of the accepted value of 9.81 m/s². This supports the validity of the method used.”

✅ 4. Reasoning Aligned with Established Scientific Principles

The logic of your conclusion must:

• Make sense scientifically

• Not contradict established physics (unless you have a really good reason and data to back it up)

• Reflect an understanding of why your results occurred

✔️ What to Do:

• Explain the result using known physics principles

• If your results deviate from expected, give a scientific explanation—not just “human error”

• Don’t just describe what happened—explain why it happened

🧠 Example:

“The increase in period with length is due to the fact that a longer pendulum has a greater arc length and takes longer to complete an oscillation, which is consistent with the theory of simple harmonic motion. Since the pendulum was kept at small angles, the restoring force remained proportional to the displacement, validating the model used.”

✅ Summary Checklist for Criterion C