Investigating Science 2023 HSC exam pack

Students should:

• read the question carefully to ensure that they do not miss important components of what is being asked
• have a clear understanding of key words in the question and recognise the intent of the question and its requirements
• plan the response to assist in the logical sequencing of information
• integrate relevant scientific terms into their responses
• engage with any stimulus material provided and refer to it in their response
• show all working related to analysing trends in a graph and include correct units and significant figures
• recognise the importance of the work of scientists named within the syllabus.

Question 21

In better responses, students were able to:

• write a hypothesis, identifying the cause and effect relationship between the independent and dependent variables
• use given data to inform their hypothesis
• identify a variable that could affect the dependent variable.

Areas for students to improve include:

• understanding the causality of variables and how they could affect each other.

Question 22

In better responses, students were able to:

• clearly link a surgical procedure to its effect on world health
• differentiate between world health and individual health outcomes.

Areas for students to improve include:

• understanding the difference between a surgical procedure, a surgical device and a medical procedure. 

Question 23

In better responses, students were able to:

• understand 'bioharvesting’ and use an example in their response
• differentiate between the use of bioharvested organisms and the value to Country and Place. 

Areas for students to improve include:

• explaining the value of the knowledges and practices of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, in addition to the associated commercial advantages of bioharvesting.

Question 24

In better responses, students were able to:

• identify the calibration or systematic error of the thermometer
• identify that both data sets are reliable
• use quantitative data from the stimulus as evidence for the justification. 

Areas for students to improve include:

• understanding validity and accuracy in relation to experimental results.

Question 25

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide examples of scientific theories and laws
• identify that parts of the information are incorrect
• use information from the stimulus to support their evaluation. 

Areas for students to improve include:

• understanding the difference between an effect and scientific theories/laws
• understanding the difference between the law of reflection and the law of refraction
• supporting statements by using evidence from the stimulus.

Question 26

In better responses, students were able to:

• use details of their chosen example to make a logical justification or evaluation
• outline or describe a specific example using relevant details
• link their chosen example to the need for regulation
• understand that effectiveness of the regulation or code of conduct in (b) was in relation to the need explained in (a).

Areas for students to improve include:

• knowing relevant and specific examples (a) and specific codes of conduct (b)
• selecting examples that can be used across both parts of the question to develop responses that are logical, coherent and concise
• stating what ethical issue they were addressing (b)
• stating whether the code or regulation was effective (b)
• using details that address the specific question rather than generalised scientific progress
• avoiding examples from the syllabus that are not relevant to the question.

Question 27

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide the reasons why people publish in fake journals
• explain why the peer review process is a barrier to publication in reputable science journals
• identify that the costs and time associated with the peer review process as an incentive to seek out fake or predatory journals, which do not require such rigour.

Areas for students to improve include:

• explaining the reasons rather than providing a list of reasons
• using examples to support the explanation.

Question 28

In better responses, students were able to:

• outline the peer-reviewed literature and evaluate the relevance of the investigation
• outline Marshall and Warren’s investigation using specific detail to support the evaluation.

Areas for students to improve include:

• knowing what initiated the investigation and the methodology that was used
• using specific examples to support their evaluation.

Question 29

In better responses, students were able to:

• identify limitations in terms of error and/or uncertainty
• understand the variables in the experiment, including the cause and effect relationship
• outline the relationship between gas temperature and volume.

Areas for students to improve include:

• understanding the relevant syllabus content.

Question 30

In better responses, students were able to:

• apply their understanding of the scientific method to the stimulus material
• relabel and/or reorder subheadings in the depth study
• outline the need for background research
• identify areas of the report that were missing, for example, the method
• give examples of how to improve the results, such as provide quantitative results, a table and/or a graph
• state the need for a formal risk assessment
• identify the need for formal scientific language to be used and state problems with the stimulus. For example, using formal language, specific terminology, numbered steps in 3rd person present tense, or prose in past tense
• identify issues with the validity of the methodology, accuracy of measurements and reliability of the results
• structure the analysis of language structure separately for clarity of supporting evidence.

Areas for students to improve include:

• addressing both the structure and language of the report
• providing a more detailed evaluation by addressing more than one aspect of structure and more than one aspect for language
• providing a clear judgement/evaluation
• using examples of corrected structure and language.

Question 31

In better responses, students were able to:

• plot graphs with multiple sets of data using an appropriate key and connect data points with an appropriate curve for each set of data
• state a relationship between the independent and dependent variables in the hypothesis
• use quantitative data to support the explanation
• explain how both phosphorus and CO₂ changes impacted the mass of leaves.

Areas for students to improve include:

• explaining the trend in the data without restating the hypothesis
• constructing a uniform scale and using a key when plotting multiple data sets
• drawing a trendline (curve) that is relevant for all data
• plotting the independent variable on the x axis.

Question 32

In better responses, students were able to:

• demonstrate an understanding of validity and were able to identify a factor which decreased it in the experiment
• make comparisons between the claim and the results in the study
• show an understanding of evidence-base claims.

Areas for students to improve include:

• understanding that having two different times of application does not decrease validity
• using experimental evidence to judge the efficacy of a claim.

Question 33

In better responses, students were able to:

• outline the positive and negative aspects of the development of flight
• coherently incorporate their own case study with the stimulus material.

Areas for students to improve include:

• selecting a case study to discuss the public image of science, rather than the improvement of flight.

Question 34

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide a clear judgement about the impact or growth attributed to economic development
• provide details of the impact of scientific research
• plan a response that was specific, coherent and logical.

Areas for students to improve include:

• discerning between economic development and a simple product or item
• using details from an example they studied to respond to the question
• selecting examples that related to research and economic development.

Question 35

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide a testable claim or hypothesis
• write a valid investigation that outlined how to change the independent variable and measure the dependent
• outline a valid method that would provide accurate and reliable results
• outline qualitative and/or quantitative measurements
• explain the impacts of sample size and sample selection separately
• make clear judgements that specifically explain the impact that sample size and sample selection can have on experimental results.

Areas for students to improve include:

• understanding accuracy, validity and reliability in the context of claims testing
• structuring responses to communicate more explicitly and effectively
• understanding the possible applications of sample selection and its impacts on associated results.

Question 36

In better responses, students were able to:

• identify a technology linking it with a model, law or theory
• demonstrate an understanding of the science and technology cycle
• outline specific research relevant to the perspective rather than broad statements
• discuss details of the chosen example to show the progression of scientific understanding
• plan a logical response to coherently and efficiently construct a response.

Areas for students to improve include:

• planning a response that addressed the entire question
• selecting examples that enabled the required detail to be included
• knowing specific models, theories or laws.