Investigating Science 2025 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:

• use relevant information from the stimulus
• identify why astrology is a pseudoscience.

Areas for students to improve include:

• demonstrating how pseudosciences manipulate scientific language and processes
• identifying relevant aspects of a stimulus to support the response.

Question 22

In better responses, students were able to:

• use a relevant example of a nuclear meltdown
• state how public image of science can be impacted by events. 

Areas for students to improve include:

• providing characteristics and features of how a nuclear meltdown impacts the public image of science.

Question 23 

In better responses, students were able to:

• describe aspects of the Marshall and Warren methodology in detail
• describe the linear model and demonstrate understanding of how the Marshall and Warren’s methodology differed
• understand aspects of methodology, for example, sample size and repetition.

Areas for students to improve include:

• improving understanding of what constitutes unethical practice.

Question 24 (a)

In better responses, students were able to:

• demonstrate an understanding of the peer review process
• identify and apply trends from the stimulus using correct terminology.

Areas for students to improve include:

• understanding components of the peer review process
• reading and interpreting data in a table
• showing understanding of the meaning of feasibility.

Question 24 (b)

In better responses, students were able to:

• outline features of peer-reviewed articles
• outline features of articles in popular media
• provide reasons for the different purposes of these features.

Areas for students to improve include:

• showing clear understanding of the different purposes scientific articles.

Question 25

In better responses, students were able to:

• outline the study that led to the public understanding of the Mozart Effect correctly
• demonstrate understanding of the difference between correlation and causation
• give reasons why the Mozart Effect is not a causal relationship by identifying confounding variables.

Areas for students to improve include:

• defining correlation and causation, and understanding the difference between them
• understanding the difference between the studies that investigated the effect of music on spatial reasoning and a common understanding that babies and/or infants increase their IQ by listening to classical music.

Question 26

In better responses, students were able to:

• clearly articulate how they would gather appropriate data
• show understanding of the importance of validity in designing the method
• demonstrate that they needed to compare data between the control group and the experimental group.

Areas for students to improve include:

• showing understanding of experimental design with a focus on validity
• ensuring that they create a method to test the information given in the stimulus
• providing a clear link between how the data is collected before and after the treatment for both groups.

Question 27

In better responses, students were able to:

• calculate averages by excluding an outlier
• demonstrate that if the average temperature reading was close to the weather station temperature that this meant the accuracy was higher
• explain that repeated observations/measurements under identical circumstances will yield similar results and that repetition may not generate consistent results.

Areas for students to improve include:

• identification of an outlier in a data set
• using all data from the table to support their comparison of accuracy to the true value
• demonstrating their understanding that reliability is the consistency of repeated results.

Question 28

In better responses, students were able to:

• clearly explain that results should be interpreted with caution because of bias or conflict of interest
• outline an example from another industry to support their response. 

Areas for students to improve include:

• ensuring that they reference Brand X in their response
• providing reasons for the need to interpret Brand X’s data with caution
• ensuring that the supportive example was from another industry and not the same industry.

Question 29

In better responses, students were able to:

• identify two different ethical considerations
• describe each ethical consideration and provide a clear reason or need for each ethical consideration.

Areas for students to improve include:

• identifying ethical considerations.

Question 30

In better responses, students were able to:

• identify all trends as shown on the graph in relation to time
• provide relevant data from the graph
• relate each trend to the construction of the dam.

Areas for students to improve include:

• identifying and explicitly stating relevant trends from data.

Question 31

In better responses, students were able to:

• identify correctly that a 10% increase in mass did not support the claim that there would be a 20% increase in mass explain why the experiment needed an experimental control and controlled variables
• outline features of the experiment that were not controlled.

Areas for students to improve include:

• showing their understanding that an experimental control and controlled variables are different
• giving reasons why variables must be controlled to ensure the independent variable is tested in isolation
• evaluating validity rather than reliability or accuracy.

Question 32

In better responses, students were able to:

• show detailed understanding of two relevant scientific advances that have improved world health
• use trends and/or data from the graph that are relevant to the identified scientific advances
• give specific details about how the identified scientific advances have helped reduce the death rate.

Areas for students to improve include:

• demonstrating their understanding of scientific advances more explicitly
• using examples that relate to the trends/data in the stimulus
• selecting examples that relate to world health, rather than generalised scientific advances.

Question 33

In better responses, students were able to:

• describe scientific regulations and the ways in which they address ethical issues
• link codes of conduct to the ethical issues they address
• provide details about the ethical issues raised by scientific research.

Areas for students to improve include:

• describing what the code does, rather than a narrative of when the code was broken
• describing codes of conduct clearly, indicating what they do or do not allow
• identifying specific ethical issues relating to a code of conduct.

Question 34 (a)

In better responses, students were able to:

• recognise variables that needed to be controlled, rather than identifying only that the same equipment should be used
• identify the independent variable in the investigation as the variable that is changed.

Areas for students to improve include:

• identifying the relationship between variables, for example, if time is the measured variable, it cannot also be controlled
• referring accurately to the specific independent and dependent variables.

Question 34 (b)

In better responses, students were able to:

• draw a curved line of best fit to reflect the trend in the data
• use linear scales on both axes of the graph
• indicate a break in the scale using scientific conventions.

Areas for students to improve include:

• using relevant scales that make plotting and interpretation easier to communicate
• identifying when to draw a curved line of best fit to reflect the trend in the data
• plotting an independent variable on the x-axis.

Question 34 (c)

In better responses, students were able to:

• identify reaction rate as being inversely related to time taken for the reaction to occur
• use the trend line in the graph to support their response.

Areas for students to improve include:

• using accurate terminology to describe relationships, such as ‘directly proportional’ or ‘inversely proportional’
• identifying the relevant relationship with reaction rate rather than reaction time.

Question 35

In better responses, students were able to:

• link the errors in investigations to features of the two graphs
• refer to specific data from the stimulus
• distinguish clearly between systematic and random errors.

Areas for students to improve include:

• identifying specific types of systematic and random errors
• using data from the stimulus to support the response
• understanding types of errors and what causes them.

Question 36

In better responses, students were able to:

• provide specific examples and clearly explain the nature and extent of the impact of science on technology and technology on science
• incorporate the student responses to support their arguments
• provide an analysis of the interdependent and cyclic relationship between science and technology.

Areas for students to improve include:

• avoiding rewording of the stimulus statements
• selecting and using appropriate examples that effectively highlight the specific impact of science on technology, and technology on science
• providing detailed and relevant examples to support arguments, avoiding unsupported generalised statements.