| Award level | Criteria breakdown | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Bronze | The student showed an understanding of how their project went and how their actions changed the outcome of the project. | I think my project was a mixed success. It went well because I was able to achieve my aim, as I researched some causes of dehydration and tested some rehydration therapies to find out what they were made from. It didn’t go well because I found the experiments hard and it took me a long time to finish them. This meant I wasn’t able to repeat my experiment as much as I would have liked. |
| Silver | The student showed a strong understanding of their project’s outcomes. They explained how their actions and decisions may have affected their project. | I chose to carry out the experiment using X technique. After completing the experiment a few times, I realised it wasn’t the right choice, as this technique tends to give false positives. Once I discovered the first few false positives, I did more research which confirmed my findings about the technique. My choice meant the timing of my project was affected and therefore I was not able to meet outcome Y. I managed to save the project because my teacher gave me extra time in the lab to repeat the experiment. |
| Gold | The student identified and critiqued their project outcomes. They explained in detail how their actions and decisions affected their project. | The method I chose to edit the genome of the embryos (CRISPR) resulted in statistically significant and reliable data. The process was relatively quick when compared to other methods. Also, based on the research I’ve carried out and my mentor’s advice – it was the best option. If I had used zinc-finger nucleases (ZFN) instead of CRISPR, although I would have received conclusive data earlier, the process overall would have lasted much longer. Also, there would have been a higher chance of errors due to the extra stages in the process. |