Mark scheme for The Science of Life: How
your body works
Only students that have registered their project for this competition are eligible to submit an entry.
Each entry will be reviewed by a panel including a combination of physiology experts, biology
teachers and postgraduate students.
Students will not be informed of their marks, only whether or not they have been shortlisted or
awarded a prize.
Stage 1: Mark scheme for progress reports submitted following completion of 15
hours’ research
Once students have registered their project, they should complete 15 hours of research and submit a
summary of their progress by 28 February 2016. The report should be presented in an innovative
way.
The following areas will be considered by the review panel:
1. Is there a clear structure to the project (aims, hypothesis, methods etc.)? (3 marks)
2. Is the research question based on a physiological concept? Has it been adequately researched
and a clear background presented? (3 marks)
3. Have the students adequately explained how their research question is original or tackles a
previous question from a different angle? (3 marks)
4. Is there a valid hypothesis and does the proposed research adequately test it? (3 marks)
5. Are the methods appropriate to produce results? (3 marks)
6. Have the results been analysed appropriately and accurately presented? Have appropriate
conclusions been drawn? (3 marks)
7. Has the project been well described for a non-specialist audience? (3 marks)
8. Has guidance been sought from a teacher? (1 mark) Have they also sought guidance from a
mentor? (1 mark)
9. Do the project and report appear to be the work of the student(s)? (3 marks, where 3 = appears
to be all own work and 0 = teacher and/or mentor appears to have had a significant input)
10. Extra marks will be awarded for the method of presentation (e.g. for learning new skills, using
innovative techniques, for collaborating with others who have necessary skills, or just a crisp
presentation) (5 marks)
Stage 2: Mark scheme for projects presented at final judging
Candidates shortlisted from stage 1 will be invited to complete a further 15 hours’ research, and then
present their findings as a poster during July 2016.
Students will present their work to other individuals attending the meeting (primarily research
physiologists) and to the review panel who will make themselves known to the students.
The following areas will be considered by the review panel:
1. 1 mark is awarded for each of the following if met to a good standard (7 marks total):
 Has the hypothesis been robustly tested?
 Are the methods appropriate for the experiment?
 Has consideration been given to Health and Safety, and ethical requirements?
 Have the results been accurately presented?
 Have appropriate conclusions been drawn?
 Has a real-world application been considered if appropriate?
 Have possible areas of improvement been identified?
2. Knowledge and understanding (3 marks)

3 marks: excellent breadth and depth of knowledge presented; answered questions well
and with confidence
 0 marks: very little background knowledge evident; difficulty in answering questions
3. Active involvement in project by all team members (3 marks)
 3 marks: individual project OR all team members show equal contribution
 0 marks: it’s clear that one person has done most of the work
4. Clarity and accuracy of communication, both orally and in the poster (5 marks)
 5 marks: excellent poster and oral presentation
 3 marks: average poster, poor oral presentation OR poor poster, average oral
presentation
 0 marks: poor poster and oral presentation