The Life Starter
Sign up
Grade 12 · unit review

Review: Plan, Write and Defend a Bounded Inquiry

Apply specify an inquiry plan element, evaluate evidence fit, prepare an oral defense answer, make the project reproducible in scope using supplied texts and original responses.

Download reviews and answer keys

Bring the unit skills together

Use these 4 new cases to check your reasoning. Choices are temporary and are not saved to an account, sent to staff or recorded as school grades. Download your current review choices before leaving or reloading.

Unit review questions
1. Original excerpt A: Method: extract date, count and whether tearing actually occurred from each included card. Use excerpt A only. Which plan element is supplied?
Need a hint?
  • A method describes how evidence is obtained.
  • A question is not already a result.
2. Original excerpt B: R1 answers one model’s failure count but not the entire requested set. Use excerpt B only. Which fit condition is supported by the excerpt?
Need a hint?
  • A procedure may explain how without measuring outcomes.
  • More sources do not automatically mean better support.
3. Original excerpt C: Questioner: Can your three cards predict all future hinges? Answer: No; the source set and trial conditions limit the claim. Use excerpt C only. Which response meets the stated challenge?
Need a hint?
  • Future work belongs in its own category.
  • A confident unsupported answer does not resolve a limit.
4. Original excerpt D: The inclusion rule is printed before the table so exclusions are inspectable. Use excerpt D only. Which documentation element is supplied?
Need a hint?
  • A stable identifier links repeated notes to one record.
  • A reproducible procedure can still have limited evidence.

The download contains your current choices and any checked feedback. Keep the separate transfer-task work in your own document; downloading its instructions does not mark it complete.

Use the skills in a new task

Make a short complete response demonstrating the four skills in this unit. Complete a paper capstone using these fictional records: R1 dated May 1, paper hinge failed after 4 bends; R2 dated May 2, failed after 6; R3 dated May 3, stopped at 5 without failure; R4 undated promotion. Define an inclusion rule, report failure observations without treating R3 as a failure, cite IDs and defend the limit that long-term durability is unknown. Longer writing targets in optional extensions can be completed in a later session.

Work on paper or in your own document. Explain the choices you made.

  • Identify the supplied component and explain its relation to the others. Keep the plan feasible with supplied records.
  • Compare the stated question with what the supplied record establishes. Identify the scope of its contribution.
  • Use the actual question and record. Provide the matching response and update the written report if a mistake is shown.
  • Record the stated element with enough detail for another reader to trace it. Distinguish source facts from interpretation.
Compare with a model response

Question: What observed failure counts appear in the dated trial cards? Include dated trials R1–R3; exclude undated promotional R4. Record | Date | Bends | Status R1 | May 1 | 4 | Failed R2 | May 2 | 6 | Failed R3 | May 3 | 5 | Stopped without failure R1 and R2 provide failure-after-four and failure-after-six observations. R3 is not a failure at five, because the trial stopped without one. Claims cite these record IDs. Defense: the dated-trial rule fits the bounded question, and separating count from status prevents inventing a failure. These short trials leave long-term durability unknown; a proposed next test is not a current result.

A different response can also meet the criteria. Compare the evidence and reasoning, rather than copying the wording.