Part 5: Preparing the Scientific Presentation
In this final phase, your team will act as solar energy consultants presenting your findings and recommendations. Your goal is to answer the driving question: Can we design a photovoltaic (PV) array to charge all school laptops?
Using evidence from Parts 1-4 (your calculations, site analysis, and experiment), you will develop a clear, data-driven recommendation for your school’s solar design. Much of the work for these sections has already been completed—you will now organize, refine, and present your findings.
Work Format
You may choose one format for your presentation:
- Scientific Poster (printed or digital)
- Digital presentation (Canva, PPT, Google Slides)
- Report-style document (written or digital).
Your presentation must be:
- Clear, organized, and professional.
- Evidence-based (use data, calculations, and visuals).
- Presented by all group members (5-7 minutes total).
Required Components
- Abstract (100-150 words)
Write a concise summary of your investigation. Your abstract should introduce the driving question and explain how your experiment informed your solar array design and final recommendation.
Include:- Your purpose (driving question and research question).
- Brief description of what you tested, and how.
- Key results of your experiment.
- How your results informed your solar design and recommendation.
- Background and Context (100-150 words)
Explain the scientific reasoning behind your investigation.- How do photovoltaic (PV) cells generate electricity?
- How does your tested variable influence PV performance?
- Why is this variable important for designing a solar array?
- Research Question
- State the testable question your experiment was designed to answer.
- Identify your independent and dependent variables.
- Prediction
- State your hypothesis.
- Describe what trend you expected to observe.
- Method
- Describe how your experiment was conducted in clear, numbered steps. Ensure another group could replicate your experiment.
- Include the number of trials for each condition within your procedure.
- Include relevant images or videos.
- Results
Present your data clearly.- Data table with titles, units, and labels.
- Graph of processed data (e.g. averages, percentages) with titles, labeled axes, and units.
- Brief summary of trends and possible sources of error.
- Conclusion (50-100 words)
Explain what your results mean.- Answer your research question, and state whether your hypothesis was supported.
- Use evidence from your data.
- Discuss the validity and reliability of your data.
- Application (100-150 words)
Apply your experimental findings to your school solar array design.- How do your results affect panel performance?
- What design decisions did your data help you make?
- How do your results support or challenge your original assumptions?
- Final Recommendation (100-150 words)
Present your final solar design as a recommendation to the school. Include:- Total energy demand.
- Estimated number and size of PV panels.
- Selected installation site.
- A clear explanation of why this design is the best solution, using evidence from your calculations, site analysis, and experiment.
Presentation Assessment Rubric
| Category | Excellent | Good | Needs Improvement |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract | Effectively summarizes the investigation (100-150 words). Includes the driving question, experiment overview, key results, and how findings informed the final design and recommendation. | Includes most elements (purpose, experiment, results, design connection) but may lack precision, conciseness, or minor details. | Missing key elements or difficult to follow. May be too vague, too long or too short, or not reflective of the full investigation. |
| Background and Context | Accurately explains how PV cells work and how the tested variable affects performance. Strong connection to the design challenge. | Generally accurate background on how PV cells work, with some connection to PV performance and design. | Limited or inaccurate background. Weak or missing connection to PV performance or the design challenge. |
| Research Question | Well-defined, testable question identifying independent and dependent variables. | Testable question with variables identified, but may lack specificity. | The question is unclear, or not testable, or variables are not well defined. |
| Methods | Detailed, logical, and replicable procedure with numbered steps. Includes sufficient detail (trials, conditions) and visuals where appropriate. | The procedure is mostly complete and understandable, but may lack some detail or clarity. | Procedure is incomplete, unclear, or difficult to replicate. |
| Results | Data is accurate, well-organized, and clearly presented. Graphs and tables are correctly labeled with units and titles. Trends and possible errors are thoroughly explained. | Data is organized and mostly accurate. Graphs and tables are included with minor errors. Basic trends are identified. | Data is incomplete, inaccurate, or poorly organized. Graphs and tables are missing or incorrect. Trends not clearly identified. |
| Conclusions | Directly answers the research question using evidence. Addresses hypothesis, and includes thoughtful analysis of validity, reliability, and error. | Conclusion answers the research question with some evidence, and addresses the hypothesis. Limited analysis of error or reliability. | Conclusion is weak, unsupported, or does not address the question. Little or no discussion of reliability. |
| Applications | Insightfully explains how experimental results informed solar design decisions. Strong connection between data and design choices. | Applies results to design with some connection. Reasoning is accurate, but may be generalized. | Weak or unclear connection between experiment and design decisions. |
| Final Recommendation | Presents a well-justified and comprehensive solar design recommendation. Includes accurate energy demand, panel estimates, site selection, and strong evidence-based reasoning. | Recommendation is present with reasonable calculations and justification, but may lack depth or completeness. | Recommendation is unclear, incomplete, or not supported by evidence. |
| Organization and Communication | The presentation is professional, clear, and engaging, with excellent visual design and logical flow. All team members contribute confidently and effectively. | The presentation is clear and organized, with readable visuals. Most team members contribute appropriately. | The presentation lacks clarity or organization. Visuals are hard to read or missing. Uneven or minimal team participation. |