Physics 2019 v1.

3
IA3 high-level annotated sample response
February 2023

Research investigation (20%)

This sample of student work has been published by the QCAA to assist and support teachers to
match evidence in student responses to the characteristics described in the instrument-specific
marking guide (ISMG).
The sample is an unedited authentic student response produced with permission. Any
identifying features have been redacted from the response. It may contain errors and/or
omissions that do not affect its overall match to the characteristics indicated.

Assessment objectives
This assessment instrument is used to determine student achievement in the following
objectives:
2. apply understanding of special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model to develop
research questions
3. analyse research evidence about special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model
4. interpret research evidence about special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model
5. investigate phenomena associated with special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard
Model through research
6. evaluate research processes, claims and conclusions about special relativity, quantum
theory or the Standard Model
7. communicate understandings and research findings, arguments and conclusions about
special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model.
Note: Objective 1 is not assessed in this instrument.
221476
 Instrument-specific marking guide (ISMG)
Criterion: Research and planning
Assessment objectives
2. apply understanding of special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model to develop
research questions
5. investigate phenomena associated with special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard
Model through research

The student work has the following characteristics: Marks

• informed application of understanding of special relativity, quantum theory or the

Standard Model demonstrated by a considered rationale identifying clear development
of the research question from the claim
• effective and efficient investigation of phenomena associated with special relativity, 5–6
quantum theory or the Standard Model demonstrated by
- a specific and relevant research question
- selection of sufficient and relevant sources.

• adequate application of understanding of special relativity, quantum theory or the

Standard Model demonstrated by a reasonable rationale that links the research question
and the claim
• effective investigation of phenomena associated with special relativity, quantum theory 3–4
or the Standard Model demonstrated by
- a relevant research question
- selection of relevant sources.

• rudimentary application of understanding of special relativity, quantum theory or the

Standard Model demonstrated by a vague or irrelevant rationale for the investigation
• ineffective investigation of phenomena associated with special relativity, quantum theory
1–2
or the Standard Model demonstrated by
- an inappropriate research question
- selection of insufficient and irrelevant sources.

• does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. 0

Physics 2019 v1.3 Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

IA3 high-level annotated sample response February 2023
Page 2 of 14
 Criterion: Analysis and interpretation
Assessment objectives
3. analyse research evidence about special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model
4. interpret research evidence about special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model

The student work has the following characteristics: Marks

• systematic and effective analysis of qualitative data and/or quantitative data within the
sources about special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model demonstrated by
- the identification of sufficient and relevant evidence
- thorough identification of relevant trends, patterns or relationships 5–6
- thorough and appropriate identification of the uncertainty and limitations of evidence
• insightful interpretation of research evidence about special relativity, quantum theory or
the Standard Model demonstrated by justified scientific argument/s.

• effective analysis of qualitative data and/or quantitative data within the sources about
special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model demonstrated by
- the identification of relevant evidence
- identification of obvious trends, patterns or relationships 3–4
- basic identification of limitations of evidence
• adequate interpretation of research evidence about special relativity, quantum theory or
the Standard Model demonstrated by reasonable scientific argument/s.

• rudimentary analysis of qualitative data and/or quantitative data within the sources about
special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model demonstrated
- the identification of insufficient and irrelevant evidence
- identification of incorrect or irrelevant trends, patterns or relationships 1–2
- incorrect or insufficient identification of limitations of evidence
• invalid interpretation of research evidence about special relativity, quantum theory or the
Standard Model demonstrated by inappropriate or irrelevant argument/s.

• does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. 0

Physics 2019 v1.3 Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

IA3 high-level annotated sample response February 2023
Page 3 of 14
 Criterion: Conclusion and evaluation
Assessment objectives
4. interpret research evidence about special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model
6. evaluate research processes, claims and conclusions about special relativity, quantum theory
or the Standard Model

The student work has the following characteristics: Marks

• insightful interpretation of research evidence about special relativity, quantum theory or

the Standard Model demonstrated by justified conclusion/s linked to the research
question
• critical evaluation of the research processes, claims and conclusions about special
relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model demonstrated by 5–6
- insightful discussion of the quality of evidence
- extrapolation of credible findings of the research to the claim
- suggested improvements and extensions to the investigation that are considered and
relevant to the claim.

• adequate interpretation of research evidence about special relativity, quantum theory or

the Standard Model demonstrated by reasonable conclusion/s relevant to the research
question
• basic evaluation of the research processes, claims and conclusions about special
relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model demonstrated by 3–4
- reasonable description of the quality of evidence
- application of relevant findings of the research to the claim
- suggested improvements and extensions to the investigation that are relevant to the
claim.

• invalid interpretation of research evidence about special relativity, quantum theory or the
Standard Model demonstrated by inappropriate or irrelevant conclusion/s
• superficial evaluation of the research processes, claims and conclusions about special
relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model demonstrated by 1–2
- cursory or simplistic statements about the quality of evidence
- application of insufficient or inappropriate findings of the research to the claim
- ineffective or irrelevant suggestions

• does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. 0

Physics 2019 v1.3 Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

IA3 high-level annotated sample response February 2023
Page 4 of 14
 Criterion: Communication
Assessment objectives
7. communicate understandings and research findings, arguments and conclusions about
special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model

The student work has the following characteristics: Marks

• effective communication of understandings and research findings, arguments and

conclusions about special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model
demonstrated by
- fluent and concise use of scientific language and representations 2
- appropriate use of genre conventions
- acknowledgement of sources of information through appropriate use of referencing
conventions

• adequate communication of understandings and research findings, arguments and

conclusions about special relativity, quantum theory or the Standard Model
demonstrated by
1
- competent use of scientific language and representations
- use of basic genre conventions
- use of basic referencing conventions

• does not satisfy any of the descriptors above. 0

Physics 2019 v1.3 Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

IA3 high-level annotated sample response February 2023
Page 5 of 14
 Context
See IA3 sample assessment instrument: Research investigation (20%) (available on the QCAA
Portal).
Investigate one of the following claims:
• The theory of relativity explains the cosmos and everything in it.
• Climate change can be modelled using blackbody radiation.
• Using electrons for microscopy means there is no limit to the resolution that can be achieved.
• Quantum theories explain the origin of life.
• Bruce Banner absorbs ambient gamma radiation, converting its energy into mass during the
transformation into the Hulk.
You may identify an alternative claim in consultation with your teacher. This claim must be related
to Unit 4 subject matter.

Task
Gather secondary evidence related to a research question in order to evaluate the claim. Develop
your research question based on a number of possible claims provided by your teacher.
Obtain evidence by researching scientifically credible sources, such as scientific journals, books
by well credentialed scientists, and websites of governments, universities, independent research
bodies or science and technology manufacturers. You must adhere to research conventions.

Sample response
Criterion Marks allocated Provisional marks

Research and planning 6 6

Assessment objectives 2, 5

Analysis and interpretation 6 6

Assessment objectives 2, 3, 5

Conclusion and evaluation 6 6

Assessment objectives 4, 6

Communication 2 2
Assessment objective 7

Total 20 20

The annotations show the match to the instrument-specific marking guide (ISMG) performance-
level descriptors.

Physics 2019 v1.3 Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

IA3 high-level annotated sample response February 2023
Page 6 of 14
 Physics IA3
Research and Rationale
planning [5–6]
Claim: climate change can be modelled using blackbody radiation.
a considered rationale
identifying clear
development of the This claim was broken down into two main parts: climate change and
research question blackbody radiation. In order to start initial research, a broad research
from the claim question stating, ‘how is climate change impacted by blackbody
The rationale radiation?’ was formulated.
communicates the
sequence of ideas, This research found that the greenhouse effect relied heavily on
supported by scientific
literature, involved in the blackbody radiation to be emitted into the atmosphere, and then re-
development of the absorbed by certain gases in the lowest level of atmosphere called the
research question from troposphere (Dhaniyala, 2011). Further specificity was required to
the claim.
understand exactly how the greenhouse effect is related to climate
change.

It was found that due to an increase in the greenhouse gas concentrations

in the troposphere, the amount of radiation absorbed at this level was
increasing (EPA, 2019). This in-turn was leading to an increased amount
of heat being ‘trapped’ on the surface of the Earth, leading to a process
called global warming (Turrentine, 2021). After analysing multiple
absorption spectra for common greenhouse gases, it was discovered that
water vapor actually absorbed more radiation than CO2, yet CO2 is
commonly considered to be the reason behind climate change (CSI,
unknown). Therefore, CO2 is included in the question. A lack of research
concluded there was a relationship between water vapour and CO2 that
caused an increase in the rate of climate change. Therefore, it became
Research and the focus of the research question.
planning [5–6]

a specific and relevant Research Question

research question
Is there a relationship between the concentration of water-vapour and
The research question carbon dioxide greenhouse gases, that leads to an increase in the rate of
has been developed
from the claim and is
global warming due to an increased absorption of blackbody radiation?
connected to the topics
covered in the unit. Background
A blackbody is a theoretical object that absorbs all electromagnetic
radiation it is exposed to and reflects none (Swinburne University,
unknown). Blackbodies also emit radiation. All things above 0°K emit
some form of electromagnetic radiation, acting as a blackbody (Swinburne
University, unknown). When considering how the planet absorbs
radiation from the sun, blackbody radiation is a key factor.

Communication [2]
The sun emits energy in the form of electromagnetic radiation:
approximately 99% of this radiation is in the form of visible light, ultraviolet
fluent and concise use and infrared (Villanueva, 2010). When this light reaches Earth, the
of scientific language
and representations
atmosphere reflects some of this radiation and the rest is absorbed by
Earth’s surface (Australian Government, 2021). The surface then re-
Data is clearly emits this light (most being infrared) into the atmosphere. Greenhouse
represented so that the gases (GHGs) are then responsible for absorbing some of this radiation,
trends, patterns and
relationships can be keeping it close to Earth’s surface (Figure 1) (Australian Government,
easily identified. 2021). This is called the greenhouse effect and the process maintains

Physics 2019 v1.3 Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

IA3 high-level annotated sample response February 2023
Page 7 of 14
 Earth’s temperature around 33°C warmer than if there was no
atmosphere (Physics Today, 2011).
Communication [2]

fluent and concise use

of scientific language
and representations

Data is clearly
represented so that the
trends, patterns and
relationships can be
easily identified.

Figure 1: Model of greenhouse effect. (Britannica, 2021)

Water vapour is a GHG as it also absorbs infrared radiation from Earth. A

measure of the level of water vapour is humidity, or grams of vapour per
kilogram of air (g/kg-1) (BYJU’s, unknown). When analysing the
absorption spectra of this GHG (Figure 2), it can be seen that absorption
occurs at 3 large points on the graph (5 in total), in comparison to CO
which has 3 much smaller periods on absorption. This suggests water
vapor is a more effective GHG.

Figure 2: Absorption spectra of CO2 and H2O. (Google images, unknown).

Evidence
M. Scheffer et. al (2006) investigated a series of historical fluctuations in
Analysis and carbon concentrations and climate change. At the time of publication,
interpretation [5–6]
many believed that an increase in CO2 emissions would increase the rate
identification of of photosynthesis, hence, leading to a negative feedback system in which
sufficient and relevant the Earth could be cooled. Furthermore, the focus of the most research
evidence
was understanding the effect that doubling CO2 concentrations in the
The evidence is atmosphere would cause. Some estimated that this could be as high as
appropriate for the 11.5°C. Prior efforts to construct models proved considerably inaccurate
purpose of responding
to the research and did not take into account positive feedback systems. Scheffer et. al
question. It is applicable believed positive feedbacks could override pre-existing negative
and directly connected feedbacks.
to the formation of the
scientific argument.
Research uncovered that as CO2 emissions were increased, the rate of
other gases, such as methane and water vapour also increased, creating

Physics 2019 v1.3 Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

IA3 high-level annotated sample response February 2023
Page 8 of 14
 Analysis and a positive feedback. Scheffer et. al concluded that these feedbacks could
interpretation [5–6]
account for an increase in the rate of global warming by 15-78% on a
thorough and century scale. This high level of inaccuracy does impact the validity of the
appropriate model, as it is difficult to generalise. Figures 3 and 4 displayed below are
identification of
limitations of evidence
predicted models displaying the effect on equilibrium with feedbacks.

The response identifies

limitations of evidence
that affect how well it
can be used to develop
a response to the
research question.

Figure 3: Graph displaying the relationship between carbon in ppm and

temperature.

Analysis and
interpretation [5–6]
Figure 4: The proposed impact of a positive feedback on equilibrium.
thorough
identification of
relevant trends, Figure 3 illustrates the relationship between rising temperature and
patterns or greenhouse gas concentration. In context of water vapor, when the
relationships concentration increases to the point of equilibrium (intersection of lines) it
The identified will rain, leading to a decrease in water vapour. Figure 4 shows the
relationships are impact the positive feedback of CO2 concentration has on the point at
adequate for the which equilibrium is reached. Originally, the increase was thought to
purpose of responding
to the research question reach equilibrium at 500ppm and increase global temperature by ~2°C.
and can support a valid The research found that the effect of the feedback would increase the
conclusion. They have ppm by a further 20% and temperature would increase a further 1°C.
direct bearing upon and
are applicable to the
formation of the Extrapolation of this data to the claim, suggests that as CO2 is increased,
scientific argument. water vapor feedback loops are created which introduce more GHGs to
the atmosphere. This leads to increased absorption of blackbody
radiation, intensifying the greenhouse effect and thus, modelling climate
Analysis and change.
interpretation [5–6]

justified scientific Source 2

arguments
F. Rákóczi and Z. Iványi (1999) utilised data form satellites to calculate
The scientific argument
communicates sound the relationship between water vapour and the surface temperature of the
reasoning and draws Earth. They calculated the greenhouse effect (°C) by subtracting the
upon valid and reliable ground temperature from a monthly effective temperature value
evidence.
(∆𝑇𝑇 = 𝑇𝑇𝑔𝑔 − 𝑇𝑇𝑒𝑒 ). The temperature difference was then graphed against the
water content or humidity in the atmosphere. This is a simple calculation
that does not take into account fluctuations in the weather, so the validity
of this model is compromised. The findings are graphed in figure 5.

Physics 2019 v1.3 Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

IA3 high-level annotated sample response February 2023
Page 9 of 14
 Figure 5: Relationship between humidity and temperature.

The graph above shows a clear positive linear relationship between an

increasing humidity level and the greenhouse effect. The outliers for (We)
12.4, 12.75 and 13.5 still follow the general trend and therefore do not
significantly impact the reliability of the data. The simplicity of the model
are evident in such trends as it shows the relationship between water
Conclusion and vapor and the greenhouse effect is not entirely causative. Nevertheless,
evaluation [5–6]
this supports the claim the blackbody radiation can model climate
extrapolation of changes, as a small increase in humidity in the atmosphere causes the
credible findings of greenhouse effect to intensity by 2°C due to more radiation being
the research to the
claim reflected and absorbed in the atmosphere.

The response identifies Source 3

believable outcomes of
the research and then
applies them to the G. Stephens et. al (1993) utilised data from numerous observations from
claim. varying climates around the world to understand the water vapor feedback
system and its relationship to the greenhouse effect. The data was then
processed using multiple formulae to create the figures seen below.
Communication [2]

acknowledgement of
sources of information
through appropriate
use of referencing
conventions

The use of in-text

referencing fits the
purpose of a scientific
report.

Figure 6: Relationship between surface temperature and water vapor after a 10%
increase in CO2.

Physics 2019 v1.3 Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

IA3 high-level annotated sample response February 2023
Page 10 of 14
 Figure 7: Theorised water vapour model process.

Figure 6 displays these results after processing data. It was found that
the amount of precipitable water dramatically increased following a
doubling of CO2 which heated the environment (expressed as a surface
temperature on x-axis). Specifically, as the CO2 created more heat due to
Analysis and
interpretation [5–6] the greenhouse effect, the amount of precipitable water increased
substantially. Plotted below the precipitable water-surface temperature
thorough graph, a smaller graph features the number of observations made at each
identification of
relevant trends, temperature (in thousands). The inclusion of the graph increases the
patterns or reliability and accuracy of the results.
relationships

The identified patterns

Furthermore, the pattern existing between water vapor and CO2 is
are adequate for the displayed in Figure 7. This model shows (from top left corner) that an
purpose of responding increase in atmospheric CO2 initially creates a small increase in
to the research question
and can support a valid
temperature. This causes amplification of the greenhouse effect and an
conclusion. They have increased humidity. It is here the feedback loop can be observed as the
direct bearing upon and surface temperature increased leading to further infrared blackbody
are applicable to the radiation. Intriguingly, the change in temperature caused by direct
formation of the
scientific argument. increase of CO2 concentration equates to only 22.73% of the total
increase in temperature (2.2°C). Stephens et. al then concluded from this,
that the water vapor feedback loop actually contributed to over half of the
total increase of global warming.
Analysis and
interpretation [5–6] Unfortunately, due to the equilibrium on Earth that leads to precipitation,
thorough and the long-term extent of this feedback loop was hard to determine. This
appropriate model is also very general and different climates would experience varied
identification of impacts. Furthermore, the article was written when there was less of an
limitations of evidence
understanding of the equilibrium, meaning the results found were broad
The response identifies and may have only been accurate for a proportion of models both modern
limitations of evidence and past.
that affect how well it
can be used to develop
a response to the Interpretation
research question.
Extrapolation of the data suggests that when atmospheric CO2
concentration is increased, a process called ‘water-vapor feedback’ takes
Analysis and
interpretation [5–6] place which enhances the GHG concentration. This leads to higher
amounts of blackbody radiation being absorbed, facilitating climate
justified scientific change. Hence, the research supports the claim.
arguments

The scientific argument Evaluation

communicates sound
reasoning and draws Scheffer et. al (2006), F. Rákóczi and Z. Iványi (1999), and Stephens et.
upon valid and reliable
evidence.
al (1993) all provide evidence in their articles that is complementary. The

Physics 2019 v1.3 Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

IA3 high-level annotated sample response February 2023
Page 11 of 14
 researcher’s all predicted that this process is accountable for more than
Conclusion and
evaluation [5–6] half of the intensifying greenhouse effect that is leading to global warming,
through varying methods of data, hence, the sources are reliable.
insightful discussion
of the quality of
evidence
However, all sources are largely impacted by validity. Scheffer et. al and
Stephens et. al both made direct reference to the inaccuracies associated
The discussion with the models and data. Specifically, the variation in tropical and arid
communicates climates created large uncertainty in the data and make it less
understanding of the
features of the evidence representative of the global climate. Furthermore, due to the number of
that affect how well it different feedback systems happening globally such as photosynthesis,
can be used to respond finding the effect that this feedback has (by isolating it form the rest) is
to the research
question. difficult and inaccurate. Scheffer et. al predicted the impact of the water
vapor effect to equate for 15-78% of the total global warming. Similarly,
Stephens et. al concluded that water vapor accounted for ‘more than half’
of the total greenhouse effect but failed to make an exact value due to the
acknowledged inaccuracy.

Another limitation of the research is the age of the data which impacts its
reliability. Although global warming is an increasingly researched topic,
data around water vapor feedback is less focussed on how much it
influences climate change, and more focussed on finding methods to
reduce CO2 concentrations to stop this feedback from occurring.

Conclusion
Conclusion and
evaluation [5–6] To encapsulate the evidence provided in this report the research
question, ‘is there a relationship between the concentration of water-vapor
justified conclusion/s and carbon dioxide greenhouse gases that leads to an increase in the
linked to the research
question rate of global warming?’ can be answered confidently. It was found that
the relationship linking these greenhouse gases is called the water vapor
The response uses feedback. It is facilitated by an increase in atmospheric CO2 which
sound reasoning
drawing upon valid and consequently increases the humidity, hence, magnifying the greenhouse
reliable evidence to effect. The claim, ‘climate change can be modelled using blackbody
support conclusions that radiation’ can be partially supported as all sources’ relied heavily on
directly respond to the
research question.
metaphorical situations and were largely affected by error due to the
complicated process which changes depending on the climate. In order
to increase the reliability and validity to fully support the claim the
following improvements and extensions should be considered in the
future.

Improvements and Extensions

To address the limitations of the evidence, the following improvements
and extensions should be considered in the future:
Conclusion and
evaluation [5–6]
- Improvement: finding data that is specific for different climates
suggested around the world in order to communicate accurate models that
improvements and
extensions to the
represent the globe, hence, improving validity.
investigation, which
are considered and - Improvement: Finding more recent models that includes satellite
relevant to the claim data to visualise how the presence of water vapour from the
The response uses the
feedback loop actually increases temperature. This would improve
analysis of the the reliability and validity of the findings as they would have a more
investigations limitations realistic context rather than hypothetical.
to inform suggested
improvements that are
connected to the claim.

Physics 2019 v1.3 Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

IA3 high-level annotated sample response February 2023
Page 12 of 14
 Conclusion and - Extension: research further if other common greenhouse gases
evaluation [5–6]
such as sulphur dioxide, nitrous oxide and methane have similar
suggested feedback systems present that add to the greenhouse effect.
improvements and
extensions to the - Extension: investigate the modern understanding of how humidity,
investigation, which
are considered and atmospheric pressure and carbon impact the temperature at which
relevant to the claim precipitation (equilibrium) is reached and how it is changed due to
The extensions identify
the feedback systems (mentioned in Source 1: Scheffer et. al
modifications that would (2006).
complement the findings
of the investigation and
have the potential to
provide new evidence Word count:1985
that could be used to
evaluate the claim
further. Bibliography
American Chemist Society. (unknown). What are the properties of a
greenhouse gas? Retrieved from ACS:
https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/climatescience/greenhousegases/pr
operties.html

Australian Government. (2021). Greenhouse effect. Retrieved from Autralian

Government: Department of Agriculture, water and Environment:
https://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/climate-science-
data/climate-science/greenhouse-effect

Brittannica. (2021). Greenhouse effect. Retrieved from Atmospheric science:

https://www.britannica.com/science/greenhouse-effect

BYJU’s. (unknown). Unit of Humidity. Retrieved from BYJU’s Classes:

https://byjus.com/physics/unit-of-humidity/

CSI. (unknown). The Greenhouse Effect. Retrieved from Energy: Driver of

Climate Change: http://www.ces.fau.edu/nasa/module-2/how-
greenhouse-effect-works.php

Dahlman, R. L. (March). Climate Change: Global Temperature. Retrieved

from Climate.gov: https://www.climate.gov/news-
reatures/understanding-climate-change-global-temperature

Dhaniyala, S. (2011, August)). Greenhouse Effect. Retrieved from Clarkson

University: https://www.clarkson.edu/stem/project-based-climate-
modules/greenhouse-effect

EPA. (2019). Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Retrieved from

Environmental Protection Agency:
Research and
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions
planning [5–6]
Google images. (unknown). Absorption spectra of CO2 and water vapour.
selection of sufficient
and relevant
resources Iványi, F.R. (1999, June). Water Vapor Feedback and Greenhouse Effect.
Retrieved from Geofizika: file:///C:/Users/61457/Downloads/16127-
Sources throughout the Article%20Text-56878-1-10-20210329%20(3).pdf
response are scientific
and provide enough
evidence for the Marten Scheffer, V. B. (2006, May). Positive feedback between global
development of a warming and atmospheric CO2 concentration inferred from past climate
scientific argument that change. Retrieved from AGU:
responds to the https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2005GL025044
research question.

Physics 2019 v1.3 Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

IA3 high-level annotated sample response February 2023
Page 13 of 14
 Physics Today. (2011, January). Infrared radiation and planetary
temperature. Retrieved from Physics Today: https://physicstoday-
Communication [2]
scitation-org.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/doi/full/10.1063/1.3541943
acknowledgement of
sources of information Reisinger, M. M. (2011, May). Broader perspectives for comparing different
through appropriate
use of referencing
greenhouse gases. Retrieved from The Royal Society Publisher:
conventions https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsta.2010.0349

Sources of information Soden, I. H. (2000). Water Vapor Feedback and Global Warming. Retrieved
are acknowledged using
a referencing style that
from Annual Reviews:
is suitable for the https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.energy.25.1.44
purpose of the essay. 1

Swinburne University. (unknown). Blackbody Radiation. Retrieved from

Cosmos: https://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/b/blackbody+radiation

Tjemkes, G. S. (1993). Water Vapor and Its Role in the Earth’s Greenhouse.
Retrieved from Harvard.edu: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-
bin/nph-
iarticle_query?bibcode=1993AuJPh..46..149S&db_key=AST&page_ind
=0&data_type=GIF&type+SCREEN_VIEW&classics=YES

Turrentine, A.M. (2021, April). Global Warming 101. Retrieved from Natural
Resources Defense Council, Inc.: https://www.nrdc.org/stories/global-
warming-101

Villanueva, J. (2010). Radiation from the sun. Retrieved from Universe

Today: https://www.universetoday.com/60065/radiation-from-the -sun/

© State of Queensland (QCAA) 2022

Licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 | Copyright notice: www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/copyright —
lists the full terms and conditions, which specify certain exceptions to the licence. |
Attribution (include the link): © State of Queensland (QCAA) 2022 www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/copyright.

Physics 2019 v1.3 Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority

IA3 high-level annotated sample response February 2023
Page 14 of 14