Year 11 – Health and Movement Science

Phase 5: Presentation and Reflection

The purpose of Phase 5

Phase 5 is the final stage of the Collaborative Investigation. This is where your group brings everything together.

In the official NESA process, Phase 5 includes:

  • Conclusion
  • Evaluation of investigation
  • Checkpoint
  • Presentation of investigation

NESA states that the conclusion should:

  • restate the purpose of the investigation
  • identify the main findings
  • identify any key limitations relevant to interpreting the results.

NESA states that the evaluation should include:

  • strengths
  • limitations
  • improvements.

The final presentation should appropriately present:

  • the research question
  • background research
  • methodology
  • data
  • data analysis
  • conclusion
  • evaluation.

Step 1: Write the conclusion

Your conclusion is where you answer the research question using your findings.

What to do

  • restate the purpose of the investigation
  • return directly to the research question
  • identify the main findings
  • state what the findings show overall
  • mention any key limitations that affect how the results should be understood.

What a strong conclusion does

A strong conclusion:

  • answers the question clearly
  • stays focused on the most important findings
  • explains what those findings mean
  • does not introduce brand new data or ideas
  • keeps the wording linked to the investigation itself.

Example: If your question was about whether regular physical activity is linked to concentration, your conclusion should clearly state what your data suggests about that relationship, not just repeat every graph or statistic.

If you used a hypothesis

If your group used a hypothesis, the conclusion should make clear whether the findings:

  • supported it
  • partly supported it
  • did not support it.

Step 2: Explain why the findings matter

Once you have stated the conclusion, explain the importance of the findings.

What to do

  • link the findings back to the background research
  • link them to relevant health and movement science concepts
  • explain what the results suggest in a broader sense
  • keep this brief and focused.

What this might include

  • whether your findings are similar to earlier research
  • whether they suggest a possible pattern or issue
  • whether they suggest something could be explored further.

Example: If your results were similar to earlier studies on sleep and concentration, you could briefly state that your findings support the idea that sleep is linked to better focus in school settings.

Step 3: Write the evaluation of the investigation

The evaluation is where your group judges how well the investigation worked. NESA makes it clear that this section should include strengths, limitations, and improvements.

Start with strengths

Identify what worked well in the investigation.

Possible strengths might include:

  • a clear research question
  • a method that matched the question well
  • useful data collection tools
  • strong organisation
  • clear analysis
  • good use of evidence.

Then identify limitations

Be honest about what may have affected the investigation.

Possible limitations might include:

  • a small or narrow sample
  • limited time
  • unclear survey questions
  • self-reported data
  • inconsistent conditions
  • difficulty controlling variables
  • missing or unusable data.

Then suggest improvements

Each improvement should connect directly to a limitation already identified.

Example:
If the limitation was a small sample, the improvement could be to collect responses from more students or more than one year group.

Example:
If the limitation was unclear survey questions, the improvement could be to test the survey first and rewrite confusing questions.

What to avoid

  • vague comments such as “it went well”
  • listing limitations without explaining their effect
  • suggesting improvements that do not match the actual problem

Step 4: Reflect on collaboration

Because this is a Collaborative Investigation, your group should also reflect on how you worked together. This links to HM-11-05, so it should not be ignored.

What to do

Think about:

  • how your group shared tasks and decisions
  • what collaboration strategies worked well
  • any challenges the group faced
  • how those challenges were handled
  • what you learnt about working with others.

Useful things to mention

  • regular meetings
  • shared documents
  • group chats
  • feedback between members
  • role allocation
  • changes your group made when something was not working.

Example: Your group may have realised early on that tasks were unclear, then improved by using weekly check-ins and clearer role allocation.

Step 5: Complete the Phase 5 checkpoint

NESA includes a checkpoint in Phase 5 for:

  • feedback on collaborative practice
  • review of findings.

What to bring to the checkpoint

  • your draft conclusion
  • your draft evaluation
  • your main findings
  • your reflection on collaboration
  • any questions your group still has about the final presentation.

Why this matters

This checkpoint gives your teacher the chance to:

  • review whether your findings are being interpreted properly
  • check whether your conclusion actually answers the question
  • check whether your evaluation is specific enough
  • give feedback on how your group is working together.

Step 6: Prepare the presentation of the investigation

NESA states that the final presentation should appropriately present:

  • research question: State the exact question your investigation set out to answer. Keep the wording consistent with earlier phases and make it clear what variables or factors you were investigating.
  • background research: Summarise the key ideas and evidence from credible sources that informed your investigation. Explain how this research shaped what you expected to find and how you designed your method.
  • methodology: Explain, step by step, how you conducted the investigation so another group could understand or repeat it. Include participants or sample, tools used, how data was collected, and how you tried to keep the process fair and consistent.
  • data: Present the results you collected in an organised way, such as tables, graphs, or summary results. Make sure the data is labelled clearly and includes units, categories, or scales where needed.
  • data analysis: Show what you did with the data to identify patterns or meaning. This might include calculations, comparisons, trends, and what the results suggest, while linking back to the research question.
  • conclusion: Clearly answer the research question using the main findings. Briefly explain what the findings show overall and note any key limitations that affect how the conclusion should be interpreted.
  • evaluation: Judge how well the investigation worked by describing strengths, limitations, and specific improvements. Explain how each limitation may have affected the results and how your suggested improvement would make the investigation stronger next time.

What to do

  • choose the presentation format required by your school
  • organise the content in a clear order
  • make sure each part of the investigation is covered
  • keep the presentation clear and easy to follow.

Possible presentation modes

  • oral
  • written
  • multimodal.

What to include

Your presentation should clearly show:

  • what you investigated
  • why you investigated it
  • how you did it
  • what you found
  • what the findings mean
  • how well the investigation worked.

Tips for a stronger presentation

  • keep slides, posters or visuals uncluttered
  • use graphs and tables only when they help explain the findings
  • make sure all group members understand the full investigation
  • rehearse if the presentation is oral or multimodal.

Step 7: Finalise the portfolio and reference list

The Collaborative Investigation includes Documentation: portfolio and a Reference list, so these need to be finalised before submission.

What to include in the portfolio

Depending on your school’s requirements, the portfolio may include:

  • proposal
  • background research
  • method
  • tools used for data collection
  • raw data
  • analysis work
  • conclusion
  • evaluation
  • collaboration reflection
  • presentation materials.

What to do with the reference list

  • include all sources used
  • format them consistently
  • make sure any in-text citations match the reference list
  • put the reference list in the required place.

Step 8: Do a final review before submission

Before submitting, check everything carefully.

Final review checklist

  • Does the conclusion clearly answer the research question?
  • Does the evaluation include strengths, limitations, and improvements?
  • Does the presentation include all required parts?
  • Is the portfolio complete and organised?
  • Is the reference list accurate and consistent?
  • Is all work in your group’s own words, unless properly referenced?
  • Has participant privacy been protected where needed?

Academic integrity

The final product should be your group’s own work. Sources should be acknowledged properly, and data should be presented honestly.

What you should have by the end of Phase 5

By the end of Phase 5, your group should have:

  • a clear conclusion
  • an evaluation with strengths, limitations, and improvements
  • a reflection on collaboration
  • teacher feedback from the checkpoint
  • a completed presentation
  • a finished portfolio
  • a complete reference list
  • work that is ready for submission.
← Phase 4