How to Write a Band 6 HSC Physics Depth Study Report (With Examples & Pro Tips)

Let’s launch into the physics of depth study writing (and maybe a Newton pun or two 🚀).

If you’ve ever been curious about how physics connects to real-world phenomena, the depth study is your chance to explore it in depth. This task lets you go beyond classroom theory and investigate a topic that genuinely interests you.

In this guide, we’ll cover:

• What a depth study is
• How to choose an experiment
• The structure of a Band 6 report
• How to write each section with clarity
• Tips to improve reliability, validity, and accuracy

What is a Depth Study?

A depth study is a student-led investigation aligned with the HSC Physics syllabus. According to NESA:

"A depth study is any type of investigation or activity that a student completes individually or collaboratively that allows the further development of one or more concepts found within or inspired by the syllabus."

In simpler terms: Choose a Physics concept → ask a compelling question → explore it through investigation → analyse and report your findings.

Step 1: Choosing the Right Experiment

Pick a topic you’re genuinely curious about. This will keep you motivated throughout the research and writing process.

Make sure your experiment:

• Relates to at least one Physics syllabus dot point
• Provides quantitative data for analysis
• Can be completed using available equipment and time

Pro Tips:

• Repeat the experiment at least three times for better reliability
• Frame a deep, meaningful inquiry question
• Link the topic to real-world applications

🔥 Hot Tip: Check out KIS Academics’ guide on HSC Physics modules and assessments or HSC Physics: Electromagnetism Practice Questions, which touch upon topics and practical experiments that you can use to get inspired.

Step 2: Designing and Conducting Your Experiment

Your experiment should be:

• Reliable: Repeatable with consistent results
• Valid: Tests what it's meant to test, with well-controlled variables
• Accurate: Produces measurements close to the true value

How to Improve Each:

• Reliability: Use consistent methods and run multiple trials
• Validity: Control variables, directly address the aim
• Accuracy: Use calibrated, precise equipment and proper technique

Book a free consultation with a KIS Academics tutor today!

Step 3: Writing the Report (Section-by-Section)

Title

Be specific. E.g. "The Effect of Light Frequency on the Kinetic Energy of Photoelectrons"

Abstract (100–200 words)

Summarise:

• Aim
• Method
• Key results
• Conclusion

Introduction

3–5 paragraphs covering:

• Background theory and equations
• Real-world relevance
• Equipment and scientific principles
• Inquiry question

Hypothesis

Your prediction, written in the present tense. E.g.: "Increasing the launch angle of a projectile from 0° to 45° will increase its range, while increasing it further will decrease it."

Aim

A 1-sentence purpose. E.g.: "To investigate how launch angle affects the range of a projectile launched with a constant initial velocity."

Materials & Equipment

A bullet-point list with specific quantities and instruments. Include uncertainties where relevant.

Methodology

• Numbered steps
• Past or imperative voice
• Trials clearly stated
• Variables and control group defined
• Optional: photos or diagrams

Risk Assessment

Table format:

• Hazard
• Risk
• Control measure

Results

• Tables and graphs with proper labels and units
• Averages, standard deviations, and error bars
• Trends and patterns (but no interpretation)

🔥 Hot Tip: It can be easy to visualise outliers from a graph, but you can also numerically determine your outliers using a handy equation which also happens to be in the HSC Mathematics syllabus:

• Low outliers: Q1 - 1.5 × IQR
• High outliers: Q3 - 1.5 × IQR
• Include averages, standard deviations, and relevant calculations e.g. average velocities, accelerations, forces, uncertainties.
• Add any qualitative observations that might be relevant to your physics investigation e.g. visual trajectory of a projectile, changes in brightness of a light bulb.

Discussion

This is your section for qualitative analysis i.e. where you demonstrate your understanding of your results and the concepts behind your experiment. This involves interpreting and analysing your findings, linking them back to what you’ve learned in class.

You must include a thorough error analysis and insightful suggestions for improvement.

• Answer your hypothesis. State whether it was supported or not.
• Explain trends using physics principles.
• Provide error analysis.
  • Identify sources of error
  • Explain impact on results
  • Propose fixes to minimise error in future investigations
• Evaluate your procedure. Critically assess your method in terms of validity, accuracy, and reliability.
• Future studies. Propose further questions arising from your findings and potential future investigations. This could be modifying the independent variable, or changing the equipment you used.

Conclusion

Summarise your main findings in 2-3 sentences.

• State whether your aim was achieved or your hypothesis was supported.
• Refer briefly to your key results.

References

Use Harvard or APA referencing. Include a mix of textbooks, websites, videos, and academic journals. Always double-check citations for accuracy.

• Use a consistent referencing style throughout, such as:
  • Harvard
    • In-text example: “... limited data is available surrounding the equilibrium constant for this system (Kolling 1970, p. 453) …”
    • References example: Kolling, O. W. 1970, “The Bromine-Tribromide Ion Equilibrium in Anhydrous Acetic Acid”, Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science, vol. 73, no. 4, pp. 452-463, https://doi.org/10.2307/3627074.
  • APA
    • In-text example: “... these results are consistent with previous studies (Bürgmayr et al., 2022, p. 186) …”
    • References example: Bürgmayr, S., Tanner, J., Batchelor, W. & Hoadley, A. (2022). CaCO3 solubility in the process water of recycled containerboard mills. Nordic Pulp & Paper Research Journal. 38(1), 181-195. 10.1515/npprj-2022-0042.

🔥 Hot Tip: In a pinch, you can try using free citation generators. But always double-check their outputs, as they’re not always perfect.

• Aim for a variety of source types, such as:
  • Textbooks
  • Websites
  • Articles
  • Lab handouts
  • Videos
• Try to stick to reliable sources like ‘.edu’, ‘.gov’ or ‘.org’ websites, books from your school or local library, or even your school textbook. Great databases and search engines to look for high-quality articles include:
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar
  • JSTOR
  • Scopus
  • IEEE Xplore
  • ScienceDirect

Many of these sites have a handy ‘cite’ button that generates the reference for you! Simply copy and paste it into your bibliography.

🔥 Hot Tip: Sometimes you’ll track down the perfect paper, only to find that it’s locked behind a paywall. 😒 Before giving up completely, do some sleuthing - a free version might be available elsewhere online. Otherwise, ask your school librarian or science teacher - your school may already have a subscription that gives you full access.

More Tips and Tricks

• Maintain formal scientific language. Avoid using first-person pronouns (e.g. “I”, “we”), and steer clear of colloquialisms.
• When introducing an acronym, define it at its first mention. Example: “electromotive force (EMF)”.
• Start early and manage your time. Do not leave writing until the last minute. Having a draft report ready before conducting your experiment can be very helpful - annotate and refine it as you progress through your practical work.
• Label your tables and figures clearly and consistently.Table labels typically appear above the table; and figure labels are usually positioned below the figure.
• Optional elements to consider adding:
  • A table of contents and page numbers to help with navigation, especially for longer reports. 
  • An appendix for additional data that doesn’t fit neatly into the main body of the report. This could be: large raw data tables, images, material data sheets, or calculations.
  • A diagram of your experimental setup - clear and well-labelled, to help readers quickly understand your method.

What should I do if my experiment gives weird results?

Option 1: Analyse and Explain Your Unexpected Results

Step 1 - Don’t panic. The amazing thing about science is this: an experiment that doesn’t go as planned can be just as valuable as one that does! It gives you a chance to undertake some juicy scientific error analysis, personal reflection and experimental critique.

In the case where you get funky results, include the following in your Discussion:

• Discuss potential reasons for anomalies.
• Suggest improvements to the experimental method.
• Recommendations for future investigations.

If your results significantly contradict established scientific principles, reference (and appropriately cite) reliable secondary data, such as published research papers, that demonstrate the expected trends.

What not to do: Fake your results. I know, it can be tempting to “tidy up” your data if it looks messy or unexpected. However, remember that you’re not being marked on how “perfect” your data is; you’re assessed how well you interpret, analyse, and reflect on your findings.

In fact, a thoughtful discussion of errors or anomalies often earns more marks than presenting fabricated, “flawless” data because it shows you understand the scientific process, are capable of critiquing your method, and appreciate the limitations of real-world experiments. Most importantly, maintaining academic integrity is a crucial part of being a good scientist. Own your results - warts and all - because that’s where the real learning happens. 💕

Option 2: Revise your Procedure

If you have time, critically review your procedure. Where might things have gone wrong? Did you use faulty or inconsistent equipment? Were there uncontrolled variables? Did you follow each step precisely?

If you identify a clear issue, consider re-doing the experiment with the fixes in place - or, if you realise that your original design wasn’t feasible, design a backup experiment that uses similar materials but explores a slightly different aspect of your chosen scientific concept. You can briefly mention how (and why) you revised your experiment under the Discussion section.

Option 3: Complete a Secondary Data depth report

If your assignment does not require you to conduct your own experiment, you could base your depth study on secondary data. Use reliable sources such as peer-reviewed scientific journals or reputable educational materials. Ensure you cite all sources properly and critically evaluate their reliability.

FAQs

Want personalised study guidance to help drastically improve your marks? A private tutor can make the biggest difference!

Written by KIS Academics Tutor, Celeste Thomson. Celeste is currently working as a Chemical Risk Engineer with a Bachelor of Chemical Engineering (Honours) / Master of Biomedical Engineering. She has been tutoring (and loving it!) since 2017, with a particular focus on English, Mathematics, and Science. You can view Celeste’s profile here and request her as a tutor.