Start by planning around the research question: How does daily use of Instagram affect face-to-face friendships among teenagers in my city? Decide what you want to measure (for example, time spent in person with friends, perceived closeness, conflict, or social skills) and which teenage age range and locations in your city you will include. Create a simple timeline and a realistic sample size — aim for 20–40 respondents if you plan surveys, or 8–12 for in-depth interviews — and get any permissions you need from schools, parents, or guardians. Prepare clear ethical safeguards: explain consent, anonymity, voluntary participation, and how you will store data. Keep a research log where you note dates, contacts, and reflections so you can show the teacher your process and decision-making during internal assessment moderation if asked. Do not change the research question; work with it as given and let it guide all methodological choices so your study remains focused and defensible to the examiner.

Collect mixed evidence that helps you answer the research question directly. Use a short questionnaire with closed items (e.g., frequency of Instagram use, types of activities on the app) and a few Likert-scale statements about face-to-face friendship quality to quantify patterns, then follow up with semi-structured interviews or focus groups to capture deeper reasons and examples. When sampling, try to include teenagers from different parts of your city or different school types to avoid bias. Use simple descriptive statistics (counts, averages, basic charts) to summarize patterns from the survey, and code interview transcripts thematically to find recurring ideas (e.g., time displacement, enhanced coordination, jealousy). Keep all instruments (questionnaire, interview protocol) attached in the appendix of your final submission so the assessor can see how you gathered data.

Structure your essay clearly: open with the research question and a short rationale linking Instagram use to friendship concerns in your city, then describe methods and ethical steps concisely. Present your findings next, combining numbers and short illustrative quotes: report the most important statistics first, then show qualitative themes that explain why those patterns occur. In the analysis section, directly relate each finding back to the research question, discussing possible causes, limitations of your sample and methods, and whether the evidence supports a clear conclusion. Finish with a brief conclusion that answers the research question based on your data and suggest one or two realistic ideas for further study. Keep language simple, avoid unsupported generalizations, and cite any academic or credible sources you use for background context.

Begin by clarifying the research question exactly as given: How do the greeting expressions used by waitstaff in central Barcelona restaurants affect tourists' perceptions of friendliness? Treat this question as fixed and build your focus around it. Start your essay with a concise introduction that explains why this question matters (e.g., tourism, cross-cultural communication, service encounters) and states your approach: you will observe real interactions, collect short interviews or quick surveys from tourists, and record examples of greetings used by waitstaff. Outline the context (central Barcelona, types of restaurants, tourist demographics) so the reader understands the setting and limits of your study. Keep the introduction short but precise, and include a clear thesis sentence that indicates whether and how you expect greeting expressions to influence perceived friendliness based on preliminary background reading on sociolinguistic cues and politeness strategies. Plan your data collection and research carefully and ethically. Use naturalistic observation in several restaurants at different times to capture variety, and, where possible, ask tourists for verbal consent to a brief anonymous survey about how friendly they perceived the staff after the interaction. Record exact greeting phrases (in the original language) and note paralinguistic features such as tone, volume, eye contact, and physical gestures. Keep samples manageable — for example, 20–30 tourist responses and 30–50 greeting instances — and explain your sampling choices. Reflect on ethical issues: obtain consent when recording or quoting tourists or staff, anonymize participants, and avoid disrupting service. Complement primary data with at least three relevant secondary sources on greetings, hospitality language, and cross-cultural perception and cite them correctly. When analysing and writing, organise your essay clearly: short methods section, descriptive results with representative examples of greeting expressions, analysis linking linguistic features to tourist perceptions, and a concise conclusion that answers the research question. Use qualitative coding (friendly, neutral, cold) or simple quantitative summaries (percentages of tourists reporting friendliness) to support claims, and always illustrate points with actual quotes or detailed descriptions from your data. Discuss limitations of your study and suggest implications for restaurants and further research. Maintain clear, simple English suitable for ab initio level, check word count and IB criteria, and ensure in-text citations and a reference list follow the required format.

Begin by clarifying the scope of your research question: "Why do university students in Ankara choose whether to recycle plastic bottles on campus?" Decide on a clear definition of key terms you will use in your essay (for example, what counts as "recycling," which campuses or faculties you mean, and whether "choose" includes both active recycling and passive non-recycling). Plan a realistic timeline and small, manageable sample so you can collect primary data during the IA period—aim for a mix of interviews, short surveys and observation. Prepare consent forms and simple ethical notes in Turkish and English if you will be interacting with students; explain that participation is voluntary and anonymous. Think early about language: since this is English ab initio, collect some responses in Turkish if needed but record translations and original phrases so you can discuss language effects on answers in your analysis. Keep data collection instruments short (5–10 minutes) and test them on a few peers first to refine question clarity and translation accuracy. When researching background information, use a mix of local and general sources: Turkish university waste policies, municipal recycling initiatives in Ankara, brief academic articles on recycling behaviour, and reputable news or NGO reports. Use these sources to create a simple conceptual frame—examples include convenience (location of bins), awareness (knowledge of benefits), social norms (peer influence), and incentives or barriers (time, cleanliness). Link each interview or survey question to one of these categories so you can group responses later. While collecting primary data, take noted examples of student language, attitudes, and concrete campus features (bin placement, signage, availability of recycling services) and photograph public spaces if allowed. Keep quotes short and accurate; write a brief reflection after each interview to capture tone and context while it’s fresh. Analyse by coding your data against the categories you created, looking for patterns and counterexamples. Quantify simple survey results (percentages choosing to recycle, top stated reasons) and pair these with qualitative quotes that illustrate motivations and obstacles. In the essay, present findings clearly: a short methods paragraph, concise results with one or two tables or figures if allowed, then an analysis that links evidence to the broader literature and to the specific Ankara context. Discuss limitations (sample size, language issues, campus differences) and suggest realistic implications or minor recommendations for campus recycling communication. Keep language simple, use short paragraphs, and proofread for clarity and correct English befitting English ab initio criteria.

Begin by planning around your research question: To what extent does the annual harvest festival maintain community identity among elders in my village? Decide what you need to know to answer “to what extent” — whether the festival strengthens belonging, transmits traditions, or merely preserves rituals. Identify key concepts you will use (community identity, elders, maintenance) and choose a clear scope: which elders, what time frame, and which aspects of the festival (rituals, stories, roles). Prepare a simple, realistic timetable for fieldwork, interviews, observations, and secondary reading. Make a short ethics plan: obtain informed consent, explain the purpose in plain language, ask permission before recording, and be sensitive to power dynamics and privacy when dealing with older participants. Keep an interview guide with open questions that invite concrete examples and memories rather than leading prompts, and pilot it with one person to check clarity and tone. Collect evidence from multiple sources so you can triangulate your findings. Use short participant observation notes during the festival: record who participates, what is said, symbols used, and any generational differences you notice. Conduct semi-structured interviews with a purposeful sample of elders (age range, gender, different roles) and, where possible, complementary interviews with younger community members for contrast. Supplement fieldwork with secondary sources: local histories, community records, newspaper reports, and academic work on ritual and identity. Translate and transcribe interviews carefully; note when meanings are lost or altered in translation. Keep careful bibliographic and methodological notes as you go so you can explain how you gathered and evaluated your data in the essay. When writing, structure the essay so it answers the research question directly. Start with a short introduction that situates the festival and states the research question, then describe your methodology briefly so readers understand your evidence base. In analysis sections, present findings thematically (for example: transmission of knowledge, social roles, emotional attachment), supporting each claim with specific evidence — direct quotes, descriptive field notes, and references to documents — and analyse what each piece of evidence shows about “to what extent.” Compare conflicting accounts and discuss limitations of your sample or methods. Conclude by synthesising the evidence to give a balanced answer to the research question, reflecting on implications for the community and suggesting realistic directions for further inquiry. Keep language clear, avoid vague generalisations, and connect claims back to your evidence throughout.

Start by clarifying exactly what your research question asks: you are investigating how English loanwords influence youth slang among secondary students in Tokyo. Decide the scope (age range, schools or districts, number of participants) but do not change the question itself. Prepare a short literature review on loanwords, code-switching, katakana transcription, and youth language to frame your work; use simple IB-friendly sources like journal articles, book chapters, and reputable online studies. Plan a mixed-methods approach: collect natural speech samples (with permission), short interviews or focus groups, and a brief anonymous questionnaire about frequency and attitudes. Pay strict attention to ethics: obtain written parental consent for minors, anonymize participants, and explain how you will store recordings and transcripts. Keep a research log so you can describe your methods clearly in the essay and justify choices such as sample size and settings (school corridors, social media, clubs) where slang naturally occurs. When gathering data, aim to capture both tokens (specific English-origin words) and how they are used—pronunciation, katakana form, morphological changes, and pragmatic meaning. Note contexts: are words used jokingly, for identity marking, or to signal trendiness? Record metalinguistic comments from participants about why they use certain loanwords and whether they think the words are “English” or naturalized Japanese. For analysis, quantify occurrences to show patterns (e.g., which loanwords are most frequent, in what contexts, and among which students) and pair this with qualitative analysis that explains meaning and function. Look for semantic shifts (new meanings), morphological integration (Japanese verb/adjective forms), and phonological adaptation. Relate your findings back to the literature: do your data support existing theories about language contact, globalization, and peer-group identity, or do they show local variation specific to Tokyo secondary students? When writing, follow IB criteria: introduce the research question and relevance, describe methods and ethical procedures, present data clearly with short quoted examples and simple tables or charts in an appendix if allowed, and provide analysis that links evidence to claims. Discuss limitations (sample size, school access, observer influence) and suggest realistic implications or further research. Keep language clear and concise, translate or gloss any Japanese slang for examiners who may not understand, and reflect briefly on what your findings reveal about language change and youth identity. Finish with a focused conclusion that answers the research question using your collected evidence.