IA Criteria

The new assessment model contains five criteria:

Personal Engagement (PE), Exploration (EX), Analysis
(AN), Evaluation (EV), and Communication (CM).

Maximum
Marks

Percenta
ge

PE

EX

AN

EV

8%

CM Total
4

24

25% 25% 25% 17%

CM
17%

100
%
PE
8%

EX
25%

EV
25%

AN
25%

Differences between EE and

IA
There is some overlap but generally the IA:

1. Is shorter- about 2000 words.

2. Requires less extensive supporting literature. Just
enough relevant background context to evidence
understanding even from and IB text book.
3. Can be on a solidly syllabus relevant topic.
4. Is less prescriptive in its formal requirements.
5. Can rationalize sole use of secondary data only
explorations for the PE.

What Can I Do?

The method could involve any of the following:

practical lab experiment

modelling activity using a spreadsheet
analysis of data taken from a database
a hybrid practical lab with analysis of secondary data
an investigation using an open-ended simulation

Personal Engagement
Has the personal experience helped design the
investigation?
It doesn't need to be brand new research
Must demonstrate independent thought in:
choice of topic, method of the experiment or
presentation of results
If the experiment is too simple, it will be hard to
achieve high marks in the EX and AN sections

Personal Engagement
Marks

Evidence of
personal
engagement
with
exploration.

The justification
given for choosing
the research
question and/or the
topic under
investigation.

Evidence of
personal input and
initiative in the
designing,
implementation or
presentation.

Clear with
significant
independent
thinking,
initiative or
creativity.

Demonstrates
personal significance,
interest or curiosity.

A lot

Limited with
little
independent
thinking,
initiative or
insight.

Does not demonstrate

personal significance,
interest or curiosity.

Little

Standard not
reached.

Standard not reached.

Standard not reached.

Exploration
Develop your initial ideas into a workable method
for an experiment.
Needs to be planned with reference to your
scientific knowledge.
A general discussion of the biological topic is not
enough, information needs to be clearly focused on
the research question being tested.

What is expected
a precise investigation research question and associated
biology theory.
a clear method including variables, controls and a
description of the data to be collected
enough data for analysis - leading to a conclusion.
safety considerations - risk assessment - and disposal of
any chemicals
Reference to the IB guidelines for use of animals
(including humans) not needed for virtual labs etc.

Exploration
Marks

The topic
of the
investigat
ion is
identified
and
research
question.

Background
information
provided for
the
investigation
is.

Relevant
and fully
focused.

Entirely
appropriate and
relevant and
enhances the
understanding of
the context of
the investigation.

Relevant
but not
fully
focused.

Mainly
appropriate and
relevant and aids
the
understanding of
the context of
the investigation.

Some
relevance
but not
focused.

Superficial or of
limited relevance
and does not aid
the
understanding of

Consideration
of factors that
may influence
the relevance
reliability and
sufficiency of
collected data.

Evidence of
awareness of
the significant
safety, ethical
or
environmental
issues

Highly

Nearly all factors

considered.

Full - all potential

hazards
identified and
dealt with
appropriately

Mainly

Some factors
considered.

Limited

Limited

Few factors
considered.

Some

Appropriate
ness of the
methodolog
y of the
investigatio
n.

Analysis
Data collection and processing.
Must collect sufficient data, even if you have to repeat
some of the data collection or find data from a
simulation or database to reinforce the data collected.
All analysis and data processing should be done with
the aim of answering the research question.

Analysis
If variability in the data makes it difficult to identify a
clear conclusion you should demonstrate this variability
and write about it in the analysis.
The word conclusion in the analysis refers to what the
graph shows or how a statistical test supports the
conclusion.
Conclusions should be based on data collected not on
theory or expectations.
The comparison of the conclusion to the research
question comes in the Evaluation section.

Analysis
Interpretation
of processed
data

Raw data is

Data processing

Impact of
uncertainties

Sufficient. Could
support a detailed and
valid conclusion.

Appropriate and
sufficient accuracy
enables a
conclusion to the
RQ to be drawn
that is fully
consistent with
data.

Full and
appropriate
consideration.

Correct valid and

detailed
conclusion.

Relevant but
incomplete. Could
support a simple or
partially valid
conclusion.

Appropriate and
sufficient. Could
lead to a broadly
valid conclusion
but significant
inaccuracies and
inconsistencies in
the processing.

Some
consideration.

Broadly valid
limited
conclusion.

Insufficient to support a
valid conclusion.

Basic, inaccurate
or too insufficient
to lead to a valid
conclusion

Little
consideration.

Incorrect or
insufficient invalid
or very
incomplete

Standard not reached.

Standard not
reached.

Standard not
reached.

Marks

Evaluation
Does the conclusion support your original thinking
which (explained in the Exploration section)
If not, discuss the limitations of the method and
suggest how it could be changed to enable collection
of data that could lead to a stronger conclusion.
If it does support the original thinking then the
variability of the data can be mentioned to support a
statement about the reliability of the conclusion.
In the evaluation the focus is on the limitations of the
method and how to improve the investigation

Evaluation
Mark
s

Conclusion
data

Described in
detail and
justified,
entirely relevant
to the RQ fully
supported by
the data.

Described,
relevant to the
research
question and
supported by
the data.

Outlined but
may not be
relevant to the
research
question or may
not be
supported by

Conclusion
theory

Strengths and
weaknesses of the
investigation, such
as limitations of the
data and sources of
error, are

Justified through
relevant
comparison to the
accepted
scientific context.

Discussed and provide

evidence of a clear
understanding of the
methodological issues
involved in
establishing the
conclusion.

Are discussed.

Some relevant
comparison to
accepted
scientific context.

Described and provide

evidence of some
awareness of the
methodological issues
involved in
establishing the
conclusion.

Some described.

Erroneous or
superficially
compared to the
accepted
scientific context.

Outlined but are

restricted to an
account of the
practical or procedural
issues faced.

Very few outlined.

Realistic and relevant

suggestions for the
improvement and
extension of the
investigation.

Communication
Covers the whole investigation.
A good report can be read easily without re-reading
sections.
All the information should be focused on the research
question.
The vocabulary should be subject-specific and of a
quality appropriate to diploma level

Communication
The correct IB Diploma formats for graphs and
tables including use of SI units with uncertainties is
expected.
The presentation need not be faultless to gain full
marks. Minor errors are acceptable but they must
not cloud understanding or the interpretation of the
results.

Communication
Presentation
of the
investigation

Structure

Relevance

Terminology

Clear. Any
errors do not
hamper
understanding
of the focus,
process and
outcomes.

Well-structured and
clear: the
necessary
information on
focus, process and
outcomes is
present and
presented in a
coherent way.

Relevant and concise

thereby facilitating a
ready understanding
of the focus, process
and outcomes of the
investigation.

The use of subject

specific terminology
and conventions is
appropriate and
correct. Any errors do
not hamper
understanding.

Unclear,
making it
difficult to
understand
the focus,
process and
outcomes

Not well structured

and is unclear: the
necessary
information on
focus, process and
outcomes is
missing or is
presented in an
incoherent or
disorganized way.

The understanding of
the focus, process and
outcomes of the
investigation is
obscured by the
presence of
inappropriate or
irrelevant information.

There are many errors

in the use of subject
specific terminology
and conventions*.

Standard not
reached.

Standard not
reached.

Standard not reached.

Standard not reached.

Marks

IB Investigation Structure
Introduction

Background information
Research question
Scientific rationale
Experimental / data collection method

Analysis
Data in tables - including consideration of uncertainties
Graphs
Statistical analysis

Evaluation
Conclusion - justified by data, and reference to scientific
context
Discussion of relevant limitations
Suggestion of realistic improvements

Exploration Timeline
Time
1

2-3

4-8
9-10

Planned activities
Introduction to the task & student choice of topic / research
question.
Homework: Preliminary research for scientific context.
Investigation proposal form
Teacher consultation time with each student (10 minutes per
student - in class)
Students continue to write Introduction, establish research
question, scientific context & methods.
Methods collected for checking of safety
Lab experiment time / data collection
Analysis of data & conclusion writing
Homework: Opportunity to complete analysis, overcome
obstacles, meet teacher for guidance etc.
Students finalise conclusion / evaluation.
Written feedback on first draft.
Final revision and redrafting

Burning Questions?