General information

The method of assessment used for internal assessment is criterion-related. That is to say, the method of assessment judges each student in relation to identified assessment criteria and not in relation to the work of other students.

The internal assessment component in all group 4 courses is assessed according to sets of assessment criteria and achievement level descriptors. The internal assessment criteria are for the use of teachers.

• For each assessment criterion, there are a number of descriptors that each describes a specific level of achievement.

• The descriptors concentrate on positive achievement, although for the lower levels failure to achieve may be included in the description.

Using the internal assessment criteria

Teachers should judge the internal assessment exercise against the descriptors for each criterion. The same internal assessment criteria are used for both SL and HL.

• The aim is to find, for each criterion, the descriptor that conveys most adequately the achievement level attained by the student. The process, therefore, is one of approximation. In the light of any one criterion, a student’s work may contain features denoted by a high achievement level descriptor combined with features appropriate to a lower one. A professional judgment should be made in identifying the descriptor that approximates most closely to the work.

• Having scrutinized the work to be assessed, the descriptors for each criterion should be read, starting with level 0, until one is reached that describes an achievement level that the work being assessed does not match as well as the previous level. The work is, therefore, best described by the preceding achievement level descriptor and this level should be recorded. Only whole numbers should be used, not partial points such as fractions or decimals.

• The highest descriptors do not imply faultless performance and moderators and teachers should not hesitate to use the extremes, including zero, if they are appropriate descriptions of the work being assessed.

• Descriptors should not be considered as marks or percentages, although the descriptor levels are ultimately added together to obtain a total. It should not be assumed that there are other arithmetical relationships; for example, a level 2 performance is not necessarily twice as good as a level 1 performance.

• A student who attains a particular achievement level in relation to one criterion will not necessarily attain similar achievement levels in relation to the others. It should not be assumed that the overall assessment of the students will produce any particular distribution of scores.

• The assessment criteria should be available to students at all times.

Criteria and aspects

There are five assessment criteria that are used to assess the work of both SL and HL students.

• Design—D

• Data collection and processing—DCP

• Conclusion and evaluation—CE

• Manipulative skills—MS

• Personal skills—PS

The first three criteria—design (D), data collection and processing (DCP) and conclusion and evaluation (CE)—are each assessed twice.

Manipulative skills (MS) is assessed summatively over the whole course and the assessment should be based on a wide range of manipulative skills.

Personal skills (PS) is assessed once only and this will be during the group 4 project.

Each of the assessment criteria can be separated into three aspects as shown in the following sections. Descriptions are provided to indicate what is expected in order to meet the requirements of a given aspect completely (c) and partially (p). A description is also given for circumstances in which the requirements are not satisfied, not at all (n).

A “complete” is awarded 2 marks, a “partial” 1 mark and a “not at all” 0 marks.

The maximum mark for each criterion is 6 (representing three “completes”).

D	× 2 = 12
DCP	× 2 = 12
CE	× 2 = 12
MS	× 1 = 6
PS	× 1 = 6

This makes a total mark out of 48.

The marks for each of the criteria are added together to determine the final mark out of 48 for the IA component. This is then scaled at IBCA to give a total out of 24%.

General regulations and procedures relating to IA can be found in the Vade Mecum for the year in which the IA is being submitted.

Design

Levels/marks	Aspect 1	Aspect 2	Aspect 3
	Defining the problem and selecting variables	Controlling variables	Developing a method for collection of data
Complete/2	Formulates a focused problem/research question and identifies the relevant variables.	Designs a method for the effective control of the variables.	Develops a method that allows for the collection of sufficient relevant data.
Partial/1	Formulates a problem/research question that is incomplete or identifies only some relevant variables.	Designs a method that makes some attempt to control the variables.	Develops a method that allows for the collection of insufficient relevant data.
Not at all/0	Does not identify a problem/research question and does not identify any relevant variables.	Designs a method that does not control the variables.	Develops a method that does not allow for any relevant data to be collected.

Data collection and processing

Levels/marks	Aspect 1	Aspect 2	Aspect 3
	Recording raw data	Processing raw data	Presenting processed data
Complete/2	Records appropriate quantitative and associated qualitative raw data, including units and uncertainties where relevant.	Processes the quantitative raw data correctly.	Presents processed data appropriately and, where relevant, includes errors and uncertainties.
Partial/1	Records appropriate quantitative and associated qualitative raw data, but with some mistakes or omissions.	Processes quantitative raw data, but with some mistakes and/or omissions.	Presents processed data appropriately, but with some mistakes and/or omissions.
Not at all/0	Does not record any appropriate quantitative raw data or raw data is incomprehensible.	No processing of quantitative raw data is carried out or major mistakes are made in processing.	Presents processed data inappropriately or incomprehensibly.

Conclusion and evaluation

Levels/marks	Aspect 1	Aspect 2	Aspect 3
	Concluding	Evaluating procedure(s)	Improving the investigation
Complete/2	States a conclusion, with justification, based on a reasonable interpretation of the data.	Evaluates weaknesses and limitations.	Suggests realistic improvements in respect of identified weaknesses and limitations.
Partial/1	States a conclusion based on a reasonable interpretation of the data.	Identifies some weaknesses and limitations, but the evaluation is weak or missing.	Suggests only superficial improvements.
Not at all/0	States no conclusion or the conclusion is based on an unreasonable interpretation of the data.	Identifies irrelevant weaknesses and limitations.	Suggests unrealistic improvements.

Manipulative skills (assessed summatively)

This criterion addresses objective 5.

Levels/marks	Aspect 1	Aspect 2	Aspect 3
	Following instructions*	Carrying out techniques	Working safely
Complete/2	Follows instructions accurately, adapting to new circumstances (seeking assistance when required).	Competent and methodical in the use of a range of techniques and equipment.	Pays attention to safety issues.
Partial/1	Follows instructions but requires assistance.	Usually competent and methodical in the use of a range of techniques and equipment.	Usually pays attention to safety issues.
Not at all/0	Rarely follows instructions or requires constant supervision.	Rarely competent and methodical in the use of a range of techniques and equipment.	Rarely pays attention to safety issues.

*Instructions may be in a variety of forms: oral, written worksheets, diagrams, photographs, videos, flow charts, audio tapes, models, computer programs, and so on, and need not originate from the teacher.

See “The group 4 project” section for the personal skills criterion.