IB Chemistry IA Criteria and Marking Rubric
Complete IA Criteria with the Full Marking Rubric Broken Down
Criterion A: Personal Engagement – 8% (2/24)
0 Marks
No evidence of the descriptors below
1 Mark
Little evidence of the descriptors below
2 Marks
Significant independent thinking, initiative, or insight with the exploration
(1) Research question has personal significance, interest, or curiosity
(2) Personal input and initiative in design, implementation, or presentation of the investigation
Criterion B: Exploration – 25% (6/24)
0 Marks
No evidence of the descriptors below
1-2 Marks
Little evidence of the descriptors below
3-4 Marks
Some evidence of the descriptors below
5-6 Marks
(1) Identified topic with relevant and focused research question
(2) Relevant background information that enhances understanding of the investigation
(3) Methodology is highly appropriate and considers all significant factors that influence the relevance, reliability, and sufficiency of the collected data
(4) Full awareness of significant safety, ethical, or environmental issues present in the methodology
Criterion C: Analysis – 25% (6/24)
0 Marks
No evidence of the descriptors below
1-2 Marks
Little evidence of the descriptors below
3-4 Marks
Some evidence of the descriptors below
5-6 Marks
(1) Relevant quantitative and qualitative raw data to support a valid conclusion
(2) Appropriate and accurate data processing to support a conclusion consistent with the experimental data
(3) Full consideration of the impact of measurement uncertainty on the analysis
(4) Correct interpretation of the data to reach a valid conclusion
Criterion D: Evaluation – 25% (6/24)
0 Marks
No evidence of the descriptors below
1-2 Marks
Little evidence of the descriptors below
3-4 Marks
Some evidence of the descriptors below
5-6 Marks
(1) Described and justified conclusion relevant to the research question and supported by the data presented
(2) Relevant comparison of conclusion to accepted scientific literature
(3) Strengths and weaknesses of the investigation discussed and show understanding of methodological issues and limitations
(4) Realistic and relevant suggestions for improvement and extension of the investigation
Criterion E: Communication – 17% (4/24)
0 Marks
No evidence of the descriptors below
1-2 Marks
Unclear presentation and explanation difficult to understand
3-4 Marks
Clear presentation and explanation. Errors do not impede understanding of the focus, process, and outcomes
(1) Clear structure and coherent explanation
(2) Concise report with a ready understanding of the focus, process, and outcome
(3) Correct and appropriate use of subject-specific terminology
