Exploration 6 marks

This criterion assesses the extent to which the student establishes the scientific context for the work, states a clear and focused research question and uses
concepts and techniques appropriate to the Diploma Programme level. Where appropriate, this criterion also assesses awareness of safety, environmental, and
ethical considerations.
Indicators

Research
Question
(X1 - RQ)

The topic of the

investigation is
NOT identified.

Background
Information
(X2 - BI)

NO background
Information
provided for the
investigation.
The methodology of
the investigation is
NOT appropriate to
address the
research question

1-2

research question of some

relevance is stated but it is not
focused.

is superficial or of limited
relevance and does not aid the
understanding of the context of
the investigation.
Methodology
The methodology of the
(X3 - M)
investigation is only appropriate to
address the research question to
a very limited extent since it
takes into consideration few of the
significant factors that may
influence the relevance, reliability
and sufficiency of the collected
data.
Safety, Ethics,
No relevant
The report shows evidence of
Environment
significant safety,
limited awareness of the
(X4 - SEE) *
ethical or
significant safety, ethical or
environmental
environmental issues that
issues are
are relevant to the methodology
addressed.
of the investigation*.
*This indicator should only be applied when appropriate to the investigation.
X1 Research Question Write a focused research question. This will is
also be the title of your report. Then write an If-Then-Because
hypothesis. Identify the independent and dependent variable, the
constants, and if appropriate the control for your experiment.
X2 Background Provide sufficient background information to place your
investigation into a broader scientific context. Discuss the relevant
theories or equations, and any topical research.

3-4

5-6

relevant but not fully focused

research question is described.

relevant and fully focused research

question is clearly described.

is mainly appropriate and relevant

and aids the understanding of the
context of the investigation.

is entirely appropriate and relevant

and enhances the understanding of
the context of the investigation.

The methodology of the investigation

is mainly appropriate to address the
research question but has
limitations since it takes into
consideration only some of the
significant factors that may influence
the relevance, reliability and
sufficiency of the collected data.

The methodology of the investigation

is highly appropriate to address the
research question because it takes
into consideration all, or nearly all, of
the significant factors that may
influence the relevance, reliability and
sufficiency of the collected data.

The report shows evidence of some

awareness of the significant safety,
ethical or environmental issues that
are relevant to the methodology of
the investigation*.

The report shows evidence of full

awareness of the significant safety,
ethical or environmental issues that
are relevant to the methodology of
the investigation.*

X4 Methodology List all materials that are needed. Be specific. Draw a

neat and labeled scientific diagram showing how the equipment
should be set up. Note any safety precautions that should be taken
and write a step-by-step numbered procedure detailing how the
experiment was or should be done so that if anyone needed to repeat
it they could. Include quantities, dimensions, and other
measurements that would be helpful to a person trying to replicate
your results. Your procedure and methods must address all the
factors that might influence your data. Indicate specifically what data
to collect and how often to collect it. Do not forget your units!

Analysis 6 marks
This criterion assesses the extent to which the students report provides evidence that the student has selected, recorded, processed and interpreted the data in
ways that are relevant to the research question and can support a conclusion.
Indicators

1-2

Data,
Raw
(A1 - DR)

No relevant raw data

present.

insufficient relevant raw data to

support a valid conclusion to the
research question.

Data,
Processing
(A2 - DP)

No data processing is
carried out.

Some basic data processing is

carried out but is either too
inaccurate or too insufficient to
lead to a valid conclusion.

Uncertainty
(A3 - U)

No evidence of any
consideration of
measurement
uncertainty.
No interpretation of
the processed data

The report shows evidence of

little consideration of the impact
of measurement uncertainty on
the analysis.
The processed data is incorrectly
or insufficiently interpreted so
that the conclusion is invalid or
very incomplete.

Data,
Interpretation
(A4 - DI)

A1 Recording The data collected may be quantitative and/or qualitative.

A2 Processing Use a table where appropriate. Explain equations if
necessary. Always write units! Always show one sample calculation,
even for averages. This should not be a jumble of equations, but a
logical sequence that guides the reader from raw data to useful results.
Make comparisons, note trends.

3-4

5-6

The report includes relevant but

incomplete quantitative and
qualitative raw data that could
support a simple or partially valid
conclusion to the research question.
Appropriate and sufficient data
processing is carried out that could
lead to a broadly valid conclusion but
there are significant inaccuracies
and inconsistencies in the
processing.

The report includes sufficient

relevant quantitative and qualitative
raw data that could support a
detailed and valid conclusion to the
research question.
Appropriate and sufficient data
processing is carried out with the
accuracy required to enable a
conclusion to the research question
to be drawn that is
fully consistent with the experimental
data.
The report shows evidence of full
and appropriate consideration of the
impact of measurement uncertainty
on the analysis.
The processed data is correctly
interpreted so that a completely
valid and detailed conclusion to the
research question can be deduced

The report shows evidence of some

consideration of the impact of
measurement uncertainty on the
analysis.
The processed data is interpreted so
that a broadly valid but incomplete
or limited conclusion to the research question can be deduced

A3 Uncertainty Perform necessary uncertainty calculations and error

propagation. Be sure to discuss the error as it compares to your
results, or affects your confidence in your results and conclusion. How
large is the error? (as %?) Could it be reduced? Is the error random or
systematic? Are there other sources of systematic error that might
affect your results?
A4 - Interpretation discuss what the results of your processed data mean,
and how your processed data supports your conclusion.

Evaluation 6 mark
This criterion assesses the extent to which the students report provides evidence of evaluation of the investigation and the results with regard to the research
question and the accepted scientific context.
Indicators

1-2

3-4

5-6

A conclusion is described which is

relevant to the research question and
is supported by the data presented.

NO context for the

conclusion is offered
at all.

A conclusion is outlined which is

not relevant to the research
question or is not supported by the
data presented.
The conclusion makes superficial
comparison to the accepted
scientific context.

Strengths and
Weaknesses
(E3 - SW)

NO strengths and
weaknesses of the
investigation, such as
limitations of the data
and sources of error,
are mentioned.

Strengths and weaknesses of the

investigation, such as limitations
of the data and sources of error,
are outlined but are restricted to
an account of the practical or
procedural issues faced.

Further
Research
(E4 - FR)

NO realistic and
relevant suggestions
are offered.

The student has outlined very few

realistic and relevant suggestions
for the improvement and
extension of the investigation

Strengths and weaknesses of the

investigation, such as limitations of
the data and sources of error, are
described and provide evidence of
some awareness of the
methodological issues* involved in
establishing the conclusion.
The student has described
some realistic and relevant
suggestions for the improvement and
extension of the investigation.

A conclusion is described and

justified which is relevant to the
research question and is supported
by the data presented.
A conclusion is correctly described
and justified through relevant
comparison to the accepted scientific
context.
Strengths and weaknesses of the
investigation, such as limitations of
the data and sources of error, are
discussed and provide evidence of a
clear understanding of the
methodological issues* involved in
establishing the conclusion.
The student has discussed realistic
and relevant suggestions for the
improvement and extension of the
investigation.

Justification
(E1 - C)

NO conclusion is
drawn.

Context
(E2 - C)

E1,2 Go back to your hypothesis. Do your results support or refute

your hypothesis? Do they answer your research question? How
does your conclusion compare to the scientific context? It is ok to get
negative results, just use evidence to justify and explain them.
Dont say that you proved your hypothesis. You didnt. Convince me
that you understand the science and that you can back up whatever you
conclude about your results.
E3 Strengths and Limitations What went well? What went wrong?
What were the limitations to your experiment? What are possible
sources of error? Identify the random error and the systematic
error. Do NOT say, human error, or I messed up. Instead explain
your error or negative result (i.e. reaction time) and quantify the error
(i.e. +/- ___ seconds). It is never appropriate to say that your results
were wrong because of miscalculations or doing the lab wrong. If

The conclusion is described which

makes some relevant comparison to
the accepted scientific context.

you feel that this is the case, re-assess your data processing, redo
calculations as necessary, or seek additional guidance from your
teacher.
E4 Further Research What could you realistically do to improve your
experiment in the future? Suggest modifications to the design of the
procedure that would have led to more reliable results and greater
validity of conclusions. Changing lab partners, going to the moon, or
using an atomic force microscope are not options. Try again. Taking
more data, controlling for some factor you hadnt thought about,
developing a more consistent method are reasonable improvements
that might actually yield better results. Dont be afraid to think outside
the box, or even suggest an entirely different approach to the research
problem. Where applicable, compare experimentally determined results
with literature value; note references.

NOTE: For the previous three Criteria, the indicators are all treated equivalently. For each the last two criteria, Communication and Personal
Engagement, the entire first indicator sentence (Presentation and Evidence, respectively) is bolded in the IB Physics Guide, indicating that IB
considers it of primary importance. The other indicators are of secondary importance, used for borderline determinations.
Communication 4 marks
This criterion assesses whether the investigation is presented and reported in a way that supports effective communication of the focus, process and outcomes.
Indicators

1-2

3-4

Presentation
(C1 P)

Presentation is utterly
incoherent. The focus, process,
and outcomes cannot be
understood.

The presentation of the

investigation is unclear, making it
difficult to understand the focus,
process and outcomes.

Structure
(C2 S)

The report has no structure

whatsoever.

Elegance*
(C3 E)

The report is at once excessively

bloated and severely incomplete.

Jargon & Format

(C4 J&F)

The report appears wholly

unfamiliar with the subject matter,
terminology, and conventions.

The report is 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**.

The presentation of the

investigation is clear. Any errors
do not hamper the understanding
of the focus, process and
outcomes.
The report is well-structured and is
clear: the necessary information on
focus, process and outcomes is
present and is presented in a
coherent way.
The report is 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.

*Elegance is used in the scientific sense, meaning efficient, concise, and parsimonious.
**For example, incorrect / missing labeling of graphs, tables, images; use of units, decimal places.
C1 Presentation This is a general indicator and IB considers it the most
important, which is why it is the only indicator that is fully bolded.
C2 Structure Use clearly titled sections in your report. It should flow
logically from one section into another, building to your conclusion.
C3 Elegance The report is no longer than is necessary to satisfy all the
requirements. Everything has a purpose and fulfills a role. It is perfect
not when there is nothing to be added, but when there is nothing that
can be taken away.
C4 Format This refers, among other things, to diagrams, calculations,
graphs, and tables. A graph should be neat and legible. A tiny graph

in the corner will receive a 0. Graphs must have a title, labeled axes
with units, an appropriate scale, and labeled best-fit lines. The
dependent variable goes along the y-axis and the independent variable
goes along the x-axis. A quick sketch will not cut it. Get out your ruler
or your computer! Include best-fit lines and error bars.
Record your data with units in one or more neat, labeled tables.
Anyone should be able to read the titles of your data tables and the
labeled columns (with units!) and know immediately what is being
presented. Neat means straight lines. Use a ruler. On your data
tables, your dependent variable goes along the top and the
independent variable goes along the side.

NOTE: The final criteria is worth the fewest marks and is the easiest to get. Although your final IA must satisfy this criteria, you will select the topic
for your IA much like a science fair project. Choosing a topic which will demonstrate personal engagement will therefore be straightforward.
However, as the practice IA topics will be assigned to your, this criteria will not be practiced in class.
Personal Engagement 2 marks
This criterion assesses the extent to which the student engages with the exploration and makes it their own. Personal engagement may be recognized in different
attributes and skills. These could include addressing personal interests or showing evidence of independent thinking, creativity or initiative in the designing,
implementation or presentation of the investigation.
Mark

Descriptor

The students report does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

The evidence of personal engagement with the exploration is limited with little independent thinking, initiative or creativity.
The justification given for choosing the research question and/or the topic under investigation does not demonstrate personal significance, interest or
curiosity.
There is little evidence of personal input and initiative in the designing, implementation or presentation of the investigation.

The evidence of personal engagement with the exploration is clear with significant independent thinking, initiative or creativity.
The justification given for choosing the research question and/or the topic under investigation demonstrates personal significance, interest or curiosity.
There is evidence of personal input and initiative in the designing, implementation or presentation of the investigation.

As with the Communication criterion, IB regards the first indicator as controlling, and the following two as of secondary importance for borderline determinations.

SCORING
The IA is worth a total of 24 marks.