IB Lab Criteria 2016 Rubric and Explain
IB Lab Criteria 2016 Rubric and Explain
IB Lab Criteria 2016 Rubric and Explain
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)
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
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
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)
Data,
Processing
(A2 - DP)
No data processing is
carried out.
Uncertainty
(A3 - U)
No evidence of any
consideration of
measurement
uncertainty.
No interpretation of
the processed data
Data,
Interpretation
(A4 - DI)
3-4
5-6
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
Strengths and
Weaknesses
(E3 - SW)
NO strengths and
weaknesses of the
investigation, such as
limitations of the data
and sources of error,
are mentioned.
Further
Research
(E4 - FR)
NO realistic and
relevant suggestions
are offered.
Justification
(E1 - C)
NO conclusion is
drawn.
Context
(E2 - C)
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.
Structure
(C2 S)
Elegance*
(C3 E)
*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.