Mr. Strickland's Chemistry     pi-sigma

Internal Assessment (IA) Introductions

During the two year duration of the IB Chemistry course, you will be performing a very detailed laboratory investigation that will be assessed internally.  The assessment will be evaluated using multiple criteria that will measure not only the students laboratory techniques and skills, but will also evaluate the students ability to document, analyze, and synthesize the content of the investigation.

 

There are five IA criteria that are presented for marks.  These five criteria will be separately evaluated and will account for 20% of the overall assessment for each student.  The investigation performed by each student will be unique based on a specific topic of interest, and will provide clear evidence of the abilities and knowledge consistent with the aims of the course and the nature of science. 

 

It should be anticipated that completion of the IA will take roughly 10 hours with the completed report being between 6 and 12 pages.

 

Criteria Marks out of 24 Percentage of IA
Personal Engagement 2 8%
Exploration 6 25%
Analysis 6 25%
Evaluation 6 25%
Communication 4 17%

 

The following information presents the highest level of measurement for each of the criteria.  Material that does not meet this valuation of content will result in marks below the maximum.  Complete disclosure of the descriptors associated with each set of marks can be found in the Internal Assessment portion of your text.

 

Personal Engagement

  • The evidence of personal engagement with the exploration is clear with significant independent thinking, initiative, and creativity.
  • The justification given for choosing the research question and/or 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.

 

Exploration

  • The topic of investigation is identified and a relevant and fully focused research question is clearly described.
  • The background information provided for the investigation is entirely appropriate and relevant and enhances the understanding of the content of the investigation.
  • 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 might influence the relevance, reliability, and sufficiency of the collected data.
  • The report shows evidence of the full awareness of the significant safety, ethical, or environmental issues that are relevant to the methodology of the investigation.

 

Analysis

  • The report includes sufficient relative 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 are correctly interpreted so that a completely valid and detailed conclusion to the research question can be deduced.

 

Evaluation

  • A detailed conclusion is described and justified which is entirely relevant to the research question and fully 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.

 

Communication

  • The presentation of the investigation is clear.  Any errors do not hamper understanding of the focus, process, and outcomes.
  • The report is well structured and clear:  the necessary information on focus, process, and outcomes is present and 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.

 

Considerations for success:

    1. Start early

    2. Know the criteria

    3. Utilize feedback

    4. It all starts with personal engagement