Read the official IB Chemistry Internal Assessment criteria with markbands, guiding questions, and notes. Use the selectors to switch subject, level, or component; the optional AI grading prompt stays at the bottom for self-review.
Step 1 — what are you working on?
Step 2 — narrow it down
Group
Subject
Level
Official criteria
Chemistry · All · Scientific investigation
4 criteriaTotal 24 marks
Criterion Research design: Research design
6 marks
0
The report does not reach the standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2
The research question is stated without context.
Methodological considerations associated with collecting data relevant to the research question are stated.
The description of the methodology for collecting or selecting data lacks the detail to allow for the investigation to be reproduced.
3–4
The research question is outlined within a broad context.
Methodological considerations associated with collecting relevant and sufficient data to answer the research question are described.
The description of the methodology for collecting or selecting data allows for the investigation to be reproduced with few ambiguities or omissions.
5–6
The research question is described within a specific and appropriate context.
Methodological considerations associated with collecting relevant and sufficient data to answer the research question are explained.
The description of the methodology for collecting or selecting data allows for the investigation to be reproduced.
Criterion Data analysis: Data analysis
6 marks
0
The report does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2
The recording and processing of the data is communicated but is neither clear nor precise.
The recording and processing of data shows limited evidence of the consideration of uncertainties.
Some processing of data relevant to addressing the research question is carried out but with major omissions, inaccuracies or inconsistencies.
3–4
The communication of the recording and processing of the data is either clear or precise.
The recording and processing of data shows evidence of a consideration of uncertainties but with some significant omissions or inaccuracies.
The processing of data relevant to addressing the research question is carried out but with some significant omissions, inaccuracies or inconsistencies.
5–6
The communication of the recording and processing of the data is both clear and precise.
The recording and processing of data shows evidence of an appropriate consideration of uncertainties.
The processing of data relevant to addressing the research question is carried out appropriately and accurately.
Criterion Conclusion: Conclusion
6 marks
0
The report does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2
A conclusion is stated that is relevant to the research question but is not supported by the analysis presented.
The conclusion makes superficial comparison to the accepted scientific context.
3–4
A conclusion is described that is relevant to the research question but is not fully consistent with the analysis presented.
A conclusion is described that makes some relevant comparison to the accepted scientific context.
5–6
A conclusion is justified that is relevant to the research question and fully consistent with the analysis presented.
A conclusion is justified through relevant comparison to the accepted scientific context.
Criterion Evaluation: Evaluation
6 marks
0
The report does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2
The report states generic methodological weaknesses or limitations.
Realistic improvements to the investigation are stated.
3–4
The report describes specific methodological weaknesses or limitations.
Realistic improvements to the investigation that are relevant to the identified weaknesses or limitations, are described.
5–6
The report explains the relative impact of specific methodological weaknesses or limitations.
Realistic improvements to the investigation, that are relevant to the identified weaknesses or limitations, are explained.
Optional: AI grading prompt
For self-review only
A copyable prompt that embeds the criteria above and asks an AI to grade the work criterion by criterion. Use it as a draft sanity check — not a substitute for teacher or examiner feedback.
Common questions
Where do the criteria come from?
The criteria are stored locally in a structured database that mirrors the official IB descriptors. The page only displays them — descriptor wording is preserved as written, with no paraphrasing.
Why pick subject, level, and component?
The criteria differ by assessment type, subject, level, and component. The selectors at the top filter the database to the criteria set that applies to your specific submission.
What is the AI grading prompt at the bottom for?
It is an optional helper. The prompt embeds the same criteria you see above and asks an AI to evaluate the work criterion by criterion. Useful for a quick self-review before teacher feedback.
Is my work sent anywhere?
No. The page only loads criteria. If you choose to use the AI prompt, you copy it manually and paste it into the AI tool of your choice — nothing leaves this page.
More IB resources
Other tools that pair well with the official criteria.