Read the official IB Nature of Science 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
Nature of Science · All · Individual investigation
5 criteriaTotal 28 marks
Criterion Context: Context
6 marks
0
The report does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2
States a research topic but it is not focused.
Lists some background NOS information.
3–4
Outlines a research topic but does not fully focus on the NOS aspects.
Describes the relevant background NOS information to provide context to the inquiry.
5–6
Constructs a relevant and coherent research topic and focuses it on the NOS aspects.
Discusses the relevant background NOS information to provide context to the inquiry.
Criterion Strategy: Strategy
6 marks
0
The report does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2
States the connection to the relevant NOS aspects.
Lists a limited range of resources*.
Describes an inappropriate methodology**.
3–4
Outlines the connection to the relevant NOS aspects.
Lists a wide range of different resources*.
Describes an appropriate methodology**.
5–6
Explains the connection to the relevant NOS aspects.
Justifies the appropriate resources*.
Justifies the methodology** chosen.
Criterion Analysis: Analysis
6 marks
0
The report does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2
States the evidence.
Lists the results of their investigation.
3–4
Outlines the evidence.
Describes the results of their investigation and their connection to the NOS aspects.
5–6
Analyses the evidence.
Discusses the results of their investigation and their connection to the NOS aspects.
Criterion Evaluation and conclusion: Evaluation and conclusion
6 marks
0
The report does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1–2
States a conclusion that is not valid or too simplistic.
Lists strengths, weaknesses and limitations of resources and/or methodology.
States simplistic and superficial modifications and/or further areas for research/investigation.
3–4
Demonstrates a conclusion that has limited validity.
Describes strengths, weaknesses and limitations of resources and/or methodology.
Describes some modifications and further areas for research and/or investigation.
5–6
Demonstrates a valid conclusion.
Discusses strengths, weaknesses and limitations of resources and/or methodology.
Suggests appropriate related modifications and further areas of research and/or investigation.
Criterion Scientific communication and engagement: Scientific communication and engagement
4 marks
0
The report does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors given below.
1–2
The investigation has limited structure and organization.
The report makes limited use of appropriate terminology
The report is not concise.
There is little evidence of personal input and initiative in the designing, implementation or presentation of the investigation.
3–4
The report is well structured and coherent.
The report makes consistent use of appropriate terminology.
The report is concise.
There is evidence of personal input and initiative in the designing, implementation or presentation of the investigation.
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.