Official IB Turkey in the 20th Century IA criteria
Read the official IB Turkey in the 20th Century 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
Turkey in the 20th Century · All · Investigation
3 criteriaTotal 25 marks
Criterion A: Identification and evaluation of sources
6 marks
Note
If Turkey in the 20th Century is not the main focus of the research question and the identification and evaluation of sources, a maximum mark of 2 is awarded for criterion A.
0
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1-2
A research question related to Turkey in the 20th Century has been clearly stated. The candidate has identified sources and referred to them, but the relevance of the sources to the investigation is very limited.
The response describes the sources, but does not analyse or evaluate them.
3-4
An appropriate research question related to Turkey in the 20th Century has been clearly stated. The student has identified and selected appropriate sources, and has provided some explanation of the relevance of the sources to the investigation.
The sources have been analysed and evaluated to some extent.
5-6
An appropriate research question related to Turkey in the 20th Century has been clearly stated. The student has identified and selected appropriate and relevant sources, and has provided clear, accurate and comprehensive explanations of the relevance of the sources to the investigation.
There is detailed analysis and evaluation of the sources, with reference to their purpose and content.
Criterion B: Investigation
15 marks
Note
If Turkey in the 20th Century is not the main focus of the investigation, a maximum mark of 6 is awarded for criterion B.
0
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1-3
The investigation is not clear and coherent and is not well organized.
Where there is an acceptable structure, there is very little focus on the task.
There is little or no critical analysis in the response. The response may mostly consist of generalizations and poorly substantiated claims. Evidence from sources is referred to, but this evidence is not analysed.
4-6
There is an attempt to organize the investigation, but this has only been partially successful and the investigation is not clear and coherent.
The investigation contains limited critical analysis, but the response is primarily narrative or descriptive rather than analytical. Evidence from sources has been included, but it has not been integrated with the analysis or argument.
7-9
The investigation is generally clear and well organized, but in some places there is repetition or a lack of clarity.
The response has moved beyond explanation to include some analysis and critical commentary, but this is not sustained. There is an attempt to integrate evidence from sources with the analysis or argument.
There may be awareness of different perspectives related to Turkey in the 20th Century, but these perspectives are not evaluated.
10-12
The investigation is generally clear and well organized, although in some places there may be repetition or a lack of clarity.
The investigation includes critical analysis, but this analysis may lack development or clarity. Evidence from a variety of sources has been used to support the argument.
There is awareness and some evaluation of different perspectives related to Turkey in the 20th Century. The investigation points towards a reasoned conclusion.
13-15
The investigation is clear, coherent and effectively organized.
The investigation contains well-developed critical analysis that is clearly focused on the stated question. Evidence from a variety of sources has been used effectively to support the argument.
There is evaluation of different perspectives related to Turkey in the 20th Century. The investigation reaches a reasoned conclusion that is consistent with the evidence and claims presented.
Criterion C: Reflection
4 marks
0
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1-2
The reflection contains some discussion of what the investigation highlighted for the student about the methods used by researchers.
The reflection demonstrates little awareness of the challenges faced by researchers and/or the limitations of the methods used by researchers.
The connection between the reflection and the rest of the investigation is mentioned, but is not clear.
3-4
The reflection is clearly focused on what the investigation highlighted for the student about the methods used by researchers.
The reflection demonstrates clear awareness of the challenges faced by researchers and/or the limitations of the methods used by researchers.
There is a clear and explicit connection between the reflection and the rest 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.