IB Chemistry
Internal Assessment
20% of “the final IB grade”
Personal Engagement (2) – Exploration (6) – Analysis (6) – Evaluation (6) – Communication (4)
Exploration (6 marks)
 Very descriptive title, not something simple or cute (has to compare independent and dependent
variable)
 The topic of the investigation is clearly identified with background information that enhances the
understanding of the experiment. Site source immediately with parentheses and appropriate
(MLA, APA) bibliography at the end of the investigation. Someone unfamiliar with chemistry
would understand the reasoning why you are doing this experiment.
 Very focused research question. This has to be directly supported/answerable by your data.
 Full details of all materials used including make and model (if possible) and “size”
 Hypothesis (If…then…because…)
 Independent variable
 Dependent variable
 Experimental control (if applies)
 Controls (listed)
 A VERY detailed procedure. Possibly a diagram or picture as well.
o Numbered steps
o Absolutely NO ambiguity!
 clear, step-wise format that could be repeated by your peers
o How the controls were maintained/achieved should be obvious
o May be necessary to conduct trial runs and repeats until consistent results are obtained
(think calibration)
o Repeated measurements/trials- at least three
o When looking for a trend, have a minimum of five data points
 When appropriate, safety, ethical, or environmental issues should be addressed
 Optional - A prepared data table
Analysis (6 marks)
Recording raw data
o quantitative data clearly recorded and most likely in a table
o unit and uncertainties/error (perhaps top of column in data table)
o a descriptive title
o sig figs must be consistent
 uncertainties/error should be one sig fig unless very large, then two sig figs
o qualitative data clearly recorded
Processing raw data
o data manipulated/calculated in order to determine a quantity
o units and uncertainties/error must be propagated
o multiple trials (at least three) have been averaged
Presenting processed data
o suitable presentation formats- table, chart, graphs, spreadsheets, etc.
o graphs should have: appropriate scales, labeled axis, unit, points plotted correctly with best-fit line
or curve
o clear, unambiguous headings/titles for calculations, graphs, and tables
o all stages to the final result can be followed clearly when calculating
o final derived quantity has clear SI metric units, sig figs, and uncertainties
o compare with known values and percentage of error can be calculated here (but discussed in the
Evaluation)
Evaluation (6 marks)
Concluding
o conclusion clearly stated with results (quantitative) to answer original question or aim/purpose
o explain the “science behind” your conclusion, meaning why did you get what you got (may
need to research and cite source)
o if the data shows any patterns or trends, it/they should be calculated/explained/discussed
o random (+/-) or any systematic errors should be identified and compared
o hopefully your random error (%) is minimal compared to any systematic error (%)
o when appropriate, compare experimental values with known values (using percentage of error
formula that you did earlier in Analysis) and literature cited
o state your random error, which hopefully was minimal, and compare it to your percentage error
that was determined by comparing to known literature values
Evaluating Procedure and Improving the Investigation (OR SEE DATA TABLE BELOW)
o comment on the design of the investigation and the precision and accuracy of your measurements
o list the weaknesses and/or limitations and how they could have affected your experiment (3 good
ones)
o suggest realistic improvements/modifications based on your three previous weaknesses and/or
limitations
o improvements/modifications should be clearly specified
 these should reduce random and systematic error and achieve greater control of the
variables
 these should make the next experiment more precise, accurate, valid, and reliable
Weaknesses/limitations/error
If applicable, which
direction did your
results shift and why?
Realistic & relevant suggestions
for improvements & extending
the investigation