Introduction
The evaluation section is one of the most important parts of your ESS Internal Assessment (IA). For the 2026 first assessment, examiners have emphasized that too many students lose marks by writing weak or generic evaluations.
A strong evaluation shows that you can think critically about your investigation. It demonstrates that you understand not only what your results show, but also how reliable they are, what their limitations are, and how the study could be improved or extended.
Quick Start Checklist for ESS Students
When writing your evaluation, make sure you:
- Identify strengths of your investigation.
- Point out limitations and weaknesses.
- Suggest realistic improvements.
- Propose extensions for future research.
- Link your evaluation back to the research question.
What Examiners Look for in an Evaluation
According to the marking criteria, the evaluation section should:
- Justify the conclusion. Show how data supports or challenges your hypothesis.
- Identify strengths. For example, effective sampling, controlled variables, sufficient data.
- Discuss weaknesses. Be specific—don’t just say “human error.”
- Suggest improvements. Realistic changes that could increase accuracy or reliability.
- Propose extensions. How could your study go further to build on findings?
Examples of Strong Evaluations
Strengths
- “Using random quadrat sampling reduced bias in biodiversity estimates.”
- “Measuring water pH with a calibrated probe increased accuracy.”
Weaknesses
- “Sampling only one season may not represent year-round biodiversity.”
- “The number of quadrats was too small to represent the whole ecosystem.”
Improvements
- “Repeating sampling across multiple seasons would provide more representative data.”
- “Increasing quadrat size could reduce under-sampling of larger plant species.”
Extensions
- “Future research could investigate how soil moisture affects biodiversity in the same site.”
- “Comparisons could be made with similar ecosystems in nearby regions.”
Common Mistakes in Evaluations
- Writing generic comments like “we could have improved accuracy”.
- Focusing too much on background theory instead of your method and data.
- Suggesting unrealistic improvements (e.g., “use satellite data” for a school project).
- Ignoring limitations of secondary data if you used it alongside primary data.
Evaluation in ESS Exams
While evaluation is assessed directly in the IA, the skill also appears in Paper 1 and Paper 2. Examiners often ask you to evaluate fieldwork methods, sustainability strategies, or case study approaches. Practicing evaluation in your IA strengthens your exam technique.
Exam Tips for a High-Scoring Evaluation
- Be specific. Always refer to your data and methods, not vague errors.
- Balance positives and negatives. Acknowledge what worked well too.
- Stay realistic. Improvements should be achievable in school-level investigations.
- Show systems thinking. Link your evaluation back to the broader ESS context.
FAQs
1. How long should my evaluation be?
About 300–500 words. Enough to cover strengths, weaknesses, improvements, and extensions in detail.
2. Do I need to include limitations even if my IA went smoothly?
Yes. Every investigation has limitations—examiners expect you to identify them.
3. Should I evaluate secondary data?
Yes. If you used secondary data, comment on its reliability, source, and limitations.
Conclusion
Writing a strong evaluation in your ESS IA shows examiners that you are a critical thinker who understands scientific investigation. By identifying strengths, discussing weaknesses, suggesting improvements, and proposing extensions, you can maximize your marks and strengthen your overall IA.
RevisionDojo Call to Action:
Need a structured IA evaluation template? RevisionDojo’s IA resources guide you through writing detailed, examiner-ready evaluations that can boost your ESS grade.
