Introduction
One of the most common pitfalls in IB Internal Assessments is being too descriptive. Many students write detailed accounts of processes, background information, or results, but forget that the IA is graded on analysis, evaluation, and critical thinking. Examiners don’t just want to know what you did — they want to see why it matters, how you interpreted it, and how it connects to the bigger picture.
If your IA reads more like a textbook summary than an independent investigation, you risk losing marks. The good news is that avoiding description is entirely possible with the right strategies. This article will show you how to spot overly descriptive writing and transform it into strong analysis that impresses examiners.
Quick Start Checklist
To immediately reduce descriptive writing in your IA, check for these:
- Do I explain why something is relevant, not just what it is?
- Have I connected my data or evidence to my research question?
- Am I comparing, evaluating, or questioning instead of narrating?
- Is my analysis section longer than my background section?
- Do I include examiner-style phrases such as “this suggests” or “this limitation means”?
Why Students Slip into Description
Understanding why description happens makes it easier to fix. Common reasons include:
- Comfort zone writing: Students rely on retelling facts instead of interpreting them.
- Fear of being wrong: Analysis feels riskier than description, so students play safe.
- Word count filler: Some pad essays with description to hit the word count.
- Confusion about the rubric: Many believe demonstrating knowledge alone earns marks, when in fact examiners want interpretation.
The Difference Between Description and Analysis
- Description: States facts, processes, or outcomes without interpretation.
- Example: “The data shows a steady increase in sales over the three-month period.”
- Analysis: Explains meaning, significance, or implications of those facts.
- Example: “The steady increase in sales over three months suggests effective targeting of consumer demand, though seasonal factors may also have contributed.”
That second step — connecting results to interpretation — is what examiners reward.
Strategies to Move Beyond Description
1. Use “Why” and “So What?” Questions
After every descriptive statement, ask yourself:
- Why is this detail important?
- So what does this result imply?
For example: Instead of writing, “The reaction rate doubled when temperature increased,” add: “This supports the collision theory, as higher temperatures increase kinetic energy, leading to more frequent successful collisions.”
2. Compare and Contrast
Examiners value evaluation. Don’t just present data — compare it against expectations, literature, or alternative explanations.
3. Address Limitations
Acknowledging flaws in your method shows analytical maturity. Rather than describing steps, explain where weaknesses lie and how they affect reliability.
4. Integrate Theory with Evidence
Description often happens when data is isolated from theory. Strengthen your analysis by consistently linking results back to theoretical frameworks.
5. Prioritize Depth Over Breadth
It’s better to analyze a few points deeply than describe many superficially. Examiners want insight, not quantity.
Common Mistakes That Lower Scores
- Overly long introductions: Students sometimes dedicate half their word count to background, leaving little space for analysis.
- Narrating methodology step by step: This belongs in a lab manual, not an IA. Summarize and focus on how the method supports validity.
- Copying textbook explanations: Even if accurate, this adds no originality. Paraphrase and interpret instead.
- Avoiding evaluation language: If your IA lacks phrases like “this suggests,” “this limits,” or “this alternative explanation,” it’s probably too descriptive.
Practical Rewrite Exercise
Here’s a quick way to spot and fix descriptive writing:
Step 1: Highlight sentences in your draft that only state what happened.
Step 2: Add follow-up sentences that explain why it matters to your research question.
Step 3: Compare the before-and-after versions. The revised version should feel more persuasive, less like a report.
FAQs
1. How much description is acceptable in the IA?
Some description is necessary, especially in the introduction and methodology. Examiners expect background context, but it should be concise and purposeful. A good rule of thumb is that analysis should outweigh description. If most of your word count is spent telling rather than interpreting, you need to rebalance.
2. What if my IA topic requires technical background?
In technical subjects like Physics or Biology, background details are important, but they should always be linked to your research question. For example, don’t just explain a formula — explain why that formula applies to your investigation and what it reveals about your results.
3. How can I tell if my IA is still too descriptive?
Ask a peer to read your work and tell you whether it sounds more like a story or an argument. If they can’t see connections to the research question, it’s likely still descriptive. Another quick test: if you can remove a section without harming your analysis, it’s probably unnecessary description.
Conclusion
Being too descriptive is one of the easiest ways to lose marks in your IA, but it’s also one of the easiest to fix. By consistently asking “why” and “so what,” linking data to theory, and prioritizing analysis over narration, you ensure your IA reflects critical thinking rather than simple reporting.
At RevisionDojo, we’ve seen students transform their IAs simply by trimming excess description and focusing on analysis. This shift doesn’t just boost grades — it makes your IA more engaging and examiner-friendly.
RevisionDojo Call to Action
Struggling to turn description into analysis? RevisionDojo provides tools, strategies, and expert guidance to help IB students elevate their writing. With our resources, you’ll learn how to think like an examiner and write IAs that stand out for their clarity and depth. Start strengthening your analysis today with RevisionDojo.
