The IB Geography IA criteria divide the fieldwork report into six assessment areas worth 25 marks. Your teacher marks the report, after which the IB may externally moderate a sample from your school. The same criteria apply at SL and HL, although the IA contributes 25% of the SL grade and 20% of the HL grade.
Markers use a best-fit approach. They do not award a particular band merely because you included a statistical test, several graphs or a detailed map. They judge how consistently the complete report matches each criterion descriptor.
IB Geography IA mark scheme at a glance
The IA is an individual fieldwork report based on a focused geographical question and primary data. It must not exceed 2,500 words. The section lengths suggested in the Geography guide are recommendations, not separate limits.
| Criterion | Assessment area | Marks | Suggested words |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | Fieldwork question and geographic context | 3 | 300 |
| B | Method(s) of investigation | 3 | 300 |
| C | Quality and treatment of information collected | 6 | 500 |
| D | Written analysis | 8 | 850 |
| E | Conclusion | 2 | 200 |
| F | Evaluation | 3 | 300 |
| Total | Fieldwork report | 25 | Approximately 2,450 |
Criteria C and D provide 14 of the 25 marks, reflecting the importance of collecting useful information, presenting it effectively and analysing its geographical meaning. The official IB Geography course overview and IB Geography subject brief confirm the fieldwork basis and assessment weightings.
Criterion A: Fieldwork question and geographic context
Maximum: 3 marks
Criterion A assesses whether the investigation is geographical, focused, theoretically grounded and located precisely enough for fieldwork. At the highest level, the question is clearly connected to a syllabus topic or geographical theory, while suitable maps establish the investigation's location and sampling framework.
A question such as To what extent does pedestrian density decrease with distance from the central business district of Canterbury? is stronger than How successful is Canterbury? It identifies measurable variables, a location and a relationship that primary data can investigate.
Maps should include an appropriate title, scale, orientation, legend, border and source where relevant. Mark sampling sites, routes, zones or transects clearly. Do not simply name a theory; explain its predicted relationship and how that prediction informs your question or hypotheses.
Criterion B: Method(s) of investigation
Maximum: 3 marks
Criterion B assesses how accurately you describe and justify data collection. A high-level response explains the methods, instruments and sampling strategy, connects them to the question, and shows how they produced sufficient reliable primary data.
Do not write only, “We measured river velocity using a flow meter.” State where readings were taken, how the instrument was positioned, how many repetitions were completed, how results were processed and why the method tested a particular hypothesis.
Explain why systematic, random or stratified sampling was appropriate. Sample size matters, but a large dataset is not automatically strong if measurements were collected inconsistently or do not answer the question.
Criterion C: Quality and treatment of information
Maximum: 6 marks
Criterion C concerns both the quality of the information and how it is processed and presented. To reach the highest band, data must be relevant and sufficient, while graphs, maps, tables and other techniques must suit the variables being investigated.
Choose each technique deliberately. Scatter graphs are useful for relationships between continuous variables, located proportional symbols reveal spatial variation, and annotated photographs can record environmental quality or land-use characteristics. Avoid presenting the same dataset repeatedly unless each format reveals something different.
Every figure should have a number, informative title, units, labelled axes where appropriate and a source for secondary information. Figures should be placed near the relevant discussion rather than collected into pages with no interpretation. The RevisionDojo Geography IA exemplar collection can help you compare presentation choices, but focus on why a technique works instead of copying its design.
Criterion D: Written analysis
Maximum: 8 marks
Criterion D carries the most marks because it assesses how well you interpret results and use them to answer the fieldwork question. Description identifies what happened; analysis uses evidence to explain patterns, relationships, differences and anomalies.
A strong analytical paragraph normally does the following:
- Identifies an important pattern or relationship.
- Supports it with precise values and units.
- Refers to the relevant figure.
- Explains it using geographical processes or theory.
- Examines an anomaly or uncertainty.
- Links the evidence back to the hypothesis or question.
“Mean channel velocity increased downstream” is descriptive. Stronger analysis quantifies the increase, links it to hydraulic radius and friction, compares the pattern with the Bradshaw model, and explains why an individual site departed from the overall trend.
Statistical tests are not automatically required. Use one only when it is appropriate for the data and question, and interpret what the result means geographically. The Lam Takhong River IA exemplar demonstrates sustained river analysis, while the Corso Buenos Aires exemplar shows how criterion-level feedback separates analytical strengths from evaluation.
Criterion E: Conclusion
Maximum: 2 marks
The conclusion must answer the fieldwork question directly and be supported by the preceding analysis. Begin with an overall judgment, then summarise the strongest findings and state whether each hypothesis was supported, partly supported or rejected.
Avoid saying that a hypothesis was definitively “proved.” Fieldwork conclusions normally apply to a particular location, sample and time period. Do not introduce new evidence, and remember that rejecting your prediction does not reduce marks when the judgment follows logically from the results.
Criterion F: Evaluation
Maximum: 3 marks
Criterion F assesses your evaluation of the investigation, not your ability to produce a generic list of problems. The strongest evaluations explain how particular methodological decisions affected reliability, validity or the usefulness of the findings.
Use the chain limitation, effect, improvement, expected impact. Instead of saying, “More data should be collected,” explain that one five-minute pedestrian count may have captured an unusual temporary flow, reducing temporal reliability. Propose repeated counts at comparable times and explain how this would reduce the influence of short-term variation.
Prioritise limitations that materially affected the results. Weather, observer subjectivity, equipment precision and sampling bias only become meaningful when their effects are explained. The feedback attached to the River Eea exemplar illustrates how realistic improvements can be linked to reliability.
How the Geography IA is actually marked
Your teacher awards a whole-number mark for each criterion using the descriptor that best fits the work. The six marks are added to give a total out of 25. The IB externally moderates samples of internally assessed work to check that schools apply the criteria consistently, as outlined in the IB's assessment and exams overview.
The rubric is therefore not a checklist. Including a north arrow, three hypotheses and a Spearman's rank calculation does not automatically place a report in the highest bands. Each feature must contribute to a coherent investigation and an evidence-based answer.
There is no current Criterion G. Websites describing seven criteria and 30 marks are using an older Geography IA structure. Under the current six-criterion model, mapping and presentation conventions are mainly assessed through Criteria A and C, while organization, citations and the word limit remain formal expectations. The current descriptors are also summarized through the IB Geography IA rules and regulations page.
Final criterion-by-criterion check
Before submitting, ask:
- A: Is my question focused, location-specific and meaningfully connected to geographical theory?
- B: Could another researcher repeat my methods, and have I justified the sampling strategy?
- C: Is each dataset relevant and presented using an appropriate technique?
- D: Have I quantified and explained patterns, investigated anomalies and linked findings to the question?
- E: Does my conclusion give a direct judgment supported by evidence already analysed?
- F: Have I explained the effects of significant limitations and proposed realistic improvements?
The wider RevisionDojo IB Geography resources and guide to getting a 7 in IB Geography can help strengthen the geographical knowledge used in your explanations.
Conclusion
The IB Geography IA criteria reward a connected investigation in which the question, methods, data, analysis, conclusion and evaluation support one another. Criteria C and D deserve particular attention because they contain more than half of the available marks.
Use the descriptors throughout drafting, not only before submission. RevisionDojo's Geography exemplars and Coursework Review tools can then help identify where your evidence does not yet match the mark band you are targeting.
Sources and referenced URLs
- International Baccalaureate: Geography in the Diploma Programme
- Official IB Geography subject brief
- International Baccalaureate assessment and exams overview
- IB Geography IA rules and regulations
- RevisionDojo IB Geography resources
- RevisionDojo Geography IA exemplar collection
- Lam Takhong River Geography IA exemplar
- Corso Buenos Aires urban-stress IA exemplar
- River Eea Geography IA exemplar
- RevisionDojo guide to getting a 7 in IB Geography
