IB Personal Project (MYP) External Assessment Exemplar

Use of advanced software features like onion skinning, frame rate settings, and reference layers shows sophisticated application of ATL skills to enhance animation consistency and quality.

Systematic practice drawings before animation reflect effective iterative experimentation and skill development through self-management.

Proactive troubleshooting and procurement of compatible devices demonstrate strong self-management and real-time problem-solving ATL skills.

Time estimation exercises reveal critical thinking and collaboration, leading to realistic scheduling and adjustment of production stages.

Detailed table linking software features to learning outcomes provides clear evidence of ATL skill transfer and supports reflective growth.

ATL skills are not explicitly named; the connection between observed actions and specific ATL categories (e.g., thinking, communication, self-management) needs clarification.

Time estimation process would be stronger if specific ATL skills (e.g., critical thinking, collaboration) were identified and discussed in relation to their impact.

Some examples describe software features rather than the underlying ATL strategies, making it harder to see how skill-based approaches were systematically applied.

Comprehensive pros and cons analysis of digital art applications demonstrates strong research skills and informed, strategic tool selection.

Engaging personal motivation narrative clearly links the creator’s interests to the project, providing a compelling foundation.

Well-justified and realistic product goal aligned with the learning goal and available time shows effective goal setting.

Choice of Procreate is supported by clear, relevant criteria (professional tools, affordability, peer support), reflecting strategic decision-making.

Detailed timeline outlines key production stages in a structured, feasible sequence, facilitating progress tracking.

Reflection on schedule adherence indicates awareness of project pacing and a willingness to evaluate planning effectiveness.

Learning goal lacks specific, measurable success criteria (e.g., defined animation length, number of frames, shading techniques) to track skill development.

Resources and sequencing are not explicitly listed for each stage; absence of clear deliverables and dependencies undermines feasibility.

Success criteria table only covers low-level descriptors; missing mid- and high-level measurable targets reduces clarity of progress benchmarks.

Research into unrelated areas (sculpting) dilutes focus on digital animation; final learning goal needs tighter scope.

Schedule tasks lack explicit milestones and buffer times, reducing accountability and risk management.

Tool comparison is thorough but does not link each choice back to specific success criteria, weakening alignment between research and evaluation.

Reflection includes specific evidence of technical growth and personal development (e.g., 49 hours invested, problem resolution), indicating thorough self-evaluation.

Clear identification of quality and time-management challenges demonstrates honest appraisal of limitations.

Insightful discussion of ATL literacy and critical thinking reveals deep engagement with the learning process and meta-cognitive awareness.

Self-assessed grade justification is well-reasoned and shows reflective confidence in the project’s outcomes.

Reflection relies solely on self-assessment; integration of peer or mentor feedback would provide triangulation and reduce potential bias.

Evaluation matrix contains incomplete entries (e.g., ‘Improvements/Learning’ row), limiting the depth and completeness of the analysis.

Specific strategies for addressing identified challenges in future projects are not clearly outlined, reducing the forward-looking utility of the reflection.

Reflection on ATL skills would be more impactful if structured explicitly according to ATL skill descriptors, demonstrating direct links between evidence and skill categories.