IB Personal Project (MYP) External Assessment Exemplar

SWOT analysis shows effective self-management strategies, including use of time-management tools and motivational approaches.

CRAAP analysis of the Google UX Design certificate provides a rigorous evaluation of source credibility and relevance.

High-fidelity UI screens exhibit strong application of UX principles with clear layout, intuitive navigation, and consistent branding.

Discussion of thinking skills links prior psychology knowledge to design techniques, illustrating synthesis of learning into innovative solutions.

Detailed primary data collection form and accompanying survey results chart demonstrate robust research and data-analysis skills informing design decisions.

SWOT diagram would benefit from a specific example annotation (for instance, a timestamped screenshot) to illustrate how a weakness was converted into a strength.

Expert feedback table lacks explicit statements of how each suggestion was implemented; linking feedback directly to concrete design changes would strengthen evidence of iterative improvement.

Global-context diagram clearly links the prototype to Scientific and Technical Innovation and other relevant contexts, demonstrating sophisticated understanding of design relevance.

Narrative conveys strong personal interest and motivation for the project, showing genuine investment in the learning goal.

Plan lacks sequencing of tasks, allocation of resources, and deadlines, making the pathway to the prototype unclear.

Success criteria are not detailed or measurable, preventing effective evaluation of the prototype’s performance.

Timeline header is present without a supporting chart or schedule, undermining evidence of detailed planning.

Learning goal is embedded in background rather than stated concisely and measurably.

Product description does not directly reference or integrate specific success criteria to tighten the focus of feature implementation.

Post-project SWOT and self-reflection table demonstrate thorough consideration of personal development and learning strategies.

Detailed evaluation of the product against success criteria shows rigor in testing methods, with clear identification of strengths and limitations.

Impact narrative lacks systematic linkage of prototype performance to each success criterion through data such as user ratings or task completion metrics.

Reflection on community-screen features needs user engagement metrics or qualitative feedback to assess how well features met goals.

Self-reflection table identifies areas to improve but does not tie each action to a concrete future plan or timeline.