IB Personal Project (MYP) External Assessment Exemplar

You conducted a substantive interview with the school psychologist and gathered expert insights on nutrition, adding credibility.

Your research list is comprehensive, showing initiative and breadth of sources.

Descriptions of applying creativity, collaboration and critical-thinking skills are coherent and contextualized.

Time management processes are discussed in detail, demonstrating reflection on workflow.

You explain how ATL skills like critical thinking and organization supported guide development.

Connections between interview findings and survey data are not clearly triangulated to reinforce recommendations.

Source credibility assessments are missing; it’s unclear how each research link informed specific guide sections.

Concrete examples of how creativity and collaboration improved readability or engagement are not provided.

Time-management descriptions lack quantification (e.g., hours per day) and reflection on productivity gains.

Integration of expert nutrition responses into the guide’s structure is not fully explained or evidenced.

The chapter outline is comprehensive and logically sequenced, providing a solid backbone for the guide.

The product goal is clearly defined in terms of content and intended audience, demonstrating strong audience awareness.

The learning goal narrative is engaging and shows genuine personal interest, which will motivate sustained work.

The success criteria address key aspects of quality, demonstrating thoughtful consideration of what makes the product effective.

The target audience description is clear and shows a good understanding of user needs.

Success criteria remain largely qualitative and lack measurable thresholds or testing methods.

The project timeline and weekly plan lack specific deadlines, deliverables and task ownership, reducing accountability.

The learning goal narrative, while engaging, does not include concise, measurable indicators of success.

Introduction and chapter descriptions are not explicitly linked back to the learning goal, which may weaken overall coherence.

Audience engagement goals are not quantified (for example, expected feedback scores or engagement metrics).

Your reflection articulates growth in writing and design skills, and you reference general improvements over time.

You describe advancements in time management and note how you adjusted your schedule.

Skill-development narratives (research, critical thinking, communication) are clear and show self-awareness.

You discuss how feedback informed changes, indicating a willingness to iterate.

The concluding reflection acknowledges the importance of measuring future reader impact.

Reflections are not consistently tied back to specific success criteria or supported with concrete evidence (e.g., survey scores).

Comparisons between planned and actual timelines are not provided, limiting insight into planning improvements.

Specific examples of peer feedback or quantitative readability metrics are absent.

There is no clear plan for how you will measure the guide’s impact on readers in future iterations.

Evaluation of the final product against each success criterion is not fully developed.