IB Digital Societies IA Grader
- Lots of students struggle to decode their Digital Societies Internal Assessment grade and assessment.
- This is a free grading tool that breaks down the IB Digital Societies IA rubric into plain English, so you understand exactly where your digital inquiry project stands across all five assessment criteria.
- The embedded grader makes self-evaluation faster and more accurate than manual rubric checking, so you're never left guessing.
Note
The grader works in two modes:
- Draft Mode: Quick assessment of your work-in-progress. Input your current sections and get instant feedback on which criteria need more work before you finish writing.
- Full Mode: Complete evaluation of your finished IA. Input your final investigation details across all criteria and get a comprehensive grade breakdown with specific improvement suggestions for each section.
Quick Start Checklist
- Before using the grader, ensure you understand these key elements:
- Inquiry Focus - Clear inquiry question with connection to specific real-world example and course concepts
- Three Sources Analysis - Discussion of claims and perspectives for three sources with justification for their use
- Digital Systems Investigation - Sustained analysis and evaluation of impacts and implications for people and communities
- Project Duration - 30 hours of documented inquiry process
- Two Project Elements - Inquiry Process Document and Presentation
- Real-World Connection - Specific, relevant example connecting to digital systems and societal impact
- Course Integration - Clear links to Digital Societies concepts, content, and contexts
- Future Implications - Discussion of emerging trends and future developments
Rubric Breakdown
The IB Digital Societies IA is graded out of 24 marks
Criterion A: Inquiry Focus (3 marks)
- This criterion tests how clear and targeted your inquiry focus is in the Inquiry Process Document.
- It evaluates your inquiry question and its connection to real-world examples and course concepts.
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | No standard reached | Work does not meet basic descriptors |
| 1 | Focus includes inquiry question and partial explanation of connection to real-world example and course concepts | Focus includes inquiry question and partial explanation of connection to real-world example and course concepts |
| 2 | Focus includes inquiry question and partial explanation of connection to real-world example and course concepts | Focus includes inquiry question and partial explanation of connection to real-world example and course concepts |
| 3 | Excellent clarity and relevance | Focus includes inquiry question and thorough explanation of connection to real-world example and course concepts |
Criterion B: Claims and Perspectives (6 marks)
- This evaluates your source analysis in the Inquiry Process Document.
- It tests how well you discuss claims and perspectives for three sources and justify their usefulness.
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | No standard reached | Work does not meet basic descriptors |
| 1–2 | Limited discussion | Discussion is limited and primarily descriptive; fewer than three sources or no justification for use |
| 3–4 | Partial discussion | Partial discussion of claims and perspectives for each source with some justification but not fully developed |
| 5–6 | Thorough discussion | Thorough discussion of claims and perspectives for each source with clear justification for usefulness |
Criterion C: Analysis and Evaluation (6 marks)
- This is a major criterion - testing your analytical skills in the Presentation.
- It assesses your sustained analysis and evaluation of impacts and implications for people and communities.
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | No standard reached | Work does not meet basic descriptors |
| 1-2 | Limited analysis | Analysis is limited and primarily descriptive or of limited relevance to inquiry focus |
| 3-4 | Adequate analysis | Analysis and evaluation of impacts and implications is adequate but not always sustained or well-supported |
| 5-6 | Effective analysis | Analysis and evaluation of impacts and implications is effective, sustained, and well-supported by evidence |
Criterion D: Conclusion (6 marks)
- This evaluates your concluding insights in the Presentation.
- It tests your further insight and discussion of emerging trends and future developments.
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | No standard reached | Work does not meet basic descriptors |
| 1-2 | Limited conclusion | Conclusion is limited with little further insight; emerging trends and future developments referenced with limited discussion |
| 3-4 | Adequate conclusion | Conclusion provides adequate further insight with partial discussion of emerging trends and future developments |
| 5-6 | Effective conclusion | Conclusion provides effective and well-supported further insight with thorough discussion of emerging trends and future developments |
Criterion E: Communication (3 marks)
- This assesses presentation quality and communication effectiveness.
- It evaluates organization of ideas and coherent use of media.
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | No standard reached | Work does not meet basic descriptors |
| 1 | Limited communication | Organization and media use are limited and do not support understanding |
| 2 | Adequate communication | Presentation is adequately organized and media use is sometimes coherent but not sustained or only partially effective |
| 3 | Effective communication | Presentation is well-organized and coherently uses media to support understanding |
How to Interpret Your Grade from the Tool
- The embedded grader calculates your total score out of 24 marks across all five criteria.
- Here's how to interpret your results:
- 21-24 marks (Grade 7 territory): Excellent work with sophisticated digital inquiry. Minor refinements needed.
- 18-20 marks (Grade 6 range): Strong investigation with good digital analysis. Focus on sustained evaluation and future implications.
- 15-17 marks (Grade 5 level): Competent work meeting basic requirements. Strengthen source analysis and impact evaluation.
- 12-14 marks (Grade 4 range): Adequate foundation but needs significant improvement. Review inquiry focus and analytical depth.
- Below 12 marks (Grade 3 or lower): Major revision required across most criteria. Restructure approach and strengthen digital inquiry fundamentals.
Tip
If you're between bands, focus on Criterion C (Analysis and Evaluation) and Criterion D (Conclusion) - they offer the biggest impact for improvement.
Grade Boundaries & Converting Your Mark
IB Digital Societies IA grade boundaries are consistent but can vary slightly by session:
| IB Grade | Typical Mark Range | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| 7 | 21-24 | 88-100% |
| 6 | 18-20 | 75-83% |
| 5 | 15-17 | 50-58% |
| 4 | 12-14 | 38-46% |
| 3 | 9-11 | 42-50% |
| 2 | 6-8 | 25-33% |
| 1 | 0-5 | 0-21% |
Tip
- Your IA grade contributes 30% to your final Digital Societies grade (SL) or 20% to your final Digital Societies grade (HL).
- Your IA project takes 30 hours and includes both inquiry process and presentation components.
Subject-Specific Tips
Artificial Intelligence Focus:
- Investigate machine learning impacts, algorithmic decision-making, AI ethics, or automation effects.
- Include case studies, bias analysis, stakeholder perspectives, and regulatory considerations.
Social Media and Digital Platforms:
- Examine platform algorithms, digital behavior, online communities, or information spread.
- Use platform analysis, user studies, content examination, and social impact assessment.
Privacy and Surveillance:
- Study data protection, surveillance technologies, digital rights, or privacy trade-offs.
- Include policy analysis, case studies, stakeholder views, and technical assessments.
Digital Economy and Work:
- Analyze digital transformation, remote work, gig economy, or digital skills.
- Use economic analysis, labor studies, business cases, and social implications.
Digital Divide and Access:
- Investigate digital inequality, access barriers, infrastructure gaps, or inclusion initiatives.
- Include demographic analysis, access studies, policy evaluation, and community impact.
Emerging Technologies:
- Study blockchain, IoT, quantum computing, or augmented reality societal impacts.
- Use technology analysis, adoption studies, expert perspectives, and future scenarios.
Common Mistake
And quick fixes:
- Vague inquiry question → Create specific, focused question with clear real-world example and course connections
- Insufficient source analysis → Provide detailed discussion of claims and perspectives for all three sources
- Weak source justification → Explain specifically how each source contributes to your inquiry investigation
- Superficial impact analysis → Develop sustained evaluation of implications for people and communities
- Missing future implications → Include thorough discussion of emerging trends and potential developments
- Poor presentation organization → Structure coherent flow with clear logical progressionIneffective media use → Choose appropriate media that supports understanding rather than decoration
- Limited real-world connection → Select specific, relevant example that clearly connects to digital systems concepts
- Descriptive rather than analytical → Move beyond description to analysis, evaluation, and synthesis
- Generic conclusions → Provide specific insights based on evidence and thorough investigation
Project Structure Guide
- Inquiry Process Document: Inquiry focus section → Source analysis section → Research planning → Investigation approach
- Presentation Structure: Introduction → Analysis and evaluation → Conclusions → Future implications → Supporting media
- Source Integration: Academic perspectives → Industry viewpoints → Policy positions → User experiences → Critical evaluation
- Impact Assessment: Individual effects → Community implications → Societal changes → Ethical considerations → Future scenarios
FAQs
- What should my inquiry question focus on?
- Specific digital technology or system with clear connection to real-world example and societal implications.
- How do I choose appropriate sources?
- Select three sources with different perspectives (academic, industry, policy, user) relevant to your inquiry focus.
- What makes effective claims and perspectives analysis?
- Detailed examination of what sources argue, whose perspectives they represent, and why they're useful for your inquiry.
- How sustained should my analysis be?
- Throughout presentation with consistent evaluation of impacts and implications for people and communities.
- What counts as emerging trends?
- Current developments, future predictions, technological evolution, and potential societal changes.
- How should I organize my presentation?
- Logical flow from inquiry focus through analysis to conclusions with coherent media support.
- What media should I include?
- Charts, infographics, images, videos that directly support your analysis and conclusions.
- How specific should my real-world example be?
- Concrete case (specific company, country, system) rather than general references to digital technology.
- Can I change my inquiry focus?
- Early stages - yes, but ensure sufficient time for thorough investigation of new focus.
- What makes a Digital Societies IA exceptional?
- Targeted inquiry, sophisticated source analysis, sustained evaluation, insightful conclusions, and effective communication.
Use the Free Digital Societies IA Grader Now
- Stop guessing about your grade.
- The comprehensive grading tool evaluates your IA against all five official criteria, giving instant feedback on strengths and improvement areas.
- Input your project details and get a preliminary grade calculation that helps you focus revision efforts where they matter most.
- Digital Societies-specific analysis helps you master the inquiry process and impact evaluation that separate excellent from average Digital Societies Internal Assessments.
