IB Physics IA Grader
- Lots of students struggle to decode their Physics Internal Assessment grade and assessment.
- This is a free grading tool that breaks down the IB Physics IA rubric into plain English, so you understand exactly where your scientific investigation stands across all four 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 project 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 have these key elements ready:
- Research Question - Clear, focused, and testable physics question with defined variables
- Variables Identified - Independent, dependent, and controlled variables clearly stated with units
- Methodology - Step-by-step replicable procedure with scientific justification for each choice
- Raw Data - Sufficient data points with multiple trials and appropriate range for analysis
- Data Processing - Calculations, graphs, statistical analysis with uncertainties and error treatment
- Physics Theory - Background knowledge connecting investigation to physics concepts and principles
- Word Count Verification - Maximum 3,000 words or approximately 12 pages including tables and graphs
- Safety Considerations - Evidence of risk assessment and safety protocols followed where applicable
Rubric Breakdown
The Physics IA is assessed using four criteria, each worth 6 marks, totaling 24 marks.
Criterion A: Research Design (6 marks)
- This criterion tests how well you plan and design your physics investigation.
- It evaluates your research question, methodology, and experimental control.
| Mark Band | What it means | Evidence you must show |
|---|---|---|
| 5–6 | Excellent research design | Clear, focused question; detailed methodology; thorough control of variables; safety considerations. |
| 3–4 | Good research design | Clear question; adequate methodology; some control of variables; basic safety considerations. |
| 1–2 | Limited research design | Unclear question; incomplete methodology; poor control of variables; minimal safety considerations. |
| 0 | No research design evident | No clear question or methodology presented. |
Criterion B: Data Analysis (6 marks)
- This evaluates how well you collect, process, and interpret your physics data.
- It tests your ability to analyze patterns and handle uncertainties appropriately.
| Mark Band | What it means | Evidence you must show |
|---|---|---|
| 5–6 | Excellent data analysis | Accurate data; correct units; thorough calculations; clear graphs with error bars; detailed uncertainty analysis. |
| 3–4 | Good data analysis | Mostly accurate data; correct units; adequate calculations; clear graphs; basic uncertainty analysis. |
| 1–2 | Limited data analysis | Some accurate data; inconsistent units; incomplete calculations; unclear graphs; minimal uncertainty analysis. |
| 0 | No data analysis evident | No data processing or interpretation presented. |
Criterion C: Conclusion (6 marks)
- This assesses how well you answer your research question using your physics data.
- It evaluates your physics understanding and connection to theory.
| Mark Band | What it means | Evidence you must show |
|---|---|---|
| 5–6 | Excellent conclusion | Clear, data-supported conclusion; strong connection to physics principles; directly addresses research question. |
| 3–4 | Good conclusion | Data-supported conclusion; some connection to physics principles; addresses research question. |
| 1–2 | Limited conclusion | Conclusion with minimal data support; weak connection to physics principles; partially addresses research question. |
| 0 | No conclusion evident | No conclusion presented. |
Criterion D: Evaluation (6 marks)
- This tests your ability to critically evaluate your physics investigation.
- It assesses your identification of limitations and realistic improvements.
| Mark Band | What it means | Evidence you must show |
|---|---|---|
| 5–6 | Excellent evaluation | Thorough critique of methodology and data; clear identification of limitations; realistic improvement suggestions. |
| 3–4 | Good evaluation | Adequate critique of methodology and data; some identification of limitations; reasonable improvement suggestions. |
| 1–2 | Limited evaluation | Superficial critique; minimal identification of limitations; vague improvement suggestions. |
| 0 | No evaluation evident | No evaluation presented. |
How to Interpret Your Grade from the Tool
- The embedded grader calculates your total score out of 24 marks across all four criteria
- .Here's how to interpret your results:
- 22-24 marks (Grade 7 territory): Excellent work with sophisticated physics investigation. Minor refinements needed.
- 19-21 marks (Grade 6 range): Strong investigation with good data analysis. Focus on evaluation depth and physics theory application.
- 16-18 marks (Grade 5 level): Competent work meeting basic requirements. Strengthen data processing and uncertainty analysis.
- 13-15 marks (Grade 4 range): Adequate foundation but needs significant improvement. Review methodology detail and variable control.
- Below 13 marks: Major revision required across most criteria. Restructure approach and strengthen experimental design.
Tip
If you're between bands, focus on Criterion B (Data Analysis) and Criterion D (Evaluation) - these often offer the biggest improvement opportunities.
Grade Boundaries & Converting Your Mark
IB Physics IA grade boundaries vary by session but your IA contributes significantly to your final grade:
| IB Grade | Typical Mark Range (out of 25) | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| 7 | 22-24 | 88-100% |
| 6 | 19-21 | 76-84% |
| 5 | 16-18 | 64-72% |
| 4 | 13-15 | 52-60% |
| 3 | 10-12 | 40-48% |
| 2 | 7-9 | 28-36% |
| 1 | 0-6 | 0-24% |
Tip
- Your IA contributes 20% for both SL and HL to your final Physics grade.
- SL and HL use identical rubrics - the only difference is topic complexity, not assessment expectations.
Subject-Specific Tips
- Mechanics Investigations:
- Use motion sensors, photogates, or video analysis for accurate timing and position measurements.
- Consider air resistance, friction, and measurement precision in your uncertainty analysis.
- Electricity & Magnetism:
- Calibrate instruments before use and check for systematic errors in multimeters and power supplies.
- Include temperature effects, internal resistance, and component tolerances in your analysis.
- Waves & Oscillations:
- Use appropriate frequency ranges and ensure steady-state conditions before taking measurements.
- Consider damping effects, resonance phenomena, and environmental interference.
- Thermodynamics:
- Allow for thermal equilibrium and use proper insulation to minimize heat losses.
- Include specific heat capacity, calorimeter constants, and temperature measurement uncertainties.
- Modern Physics:
- Use statistical analysis for radioactive decay or quantum phenomena investigations.
- Consider background radiation, detector efficiency, and statistical fluctuations.
Common Mistake
And quick fixes:
- Vague research question → Make it specific with clear variables, units, and controlled conditions
- Insufficient data points → Collect minimum 5-7 data points per variable with multiple trials
- Poor variable control → Identify and control all variables except your independent variable
- Missing uncertainties → Include instrument uncertainties, error bars, and uncertainty propagation
- Weak data processing → Show sample calculations, use appropriate graphs, and include statistical analysis
- Superficial conclusion → Quantify results, reference specific data, and connect to physics theory
- Generic evaluation → Identify specific limitations and suggest realistic, detailed improvements
- Word/page count violations → Stay within 3,000 words or 12 pages including all content
- Missing safety protocols → Address electrical safety, mechanical hazards, and equipment handling
- Poor graph presentation → Include proper titles, axis labels, units, error bars, and trend lines
FAQs
- How long should my Physics IA be?
- Maximum 3,000 words or approximately 12 pages including tables, graphs, and calculations.
- Is the rubric different for SL and HL?
- No, identical rubrics are used - HL students may choose more complex topics but same assessment standards apply.
- Should I include advanced mathematics?
- Use mathematics appropriate to your level - explain any advanced concepts beyond the syllabus clearly.
- How many trials should I perform?
- Minimum 3-5 trials per data point for statistical reliability and uncertainty calculation.
- What if my results don't match theoretical values?
- Discrepancies are acceptable - focus on explaining differences using physics principles and experimental limitations.
- Can I use computer simulations?
- Real experiments preferred - simulations acceptable only if properly justified and limitations discussed.
- How detailed should my method be?
- Detailed enough for exact replication - include equipment specifications, setup diagrams, and measurement procedures.
- Should I include preliminary experiments?
- Yes, preliminary work demonstrates good experimental design and helps justify methodology choices.
- What physics topics work well for IAs?
- Simple harmonic motion, electrical circuits, optics, mechanics, and thermal physics are popular and work well.
- How important is error analysis?
- Very important - comprehensive uncertainty treatment separates excellent from average Physics IAs.
Use the Free Physics IA Grader Now
- Stop guessing about your grade.
- The comprehensive grading tool evaluates your IA against all four official criteria, giving instant feedback on strengths and improvement areas.
- Input your investigation details and get a preliminary grade calculation that helps you focus revision efforts where they matter most.
- Physics-specific analysis helps you master the experimental design and data analysis that separate excellent from average Physics IAs.
