IB Sports Exercise and Health Science (SEHS) IA Grader
- Lots of students struggle to decode their SEHS Internal Assessment grade and assessment.
- This is a free grading tool that breaks down the SEHS 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.
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 SEHS question related to sports, exercise, or health science
- SEHS Connection - Must relate to anatomy, physiology, biomechanics, psychology, or nutrition content
- Methodology - Step-by-step replicable procedure with scientific justification and safety considerations
- Data Collection - Sufficient data with multiple participants or trials and appropriate measurement techniques
- Data Analysis - Statistical analysis, graphs, calculations with uncertainties and pattern identification
- SEHS Theory - Background knowledge connecting investigation to sports science principles and concepts
- Word Count Verification - Maximum word limit as specified by your school (typically 2,500-3,000 words)
- Ethical Considerations - Evidence of ethical approval and participant safety protocols where applicable
Rubric Breakdown
The SEHS IA is assessed using five criteria, totaling 24 marks:
Criterion A: Personal Engagement (2 marks)
- This criterion tests your personal interest and individual approach to the investigation.
- It evaluates your initiative, creativity, and personal connection to the research.
| Mark Band | What it means | Evidence you must show |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | No evidence of personal engagement. | None. |
| 1 | Limited personal engagement. | Minimal independent thinking or initiative. |
| 2 | Clear personal engagement. | Significant independent thinking and creativity. |
Criterion B: Exploration (6 marks)
- This evaluates your research question formulation and background investigation.
- It tests your methodology design and connection to SEHS theory.
| Mark Band | What it means | Evidence you must show |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | No exploration | No clear research question or relevant background |
| 1-2 | Limited exploration | Basic research question with minimal SEHS background |
| 3-4 | Adequate exploration | Clear research question with appropriate SEHS theory and methodology |
| 5-6 | Excellent exploration | Sophisticated research question with comprehensive SEHS background and detailed methodology |
Criterion C: Analysis (6 marks)
- This assesses your data processing, statistical analysis, and pattern identification.
- It evaluates your mathematical treatment and scientific interpretation of results.
| Mark Band | What it means | Evidence you must show |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | No analysis | No data processing or inappropriate presentation |
| 1-2 | Limited analysis | Basic data processing with minimal statistical treatment |
| 3-4 | Adequate analysis | Clear data processing with appropriate statistical analysis and some pattern identification |
| 5-6 | Excellent analysis | Sophisticated statistical analysis with detailed interpretation and comprehensive pattern analysis |
Criterion D: Evaluation (6 marks)
- This tests your critical evaluation of methodology and identification of limitations.
- It assesses your suggestions for improvement and reliability assessment.
| Mark Band | What it means | Evidence you must show |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | No evaluation | No evaluation of methodology or results |
| 1-2 | Limited evaluation | Basic identification of some limitations |
| 3-4 | Adequate evaluation | Clear evaluation with some realistic improvements suggested |
| 5-6 | Excellent evaluation | Comprehensive evaluation with detailed limitations analysis and sophisticated improvements |
Criterion E: Communication (4 marks)
- This evaluates your scientific communication and presentation quality.
- It tests your structure, clarity, and use of scientific terminology.
| Mark Band | What it means | Evidence you must show |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | No communication | Unclear structure, poor presentation |
| 1-2 | Limited communication | Basic structure with some clarity issues |
| 3-4 | Good communication | Clear structure, appropriate scientific terminology, professional presentation |
How to Interpret Your Grade from the Tool
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:
- 22-24 marks (Grade 7 territory): Excellent work with sophisticated SEHS investigation. Minor refinements needed.
- 19-21 marks (Grade 6 range): Strong investigation with good analysis. Focus on evaluation depth and SEHS theory application.
- 16-18 marks (Grade 5 level): Competent work meeting basic requirements. Strengthen statistical analysis and methodology.
- 13-15 marks (Grade 4 range): Adequate foundation but needs significant improvement. Review research design and SEHS connections.
- Below 13 marks: Major revision required across most criteria. Restructure approach and strengthen scientific methodology.
If you're between bands, focus on Criterion C (Analysis) and Criterion D (Evaluation) - these often offer the biggest improvement opportunities.
Grade Boundaries & Converting Your Mark
IB SEHS IA grade boundaries vary by session but your IA contributes significantly to your final grade:
| IB Grade | Typical Mark Range | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| 7 | 22-24 | 91-100% |
| 6 | 19-21 | 79-88% |
| 5 | 16-18 | 66-75% |
| 4 | 13-15 | 54-63% |
| 3 | 10-12 | 42-50% |
| 2 | 7-9 | 29-38% |
| 1 | 0-6 | 0-25% |
- Your IA contributes 20% to your final SEHS grade
- A strong IA can significantly boost your overall grade, especially if you're borderline between grade bands.
Subject-Specific Tips
- Exercise Physiology:
- Investigate heart rate responses, VO₂ max testing, lactate thresholds, or training adaptations.
- Use appropriate physiological measurements and connect to cardiovascular or respiratory theory.
- Biomechanics:
- Analyze movement patterns, force production, technique efficiency, or injury prevention.
- Include kinematic or kinetic analysis with video analysis or force measurement tools.
- Sports Psychology:
- Examine motivation, anxiety, concentration, or team dynamics effects on performance.
- Use validated psychological scales and appropriate statistical analysis for behavioral data.
- Nutrition:
- Study dietary interventions, hydration effects, supplement impacts, or energy metabolism.
- Include biochemical markers, performance measures, and nutritional analysis.
- Training Science:
- Investigate training methods, recovery strategies, periodization effects, or adaptation responses.
- Use training load monitoring and performance testing with longitudinal designs.
And quick fixes:
- Vague research question → Make it specific with clear variables, population, and measurable outcome
- Insufficient participants → Use minimum 10-15 participants for statistical validity in human studies
- Poor SEHS theory connection → Link findings to anatomical, physiological, or biomechanical principles
- Weak statistical analysis → Use appropriate tests (t-tests, ANOVA, correlation) with effect sizes
- Missing ethical considerations → Address informed consent, participant safety, and data confidentiality
- Superficial evaluation → Identify specific limitations and suggest realistic, detailed improvements
- Poor methodology description → Include equipment specifications, protocols, and standardization procedures
- Inadequate data presentation → Use appropriate graphs with error bars, statistical significance, and clear labels
- Missing personal engagement → Show individual initiative, creative approaches, and personal interest
- Word count violations → Stay within specified limits - typically 2,500-3,000 words
FAQs
- How long should my SEHS IA be?
- Typically 2,500-3,000 words maximum - check with your teacher for specific requirements.
- Do I need ethical approval for human subjects?
- Yes, ethical approval required for human participants - obtain informed consent and ensure safety protocols.
- Can I use existing data or studies?
- Primary data collection preferred - secondary analysis acceptable if properly justified and analyzed.
- What statistical tests should I use?
- Depends on data type and research design - common tests include t-tests, ANOVA, correlation, chi-square.
- Can I collaborate with other students?
- Limited collaboration allowed for data collection but each student must have unique research question and individual analysis.
- How detailed should my methodology be?
- Detailed enough for exact replication - include equipment, protocols, participant instructions, and measurements.
- What SEHS topics work well for IAs?
- Exercise physiology, biomechanics, sports psychology, nutrition, and training science investigations work well.
- How important is the theoretical background?
- Very important - connect your investigation to SEHS principles from anatomy, physiology, biomechanics, or psychology.
- Should I include personal reflection?
- Yes, personal engagement is assessed - show your individual interest and creative approach to the investigation.
Use the Free SEHS 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 investigation details and get a preliminary grade calculation that helps you focus revision efforts where they matter most.
- SEHS-specific analysis helps you master the sports science methodology and data analysis that separate excellent from average SEHS IAs.
