Environmental systems and societies (ESS) - Old IA Exemplar: Kachok… | RevisionDojo

Loading document preview...

IB Environmental systems and societies (ESS) - Old SL Internal Assessment Example

How does the presence of solid waste disposal sites in the Kachok area of Kisumu City, Kenya, affect human health as measured by the increase in the prevalence of respiratory disorders (asthma and pneumonia) among the residents from 2014 - 2024?SL

Official IB Result

IB Grade: 7

Criteria A: Identifying the Context (CXT)

6/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Research question formulation

Excellent

A.2Environmental issue context

Excellent

A.3Connection between issue and research

Excellent

Criteria Feedback

Research question is precise, coherent and fully focused, explicitly naming both independent and dependent variables.
Introduction provides robust scientific context, defining key pollutants (methane, CO₂, PM2.5) with WHO references.
Map and photograph give clear geographic and visual context for the landfill site.
Detailed narrative explains the relationship between waste emissions and respiratory illness, supported by statistics and tables.

Minor stylistic verbosity in the research question statement.
Some causality claims are slightly overstated given the observational design.

Criteria B: Planning (PLA)

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Method design

Moderate

B.2Sampling strategy

Moderate

B.3Risk and ethical considerations

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

Procedure is laid out step-by-step with sources and analytical tool (Pearson in Excel), making the method repeatable.
Stratified sampling by age, gender and distance zones is clearly described and linked to research objectives.
Basic risk and ethical considerations are outlined, covering protective gear, consent and data protection.
Variable table is well structured, identifying independent and dependent variables.

No direct air-quality measurements taken, limiting data sufficiency.
Sample size (n=25) is small; statistical power and representativeness are not fully addressed.
Rationale for strata sizes lacks formal justification (no statistical or logistical reasoning).
Risk assessment omits a formal severity/likelihood matrix and discussion of vulnerable groups.

Criteria C: Results, Analysis and Conclusion (RAC)

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Data presentation

Moderate

C.2Data analysis

Moderate

C.3Conclusion drawing

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Criteria D: Discussion and Evaluation (DEV)

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

D.1Conclusion evaluation

Moderate

D.2Method evaluation

Moderate

D.3Improvements and extensions

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Criteria E: Applications (APP)

3/3

Criteria StrandsPro

E.1Application proposal

Good

E.2Solution evaluation

Poor

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Criteria F: Communication (COM)

3/3

Criteria StrandsPro

F.1Structure and organization

Good

F.2Terminology and concision

Good

F.3Logic and coherence

Good

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Loading scores...

Official IB Result

IB Grade: 7

Criteria A: Identifying the Context (CXT)

6/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Research question formulation

Excellent

A.2Environmental issue context

Excellent

A.3Connection between issue and research

Excellent

Criteria Feedback

Research question is precise, coherent and fully focused, explicitly naming both independent and dependent variables.
Introduction provides robust scientific context, defining key pollutants (methane, CO₂, PM2.5) with WHO references.
Map and photograph give clear geographic and visual context for the landfill site.
Detailed narrative explains the relationship between waste emissions and respiratory illness, supported by statistics and tables.

Minor stylistic verbosity in the research question statement.
Some causality claims are slightly overstated given the observational design.

Criteria B: Planning (PLA)

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Method design

Moderate

B.2Sampling strategy

Moderate

B.3Risk and ethical considerations

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

Procedure is laid out step-by-step with sources and analytical tool (Pearson in Excel), making the method repeatable.
Stratified sampling by age, gender and distance zones is clearly described and linked to research objectives.
Basic risk and ethical considerations are outlined, covering protective gear, consent and data protection.
Variable table is well structured, identifying independent and dependent variables.

No direct air-quality measurements taken, limiting data sufficiency.
Sample size (n=25) is small; statistical power and representativeness are not fully addressed.
Rationale for strata sizes lacks formal justification (no statistical or logistical reasoning).
Risk assessment omits a formal severity/likelihood matrix and discussion of vulnerable groups.

Criteria C: Results, Analysis and Conclusion (RAC)

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Data presentation

Moderate

C.2Data analysis

Moderate

C.3Conclusion drawing

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Criteria D: Discussion and Evaluation (DEV)

4/6

Criteria StrandsPro

D.1Conclusion evaluation

Moderate

D.2Method evaluation

Moderate

D.3Improvements and extensions

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Criteria E: Applications (APP)

3/3

Criteria StrandsPro

E.1Application proposal

Good

E.2Solution evaluation

Poor

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Criteria F: Communication (COM)

3/3

Criteria StrandsPro

F.1Structure and organization

Good

F.2Terminology and concision

Good

F.3Logic and coherence

Good

Criteria Feedback

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.