Geography IA Exemplar: To what extent does the city of Płock fit… | RevisionDojo
Loading document preview...
IB Geography SL Internal Assessment Example
To what extent does the city of Płock fit into the Multiple Nuclei Model?SL
Loading scores...
6
Official IB Result
IB Grade: 6
Criteria A: Criterion A: Fieldwork Question and Geographic Context
3/3
0
2
3
Criteria StrandsPro
A.1Fieldwork question formulation and relevance
Excellent
A.2Geographic context and location specificity
Excellent
A.3Mapping and spatial representation
Excellent
Criteria Feedback
The student's investigation question is clearly geographical and strongly linked to the Multiple Nuclei Model, which gives the whole report a focused theoretical direction.
The student identifies Płock precisely and supports the study with locational maps that make the fieldwork area easy to understand.
The spatial context is specific enough to make primary data collection feasible and to show why the chosen sites are relevant.
Some wording could be more precise so that the hypothesis reflects nuclei formation more accurately rather than implying separate CBDs too quickly.
The map presentation is clear overall, but source information is missing and one or two maps are visually crowded.
The theory-to-method link in the aim and context could be made more explicit.
Criteria B: Criterion B: Methods of Investigation
2/3
0
2
3
Criteria StrandsPro
B.1Method description and relevance
Good
B.2Data collection techniques and implementation
Good
Criteria Feedback
The student uses several relevant methods, including land-use surveys, counts, transport observations, and building-height observations, and these match the aim of investigating urban nuclei.
The student shows awareness that repetition improves reliability by collecting repeated counts across multiple days.
The student defines some measurements clearly enough to make them repeatable, such as the observation radius for certain observations.
The methods are relevant, but the procedural detail is not complete enough to show exactly how sampling and recording were standardized.
Some collection conditions were inconsistent across sites and times, which reduces confidence in the comparability of the data.
The explanation of how different site groups and survey responses were combined is not fully clear.
Criteria C: Criterion C: Quality and Treatment of Information
4/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
C.1Data relevance and sufficiency
Good
C.2Presentation techniques
Good
C.3Convention adherence
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: Criterion D: Written Analysis
6/8
0
4
8
Criteria StrandsPro
D.1Analytical techniques
Moderate
D.2Data interpretation and linking
Good
D.3Completeness of analysis
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.
Criteria E: Criterion E: Conclusion
2/2
0
1
2
Criteria StrandsPro
E.1Conclusion quality and support
Excellent
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: Criterion F: Evaluation
2/3
0
2
3
Criteria StrandsPro
F.1Evaluation depth and relevance
Good
F.2Improvement suggestions
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.