This site uses cookie tracking technologies. Learn more in our Cookie Policy.
Loading document preview...
IB History HL Internal Assessment Exemplar: How did the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact shape the early stages of World War II and the relationship between Germany and the Soviet Union?
How did the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact shape the early stages of World War II and the relationship between Germany and the Soviet Union?
Loading scores...
6
Official IB Result
16/25
Was this exemplar helpful?
Want a report just like this?
Free mini report for your own coursework
Fast feedback on what to improve next
Annotated highlights on your writing
General feedback
16/25
0
13
25
4.1·Suggestion
Page 1• Click to view
Consider refining the title to be more concise and reflective of the conceptual lens (e.g., “Consequential Impacts of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact”).
4.2·Suggestion
Page 8• Click to view
Reference entries are inconsistent in format (missing access dates, mixed punctuation); adopt a single citation style (APA/Chicago) throughout.
Criteria A: Identification and evaluation of sources
4/6
0
3
6
Criteria Strands
Excellent
Research question formulation
Moderate
Source selection and relevance
Moderate
Source analysis and evaluation
Criteria Feedback
Research question is clearly stated, focused, and aligned with the investigation
Identification of two appropriate sources (primary and secondary) that directly address the research question
Explanations of source relevance are brief and largely descriptive rather than analytical
Evaluation of value and limitations lacks depth, specific examples, and contextual support
1.1·Strength
Page 1• Click to view
The research question is clearly stated, focused and directly aligns with the investigation’s scope, providing a strong foundation for the analysis.
1.2·Weakness
Page 3• Click to view
Value and limitation claims for Source A are asserted without specific examples; support each point with direct references to passages or context.
1.3·Suggestion
Page 3• Click to view
Consider consulting additional primary evidence (e.g., diplomatic cables or newspapers) to complement the Secret Protocols and enrich source selection.
1.4·Weakness
Page 3• Click to view
Relevance of the key sources is stated but remains descriptive; expand on how each source’s unique perspective deepens understanding of the Pact’s consequences.
1.5·Suggestion
Page 3• Click to view
Grouping origin, purpose and content in one paragraph makes the evaluation hard to follow; consider separating these for greater clarity.
1.6·Strength
Page 4• Click to view
The evaluation of Source B effectively notes its limitations (1986 publication date) but could deepen by citing specific historiographical gaps post-1986 discoveries.
Criteria B: Investigation
9/15
0
8
15
Criteria Strands
Moderate
Organization and clarity
Moderate
Critical analysis and evidence use
Poor
Perspective evaluation and conclusion
Criteria Feedback
Generally clear and well‐organised structure with clearly labelled sections
Some critical analysis beyond description, including motives of leaders and economic clauses
Demonstrates awareness of different interpretations and integrates a range of evidence
Analysis often reverts to narrative, with evidence only partially integrated into argument
Occasional repetition and awkward phrasing slightly reduce coherence
Evaluation of perspectives lacks depth and a fully reasoned judgment
2.1·Suggestion
Page 1• Click to view
The term “early stages” in the research question would benefit from a precise timeframe (e.g., specific months of 1939–1940) to sharpen the focus of the inquiry.
2.2·Suggestion
Page 3• Click to view
The opening reference to the historical concept of “consequence” is promising; briefly define how you will apply this concept in your analysis.
2.3·Strength
Page 4• Click to view
The clear contrast between fascism and communism provides strong contextual grounding for the Pact’s shock value.
2.4·Suggestion
Page 4• Click to view
Revise the sentence on lebensraum for clarity and include a citation for Hitler’s official statements to strengthen your point.
2.5·Weakness
Page 4• Click to view
Much of the narrative on ideological motives remains unsupported; integrate more primary evidence or historian quotations to substantiate these claims.
2.6·Suggestion
Page 4• Click to view
An explicit thesis statement at the start of Section 2 would help orient the reader to your central argument.
2.7·Strength
Page 5• Click to view
The detailed mapping of territorial divisions in the protocol demonstrates strong use of primary content to support argumentation.
2.8·Suggestion
Page 5• Click to view
Include engagement with historiographical debate on why the Soviet Union invaded eastern Poland to demonstrate critical evaluation of differing perspectives.
2.9·Weakness
Page 5• Click to view
The narrative in the opening investigation paragraph relies heavily on secondary accounts; integrate direct excerpts from primary documents to enrich analysis.
2.10·Strength
Page 5• Click to view
The paragraph on Germany’s invasion is highly effective, citing a specific date and Snyder (2011) to anchor the reader in a concrete event.
2.11·Strength
Page 6• Click to view
Good integration of economic cooperation details (oil, grain, technology) adds depth to understanding the Pact’s practical impact.
2.12·Suggestion
Page 6• Click to view
Analysis sections occasionally drift from the research question; insert explicit linking sentences to maintain clear focus on your central inquiry.
2.13·Weakness
Page 6• Click to view
The analysis of long-term German-Soviet cooperation lacks critical evaluation of why it ultimately failed; deepen by assessing trust and ideological divergence.
Criteria C: Reflection
3/4
0
2
4
Criteria Strands
Good
Methods reflection
Good
Historical challenges awareness
Good
Connection to investigation
Criteria Feedback
Clear discussion of what the investigation revealed about historical methods
Demonstrates solid awareness of methodological challenges (e.g., source secrecy, bias)
Explicitly links reflective observations back to the sources and the investigation’s focus
Reflection is competent but does not develop insights in depth
Some suggestions (terminology correction, concluding linkage) remain unaddressed in the text
3.1·Strength
Page 7• Click to view
The reflection clearly outlines key challenges of working with 1930s–40s sources, demonstrating solid awareness of methodological limitations.
3.2·Suggestion
Page 7• Click to view
“Liability” seems incorrect in context; replace with “reliability” to accurately describe source evaluation.
3.3·Suggestion
Page 7• Click to view
The final sentence on historians’ methods ends abruptly; complete the thought and link it explicitly back to your investigation findings.
3.4·Strength
Page 8• Click to view
The reflection’s emphasis on cross-language skills and archival research demonstrates a nuanced understanding of historians’ practical methods.
History IA Exemplar: Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and Early WWII | RevisionDojo
