IB Digital Society Inquiry Project (IA) Examiner's Checklist for Assessing: Comprehensive DS IA Guide for Assessment & Evaluation (2025 updated guide)
- lukewatsonteach
- Aug 21
- 15 min read
Updated: Oct 30
INTRODUCTION
This Comprehensive Assessment Guide is your complete resource for achieving excellence in the Digital Society Inquiry Project. Designed for in-depth self-assessment, teacher marking, and AI-assisted evaluation, this guide provides detailed criteria, explanations, and quality benchmarks for every aspect of your project.
This guide has been crafted based on assessed past student work, and official assessment criteria. It serves as both a roadmap during project creation and a thorough evaluation tool to ensure you meet the highest standards.
What Does Grade 7 Excellence Look Like?
To achieve a Grade 7 in Digital Society, you must demonstrate:
Conceptual Awareness: Show deep insight and understanding of Digital Society concepts, content, and contexts
Critical Thinking: Provide well-structured, logical arguments supported by evidence
Precise Use of Terminology: Use Digital Society-specific language accurately throughout
Depth of Analysis: Analyse and evaluate evidence while considering alternative perspectives
Reflection: Show evidence of reflective thinking and critical self-assessment
Need a Quick Reference?
This comprehensive guide is detailed and thorough. If you need a rapid checklist for quick gap-checking or final submission review, visit:
HOW TO USE THIS CHECKLIST
For Students (Self-Assessment):
Read each criterion section carefully
Check off items as you complete them
Aim for all "Excellence Indicators" to achieve top marks
Use for ongoing self-evaluation throughout your project
For Teachers:
Progress Monitoring: Use "Student Self-Check" questions for formative assessment conversations
Marking: Focus on "Excellence Indicators" to identify top-tier work vs. adequate performance
Feedback: Reference specific "Red Flag Warnings" when students need redirection
For AI Assessment:
This checklist provides detailed criteria for evaluating student work. Upload this checklist + your work to AI tools (Claude, ChatGPT) for feedback:
Example Prompts:
"Please assess my Criterion A work against the checklist and identify areas for improvement"
"Review my sources for Criterion B - do they meet the excellence indicators?"
"Evaluate my analysis in Criterion C - is it sustained and well-supported?"
"Based on this checklist, what grade would this work likely receive and why?"
"What are the top 3 things I should focus on to move from Grade 6 to Grade 7?"
Best Practices:
Upload one criterion at a time for focused feedback
Ask follow-up questions about unclear suggestions
Use AI feedback alongside teacher guidance, not as a replacement, but as a tutor
Cross-reference AI suggestions with IB requirements and teacher suggestions
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY FLEXIBILITY
Digital Society inquiries span diverse topics requiring different approaches. This checklist accommodates multiple research methodologies:
✓ User-focused studies (surveys, interviews, observations)
✓ System analysis (testing, performance evaluation, security audits)
✓ Policy/governance research (case studies, comparative analysis)
✓ Cultural/social impact (ethnography, content analysis)
✓ Technical investigations (code analysis, algorithm evaluation)
✓ Design thinking (prototyping, user testing)
KEY PRINCIPLE: Your methodology should:
1. Match your specific inquiry question
2. Generate original insights
3. Be clearly explained and justified
4. Meet ethical standards
5. Provide evidence for analysis
If your research approach differs from examples given, ensure you clearly justify why it's appropriate for your inquiry focus.
GRADE 7 STANDARD TEST
The Ultimate Question: "Would a professional in the field (academic researcher, industry expert, policy maker) consider this research credible, rigorous, and insightful?
If YES → You're on track for Grade 7
If NO → Review the gaps and strengthen your work
CRITERION A: INQUIRY FOCUS (3 marks)
Project element: Inquiry process document (~300 words)
OFFICIAL IB DP DIGITAL SOCIETY MARK BANDS for CRITERION A:
0: The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1: The focus is limited and/or incomplete. The focus does not include all required elements and/or the real-world examples are not specific or relevant.
2: The focus is adequate. The focus includes an inquiry question and a partial explanation of its connection to specific, relevant real-world examples.
3: The focus is appropriate and targeted. The focus includes an inquiry question and a thorough explanation of its connection to a specific, relevant real-world examples.
Inquiry Question Quality: Does the question:
Use appropriate command terms ("To what extent...", "How does...", "Why do...")?
Focus on a specific digital technology/system (not "technology in general")?
Target a specific context (education, healthcare, business, etc.)?
Encourage analytical thinking beyond description?
Allow for multiple perspectives and evidence-based analysis?
Avoid simple yes/no answers?
Enable meaningful, in-depth research?
Move beyond simple description to analysis?
Real-World Example: Is the example:
Specific and concrete with named organizations/systems?
Published within the last 4 years? [If NO: Is your inquiry specifically about historical evolution, long-term change, or foundational systems? Have you justified why older examples are necessary?]
Current and actively in use today (not discontinued or obsolete)?
Clearly relevant to the inquiry question?
Well-defined with specific details and data?
Properly cited with complete source information?
Substantial (more than just a brief mention)?
Involving specific digital systems rather than general technology?
Suitable for detailed analysis and evaluation?
3Cs Connections: Has the student:
Referenced specific concept numbers from the guide (e.g., "Change 2.1")?
Referenced specific content areas with numbers (e.g., "AI-3.6.E")?
Referenced specific context numbers (e.g., "Human Knowledge-4.5A")?
Used Digital Society terminology accurately throughout?
Explained clearly how the inquiry connects to each of the 3Cs?
Demonstrated deep conceptual understanding?
Applied appropriate Digital Society frameworks?
Connected to broader societal implications?
Technical Requirements: Has the student:
Cited all sources properly with complete information?
Used precise Digital Society vocabulary consistently?
Followed proper formatting guidelines?
Met word count requirements (~300 words)?
Included all required sections clearly?
Structured the document with clear organisation?
Maintained academic tone throughout?
How to Get a 3 for Criterion A?
✅ Name SPECIFIC systems with concrete details (not "apps" but "Instagram's algorithm affecting 2B users")
✅ Include DATA and statistics in your real-world example (e.g., "CDC reported 25.5% anxiety disorder rates")
✅ Name specific organizations (TikTok, NHS, Apple Watch Series 5 - not "social media" or "wearables")
✅ NARROW your focus (e.g., "mental health in adolescents" not just "health")
✅ Reference 3Cs with NUMBERS from guide (e.g., "Change 2.1, AI-3.6.E, Health-4.2B")
✅ Explain HOW it connects to each 3C in 1-2 sentences (not just that it connects)
✅ Aim for ~300 words (not 245, not 350)
✅ Support broad statements with sources and data (avoid vague claims)
Excellence Indicators: To achieve highest marks (Mark 3), ensure:
Deep conceptual awareness demonstrated throughout
Critical thinking evident in question formulation
Precise terminology used accurately
Clear analytical focus established
Evidence of reflection in connections made
Strong logical structure in explanation
Well-supported arguments for relevance
CRITERION B: CLAIMS AND PERSPECTIVES (6 marks)
Project element: Inquiry process document (~1200 words total)
OFFICIAL IB DP DIGITAL SOCIETY MARK BANDS for CRITERION B:
0: The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1-2: The discussion of claims and perspectives is limited and primarily descriptive in nature. Fewer than three sources are discussed or there is no justification for their use in the inquiry.
3-4: There is a partial discussion of the claims and perspectives for each source that includes some justification for their usefulness in the inquiry, but this is not fully developed.
5-6: There is a thorough discussion of the claims and perspectives for each source that includes a clear justification for their usefulness in the inquiry.
CRITERION B CHECKLIST
Source Quality: Are your sources:
From credible, authoritative sources matching your inquiry focus:
AI/Emerging Tech → Academic journals, tech company research papers
Social Media/Apps → Industry reports, peer-reviewed studies, app analytics
Cybersecurity/Systems → Technical documentation, security audits, IEEE papers
Digital Policy/Ethics → Government reports, legal documents, policy research
User Behaviour/Education → Educational research journals, UX studies, survey data
At least ONE academic/peer-reviewed source + variety of source types? (Mix scholarly research with real-world evidence like industry reports, technical docs, or credible journalism)
Published within the last 4 years?
Credible and authoritative?
Representing different perspectives on your topic?
Directly relevant to your inquiry question?
Three distinct sources?
QUICK CHECK: Do your sources match your question?
✓ YES: Studying TikTok's algorithm → Using TikTok technical docs + academic studies
✗ NO: Studying TikTok's algorithm → Using only news articles about TikTok
Rule: Pick sources that EXPERTS in your field would actually use.
OPVL Analysis: For each source, have you identified:
Origin: Author credentials and expertise clearly stated?
Origin: Publication date and geographic/cultural context?
Origin: Publisher reputation and credibility assessed?
Purpose: Intended audience identified?
Purpose: Research objectives and potential biases noted?
Purpose: Funding sources considered (if relevant)?
Value: Specific data/statistics that support your inquiry?
Value: Unique perspectives or insights offered?
Value: Methodological strengths highlighted?
Limitations: Sample size or scope restrictions noted?
Limitations: Potential biases or conflicts identified?
Limitations: Methodological weaknesses acknowledged?
Claims and Perspectives Analysis: For EACH source, have you:
Identified 2-3 main claims and evaluated the evidence supporting them?
Assessed reliability, biases, and alternative viewpoints?
Connected claims directly to your specific research question?
Compared and synthesized perspectives across all three sources?
Explained WHY each source is specifically useful for your inquiry? (How do they complement or contradict each other?)
Justification of Source Use: Have you explained:
Why each source is specifically relevant to your inquiry?
How each source contributes to understanding your question?
The relationship between your three sources?
The strengths each source brings to your research?
How sources complement or contradict each other?
The overall value of your source selection?
How sources support your analytical approach?
THE MAGIC PHRASE - USE IT FOR EVERY SOURCE:
"This source is useful to the inquiry because..."
Examples :
"This source is useful to the inquiry because it provides practical guidelines to individuals if they hope to minimize the overall damage through social media. This means the recommendations bring in a practical method of how to minimize harm."
"This source is interesting as it shows the perspective of researchers studying the impact... It provides a deeper and more balanced look that allows more reliable conclusions to be drawn than news articles on the topic."
Technical Requirements: Have you:
Used proper bibliographic format for all sources?
Included complete citation information (author, title, date, etc.)?
Provided DOI numbers for academic sources?
Used consistent citation format throughout?
Maintained academic tone in analysis?
Structured analysis clearly for each source?
Met word count requirements (~1200 words total)?
How To Get a 6 for Criterion B?
✅ Use 3 sources MAXIMUM
✅ Write "This source is useful to my inquiry because..." for EVERY source
✅ QUESTION each source (methodology? funding? bias? limitations?)
✅ Mix source types: 1 academic + 1 industry/technical + 1 credible journalism
✅ Stay UNDER 1200 words total (excess content gets disregarded)
✅ Complete OPVL for each source (Origin, Purpose, Value, Limitations)
✅ Connect sources to EACH OTHER (complement? contradict? synthesise?)
✅ Ensure all sources published within last 4 years
Excellence Indicators: To achieve highest marks (5-6), ensure:
Balanced representation of different perspectives
Critical evaluation beyond simple description
Clear justification of source selection strategy
Deep synthesis connecting sources to inquiry
Thorough analysis of methodology and limitations
Strong links between sources and inquiry focus
Evidence of sophisticated source evaluation skills
CRITERION C: ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION (6 marks)
Project element: Presentation
OFFICIAL IB DP DIGITAL SOCIETY MARK BANDS for CRITERION C
0: The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1-2: There is limited analysis and evaluation which is primarily descriptive in nature or of limited relevance to the inquiry focus
3-4: The student's analysis and evaluation of impacts and implications for people and communities is adequate, but this is not always sustained or well-supported
5-6: The student's analysis and evaluation of impacts and implications for people and communities is effective, sustained and well-supported by evidence
CRITERION C CHECKLIST
Primary Research Component: Choose methodology appropriate to your inquiry:
QUANTITATIVE APPROACHES:
Survey: 50+ respondents minimum (100+ for excellence)
Data analysis: Statistical analysis of existing datasets
System testing: Performance metrics, A/B testing results
Analytics review: User behaviour data, engagement metrics
QUALITATIVE APPROACHES:
Interviews: 2-3 relevant stakeholders with diverse perspectives
Focus groups: Structured group discussions
Case study: In-depth analysis of specific implementation
Observational study: Systematic observation with documentation
MIXED METHODS:
Combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches
Triangulation of multiple data sources
KEY REQUIREMENTS (regardless of method):
Methodology clearly explained and justified?
Questions/protocols directly connected to inquiry focus?
Data collection provides new, original insights?
Sample/scope appropriate for research type?
Ethical research practices throughout?
Demographic/contextual information provided?
Methodology Selection Guide: Does your methodology match your question?
User behaviour/attitudes → Surveys + interviews
System effectiveness → Testing + performance data
Policy impact → Case studies + stakeholder interviews
Cultural change → Observational + interviews
Technical analysis → System testing + expert interviews
Data Presentation: Have you included:
For QUANTITATIVE data:
Charts, graphs, or infographics showing patterns/trends
Statistical analysis with percentages, numbers, significance
Clear data visualisation with appropriate chart types
Comparative analysis showing relationships
For QUALITATIVE data:
Direct quotes with context and attribution
Thematic analysis showing patterns
Visual synthesis (concept maps, journey maps, frameworks)
Coded excerpts supporting key findings
For ALL research types:
Professional-quality visualisation
Clear labelling and captions
Source attribution for all data
Supporting materials in appendices (transcripts, raw data, etc.)
Analysis Framework: Does your analysis:
Follow the "sandwich method" (Academic → Primary → Analysis)?
Move beyond description to evaluation?
Address both positive and negative impacts?
Consider multiple stakeholder perspectives?
Evaluate implications for people and communities?
Support every claim with specific evidence?
Demonstrate sustained analytical depth?
Connect findings to broader Digital Society themes?
Impact Assessment: Have you analysed:
Individual Impact: How users are specifically affected?
Demographic Differences: Varying impacts on different groups?
Behavioural Changes: What people do differently?
Skills Impact: Abilities gained or lost?
Social Dynamics: How relationships change?
Power Structures: Who gains/loses influence?
Economic Effects: Financial implications?
Cultural Shifts: Changes in values, norms, practices?
Evidence Integration: Have you:
Used multiple source types together effectively?
Provided specific statistics rather than vague statements?
Included concrete real-world examples?
Referenced expert opinions with proper attribution?
Synthesised primary and secondary research?
Addressed complexity and nuance in findings?
Recognised limitations in your analysis?
Addressed complexity and nuance in findings?
Problem & Solution Identification:
Identified specific challenges/problems with evidence of root causes?
Proposed WHAT each stakeholder group should do (students/educators/institutions/developers)?
Explained WHY these solutions address the problems (evidence-based justification)?
Technical Requirements: Have you:
Maintained focus on your inquiry question throughout?
Used appropriate Digital Society terminology?
Structured presentation logically?
Managed time effectively (do not exceed 10 minutes)?
Engaged audience appropriately?
Demonstrated expertise in your topic?
How to get 6 for Criterion C?
✅ Use phrase: "This suggests that..." or "This indicates..." (evaluative)
❌ Avoid: "This is..." or "This shows..." (descriptive)
✅ Pick ONE focused topic with multiple perspectives
❌ Don't jump between many different topics
✅ Balance: theoretical framework + specific named examples
✅ Address complexity: "However," "On the other hand," "Correlation ≠ causation"
Excellence Indicators: To achieve highest marks (5-6), ensure:
Substantial, well-designed primary research appropriate to inquiry type
Professional analysis demonstrating methodological rigour
Balanced evaluation of both benefits AND concerns
Sustained analytical depth throughout presentation
Strong evidence supporting every major claim
Multiple perspective consideration showing complexity
Solution-oriented approach with actionable recommendations
Clear demonstration of new understanding gained
CRITERION D: CONCLUSION (6 marks)
Project element: Presentation
OFFICIAL IB DP DIGITAL SOCIETY MARK BANDS for CRITERION D
0: The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1-2: The conclusion is limited with little further insight into the inquiry focus. Emerging trends and future developments are referenced with limited or no discussion
3-4: The conclusion provides adequate further insight into the inquiry focus with a partial discussion of emerging trends and future developments
5-6: The conclusion provides effective and well-supported further insight into the inquiry focus with a thorough and substantiated discussion of emerging trends and future developments
CRITERION C vs D: UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENCE
CRITERION C (Analysis & Evaluation):
→ Analysing WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW (impacts, implications)
→ Identifying PROBLEMS from your research evidence
→ Proposing WHAT SOLUTIONS could help (recommendations)
CRITERION D (Conclusion):
→ Demonstrating NEW INSIGHTS you gained
→ Discussing WHERE THINGS ARE GOING (emerging trends, future)
→ Explaining HOW TO IMPLEMENT your proposed solutions
SIMPLE DISTINCTION:
C = Present analysis + What should be done
D = Future insights + How to do it + What you learned
CRITERION D CHECKLIST
New Understanding and Insights: Have you demonstrated:
How your thinking evolved through the inquiry process?
Unexpected findings or surprises in your research?
Connections made between different aspects of research?
Personal learning and growth from the investigation?
Limitations acknowledged in your findings?
Areas requiring further investigation identified?
Synthesis of evidence from all research conducted?
Degree of certainty in your conclusions expressed?
Solution development with implementation strategies?
Connection to Inquiry Question: Have you:
Provided an explicit answer to your original question?
Synthesise all evidence to support your conclusion?
Connected findings directly back to inquiry focus?
Evaluated the strength of your evidence?
Acknowledged any remaining questions or uncertainties?
Demonstrated clear progression from question to conclusion?
Shown how research method led to new insights?
Emerging Trends: Have you identified:
Current developments happening now (within the last year or two)?
Specific institutional examples of implementation?
Recent research trends in your area?
Pilot programs with documented results?
Expert predictions from credible sources?
Regulatory developments shaping the field?
Technology advances currently in development?
Social or cultural shifts related to your topic?
Future Developments: Are your predictions:
Based on current evidence rather than speculation?
Supported by credible research or expert opinion?
Connected to trends you've identified?
Realistic and achievable within reasonable timeframes?
Considering multiple possible scenarios?
Addressing potential challenges or obstacles?
Relevant to your specific inquiry focus?
Demonstrating understanding of broader implications?
Implementation Strategies: Have you explained:
HOW your proposed solutions (from Criterion C) can be practically applied?
Step-by-step implementation approaches for different stakeholders?
Timeline considerations (short-term vs. long-term actions)?
Resources needed for implementation?
Potential barriers and how to overcome them?
Evaluation methods: How to measure success of solutions?
Scalability considerations?
Evidence and Substantiation: Are your conclusions:
Supported by your primary research findings?
Backed by credible secondary sources?
Connected to real-world examples and cases?
Acknowledging uncertainty where appropriate?
Avoiding overgeneralization from limited data?
Considering alternative explanations or interpretations?
Demonstrating sophisticated understanding of complexity?
How to Get a 6 for Criterion D?
✅ Name SPECIFIC emerging trends with examples and dates
❌ Avoid vague conclusions like "greatly impacted lives"
✅ Identify 2-3 specific future steps with HOW to implement
✅ Build conclusion throughout presentation (start at ~halfway point)
✅ Use statistics and reputable sources to justify
✅ Connect back to earlier points, then expand
Excellence Indicators: To achieve highest marks (5-6), ensure:
Clear evolution of understanding demonstrated throughout
Well-supported future predictions with credible evidence
Multiple stakeholder perspectives in recommendations
Specific institutional examples of current implementations
Connection to broader Digital Society themes and concepts
Sophisticated analysis showing deep insight
Original conclusions contributing new knowledge
CRITERION E: COMMUNICATION (3 marks)
Project element: Presentation
OFFICIAL IB DP DIGITAL SOCIETY MARK BANDS for CRITERION
0: The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1: Communication is limited. The presentation's organisation and use of media are limited and do not support understanding
2: Communication is adequate. The presentation is adequately organised and the use of media is at times coherent but this is not sustained or only partially effective in supporting understanding
3: Communication is effective. The presentation is well-organised and coherently uses media to support understanding
CRITERION E CHECKLIST
Presentation Organization: Is your presentation:
Well-structured with clear introduction?
Following logical flow from question to conclusion?
Using smooth transitions between sections?
Appropriately timed (does not exceed 10 minutes)?
Engaging audience with compelling content?
Concluding with reinforcement of key insights?
Maintaining focus on inquiry throughout?
Demonstrating confident subject knowledge?
Media and Digital Tools: Does your presentation:
Use visuals that support content (not decoration)?
Include variety of media types appropriately?
Demonstrate professional quality design?
Show creative and purposeful tool integration?
Consider accessibility (readable fonts, contrast)?
Include interactive elements where appropriate?
Use audio/video effectively if included?
Show mastery of digital communication tools?
Citations During Presentation: Have you:
Cited sources at point of use (Author + Year)?
Included visual cues for images and media?
Provided brief but complete information?
Maintained consistent citation format?
Acknowledged all borrowed content clearly?
Distinguished your work from others' contributions?
Referenced interview sources appropriately?
Complete Bibliography - List 1 (Ideas and Content): Does it include:
All academic sources with full citations?
Interview sources with dates and contexts?
Survey methodology description?
All intellectual content sources?
Author/creator full names and credentials?
Complete titles and publication information?
Publication dates (day/month/year for websites)?
DOI numbers for academic sources?
Page numbers where applicable?
Complete Bibliography - List 2 (Media and Tech Tools): Does it include:
All images with sources and usage rights?
Video/audio clips with time codes?
Data visualisation tools used (Canva, etc.)?
Creation software and applications?
Complete URLs for online sources?
Access dates for all web materials?
Format specifications for each entry?
Copyright acknowledgments where required?
Supporting Materials: Have you included:
Complete interview transcripts in appendices?
Survey questions and raw data?
Additional charts and graphs?
Detailed methodology explanations?
Screen references directing to full bibliography?
All required supporting documentation?
Well-organized and clearly labeled materials?
Academic Integrity: Have you maintained:
Clear distinction between original and borrowed content?
Proper acknowledgment of all sources used?
No plagiarism or uncredited material?
Honest representation of research limitations?
Ethical research practices throughout?
Transparency in methodology and data collection?
Appropriate permissions for any sensitive content?
How to Get a 3 for Criterion E?
✅ Strong hook in first 30 seconds (relatable question/statistic)
✅ Clear outline within first minute
✅ ZERO text-only slides - visual on EVERY slide
✅ Integrate at least one video clip (relevant, purposeful)
✅ Clear audio - NO distracting background music
✅ Every visual has a PURPOSE - explain why it's there
Excellence Indicators: To achieve highest marks (Mark 3), ensure:
Professional presentation quality engaging audience
Seamless media integration enhancing understanding
Comprehensive documentation of all sources and tools
Creative problem-solving in presentation design
Accessibility and inclusivity considerations
Sophisticated use of digital communication tools
Complete academic integrity maintained throughout
FINAL QUALITY ASSURANCE CHECKLIST
Before Final Submission - The Ultimate Check:
Academic Rigour:
Would a university professor find this research credible?
Have I contributed original knowledge through primary research?
Are all claims supported by specific, verifiable evidence?
Have I maintained objectivity while developing insights?
Digital Society Integration:
Are Digital Society concepts explicitly woven throughout?
Have I used appropriate terminology accurately?
Do I demonstrate deep understanding of the subject?
Are connections to broader themes clear?
Research Quality:
Primary research with substantial data (50-100 survey, 3+ interviews)
Recent, high-quality secondary sources (within the last 4 years)
Balanced perspective addressing multiple viewpoints
Evidence-based conclusions and future predictions
Professional Standards:
Complete, accurate citations and bibliography
Professional presentation quality
Comprehensive supporting materials
Ethical research practices maintained
GRADE PREDICTION GUIDE
Grade 7 (18-20 marks total):
Demonstrates university-level research quality
Includes substantial primary research with professional analysis
Shows deep Digital Society conceptual understanding
Provides evidence-based insights and future predictions
Maintains professional academic standards throughout
Grade 6 (15-17 marks total):
Good research quality with some original elements
Clear understanding of Digital Society concepts
Some analytical depth with adequate evidence
Generally well-organized and presented
Grade 5 (12-14 marks total):
Adequate research with limited original investigation
Basic understanding of concepts with some analysis
Some organizational and presentation issues
Limited depth of insight or future consideration
If you're consistently hitting "Excellence Indicators" across all criteria, you're on track for Grade 7 performance.
