IBDP Digital Society HL Paper Three, Question Three: EVALUATE [8 marks]

How to Answer Evaluation Question Three in IB DP DS Paper 3

Step 1: Understand the Question (2-3 minutes)

• Identify the key focus (e.g., "evaluate the potential impact...")

• Note any specific context (e.g., "with reference to the Amazon case study...")

• Identify what aspects need evaluation (e.g., "in terms of diversity and inclusion")

Step 2: Plan Your Response (2-3 minutes) Structure your response using these key evaluation criteria:

EQUITY

• How fair is the intervention/approach?

• Who benefits and who might be disadvantaged?

• Are there accessibility or inclusion issues?

ACCEPTABILITY

• How do different stakeholders view this?

• Is it transparent and accountable?

• What concerns might stakeholders have?

FEASIBILITY

• What technical challenges exist?

• What social/political barriers exist?

• Is it practically implementable?

ETHICS

• What ethical implications arise?

• How are different stakeholder rights balanced?

• Are there unintended consequences?

Step 3: Write Your Response (10-12 minutes)

Introduction (1-2 sentences):

• Briefly state what you're evaluating

• State your evaluation approach (which criteria you'll use)

Main Body (organize in (3-4 clear paragraphs): For each major point:

1. Select 2-3 evaluation criteria from the framework (Equity, Acceptability, Cost, Feasibility, Innovation, Ethics)

2. Provide evidence/examples (reference case study if required)

3. For each 2-3 chosen criteria (Equity, Acceptability, Cost, Feasibility, Innovation, Ethics):

   • State how the intervention performs against this criterion

   • Provide evidence from research/case studies/examples

   • Consider both strengths and limitations

   • Explicitly mention stakeholder perspectives

For example: "One significant concern with Amazon's AI recruitment system was its impact on equity. The system demonstrated bias against female candidates by penalizing resumes containing women-specific terms, showing how automated systems can perpetuate existing inequalities. While the intention was to streamline recruitment, the acceptability of such a system is questionable when it fails to ensure fair treatment of all applicants. This raises feasibility concerns about implementing AI recruitment systems without proper bias detection mechanisms."

Conclusion:

• Synthesize your main evaluation points

• Make a justified judgment about overall effectiveness/impact

• Suggest potential 1-2 steps to improve the intervention or alternatives

Tips for Higher Marks:

1. Balance positive and negative aspects

2. Consider multiple stakeholder perspectives

3. Use specific examples from case studies/stimulus material

4. Link explicitly to evaluation criteria (equity, acceptability, feasibility, ethics)

5. Show awareness of broader implications

6. Make justified judgments rather than just listing points

Common Pitfalls to Avoid:

• Simply describing without evaluating

• Ignoring the specific context given

• Not referencing case studies when required

• Missing key stakeholder perspectives

• Failing to make clear judgments

Sample Sentence Starters:

• "From an equity perspective..."

• "The acceptability of this approach is demonstrated by..."

• "While technically feasible, this raises ethical concerns because..."

• "The effectiveness of this intervention is limited by..."

• "A key consideration for stakeholders is..."

Key Elements for High Marks

1. Apply Evaluation Criteria Explicitly

   • Clearly state which criteria you're using (e.g., "From an equity perspective...")

   • Connect evidence directly to these criteria

2. Balance Perspectives

   • Consider impacts on different stakeholders (applicants, HR teams, organizations)

   • Present both positive and negative aspects

3. Incorporate Research

   • Reference relevant case studies, examples, or research

   • Make connections to concepts from Digital Society

4. Use Appropriate Terminology

   • Incorporate key terms from the pre-release material

   • Use intervention categories (mitigates, intercedes, enhances, resolves)

5. Make Balanced Judgments

   • Avoid simple "good/bad" evaluations

   • Provide nuanced assessment of strengths and limitations