IB Digital Society Inquiry Project (IA)- Examiner's Concise Checklist for Assessing (Updated 2025)
- lukewatsonteach
- Jan 14
- 6 min read
Updated: Oct 30
INTRODUCTION
This Quick Assessment Checklist is designed as a rapid reference tool for students and teachers to identify gaps and strengthen work throughout the Inquiry Project process. Use it during the creation phase to stay on track, and again at the end for a final quality check before submission.
This guide has been crafted based on assessed past student work, real-world marking experience, and IB assessment criteria to help you achieve excellence.
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 More Detail?
This is a quick reference version. For comprehensive guidance with detailed explanations, examples, and in-depth criteria breakdowns, visit the full guide:
How to Use This Quick Checklist
✓ During Creation: Check boxes as you complete each requirement to stay on track
✓ Before Submission: Run through all criteria to catch any gaps or missing elements
✓ For Peer Review: Use with classmates to provide structured feedback
✓ For Teacher Assessment: Quick marking tool to identify strengths and areas for improvement
Total: 24 marks | IPD (1500 words max) + Presentation (10 mins max)
Criterion A: Inquiry focus (3 marks)
Project element: Inquiry process document
The inquiry process document demonstrates provides an inquiry focus with an explanation of the connection between the inquiry question, a specific, relevant real-world example.
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. |
CRITERION A: INQUIRY FOCUS (3 marks)
1 mark: Basic question + vague example + weak concept links
2 marks: Clear question + specific example + some concept links
3 marks: Sophisticated question + detailed example + strong concept links
Criterion A Checklist:
Does your inquiry question use analytical command terms (not yes/no)?
Do you name a specific digital system with concrete details?
Is your example published within the last 4 years (or justified if older)?
Did you reference the 3Cs with specific numbers (Concept, Content, Context)?
Is it ~300 words with proper citations?
Criterion B: Claims and perspectives (6 marks)
Project element: Inquiry process document
The inquiry process document demonstrates how research was conducted with a discussion of the claims and perspectives for three sources including a justification of their usefulness in the inquiry.
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: CLAIMS AND PERSPECTIVES (6 marks)
1-2 marks: <3 sources, descriptive only, no justification
3-4 marks: 3 sources, some analysis, partial justification
5-6 marks: 3 strong sources, deep analysis, clear justification
Criterion B Checklist
Did you complete OPVL (Origin, Purpose, Value, Limitations)?
Did you identify and evaluate 2-3 main claims?
Did you connect claims to your inquiry question?
Did you justify why this source is useful for your inquiry?
Is it published within 4 years, credible, and properly cited?
Is your total ~1200 words?
Criterion C: Analysis and evaluation (6 marks)
Project element: Presentation
The balance of the presentation consists of the student’s own sustained and well-supported analysis and evaluation of impacts and implications of the digital systems for people and communities.
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: ANALYSIS & EVALUATION (6 marks)
1-2 marks: Descriptive, limited impacts, weak evidence
3-4 marks: Some analysis, some impacts, adequate evidence
5-6 marks: Deep analysis, multiple impacts, strong evidence
Criterion C Checklist
Did you conduct primary research (50+ survey OR 2-3 interviews)?
Did you visualise data professionally (charts/quotes)?
Did you analyse BOTH positive AND negative impacts?
Did you consider multiple stakeholder perspectives?
Did you identify problems AND propose solutions (WHAT to do)?
Does evidence support every claim you make?
Did you use Digital Society terminology correctly?
Is your presentation under 10 minutes?
Criterion D: Conclusion (6 marks)
Project element: Presentation
The presentation concludes by providing further insight reflecting the student’s new understanding and ideas about their inquiry focus following analysis and evaluation and a discussion of emerging trends and future developments.
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 D: CONCLUSION (6 marks)
1-2 marks: Basic summary, little insight, weak trends
3-4 marks: Clear summary, some insight, partial trends
5-6 marks: New insights, well-supported trends + future
Criterion D Checklist
Did you demonstrate new insights and learning?
Did you provide an explicit response/answer to your inquiry question?
Did you identify emerging trends (last 1-2 years) with examples?
Are your future predictions evidence-based (not speculation)?
Did you explain HOW to implement your proposed solutions?
Did you acknowledge limitations in your research?
Criterion E: Communication (3 marks)
Project element: Presentation
The presentation supports understandings through organization of ideas and evidence and also a coherent use of media.
0 | The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. |
1 | Communication is limited The presentation’s organization and use of media are limited and do not support understanding |
2 | Communication is adequate The presentation is adequately organized 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-organized and coherently uses media to support understanding |
CRITERION E: COMMUNICATION (3 marks)
1 mark: Poor organisation, limited media, weak flow
2 marks: Adequate organisation, some media use, okay flow
3 marks: Professional organisation, effective media, smooth flow
Criterion E Checklist
Does your presentation have clear structure (intro → analysis → conclusion)?
Do your visuals support content (not just decoration)?
Did you cite sources during presentation (Author + Year)?
Do you have two bibliography lists (Ideas/Content + Media/Tools)?
Did you include complete appendices (transcripts, survey data)?
Is your presentation under 10 minutes?
Is it professional quality with accessible design?
FINAL CHECK
Before submission:
Did you state your IPD word count (under 1500 words)?
Did you time your presentation (under 10 minutes)?
Did you cite all sources properly (MLA/APA)?
Did you include original primary research?
Is everything you claim evidence-based?
Did you integrate Digital Society concepts throughout?
Is your presentation professional quality?
GRADE PREDICTOR
Grade 7 (18-20): Excellence indicators hit across all criteria
Grade 6 (15-17): Mostly strong with some gaps
Grade 5 (12-14): Adequate with notable weaknesses
Quick Test: "Would a professional find this research credible?"
YES = Grade 7 track
MAYBE = Grade 6 track
NO = Review and strengthen
To achieve a Grade 7 in Digital Society, you must demonstrate:
Conceptual Awareness: Show deep insight and understanding of Digital Society.
Critical Thinking: Provide well-structured, logical arguments supported by evidence.
Precise Use of Terminology: Use Digital Society-specific language accurately.
Depth of Analysis: Analyse and evaluate evidence while considering alternative perspectives.
Reflection: Show evidence of reflective thinking and critical self-assessment.
Comments