IB Geography IA
IB Geography ia is an integral part of the course and is a compulsory component for both SL and HL students. An IA shapes up to its fulfilment with the collaboration between the teacher, the student and the peers. This is the learning cohort of the whole process.
Get In Touch
Can't Complete this
The comprehensive fieldwork group study and individual report involves understanding the requirements of IA, review of ethical stance and the risk assessment, field work time, class assignment time, time of consultation between the teacher and the student, review time to monitor progress and check the authenticity of the course work.
Group work is collaborative team work, whereas written report is a student’s individual contribution.
Students are required to conduct fieldwork collecting primary data and produce one written report based on a fieldwork question. The fieldwork topic, fieldwork question and methods of information collection may be chosen by the teacher, the whole class, small groups or individuals.
An investigation starts with fieldwork in a group with an exchange of presentation. The final work is individual contribution of the report with a cogent analysis of methods used, hypothesis framed and conclusion drawn. The choice of field work investigation banks upon the scale and site influenced by the local environment, taking into consideration the logistical feasibility and security. Student-generated or computer-derived maps are used as tools to conduct the fieldwork.
Students are required to follow health guidelines, safety measures and ethical guidelines in handling field work.
This component of IBDP Geography is internally assessed by a teacher and externally moderated by the end. It comprises of fieldwork of 20 hours, written report of 25 marks and contributes to a total weightage of 25% for SL and 20% for HL students.
Step 1-The fieldwork essentially necessitates a fieldwork topic, fieldwork question and information collection tools which involve a collaborative decision making by the class of students and the teacher.
Step 2-Once the fieldwork research and presentation reaches the completion stage, the immediate focus is on written report, which is an individual contribution.
The writing of the report involves the comprehensive analysis of the methods used and the subsequent conclusion drawn out of it. The written report of investigation comprises of not more than 2500 words, where the following components are not included within this word limit.
The components precluded are:
- Title page
- Acknowledgments
- Contents page
- Titles and subtitles
- References/Bibliography
- Footnotes—up to a maximum of 15 words each
- Map legends and/or keys, Labels—of 10 words or less
- Tables—of statistical or numerical data, or categories, classes or group names
- Calculations
- Appendices—containing only primary data in the form of data sheet or translation of a questionnaire and/or calculations which include numbers, instrument readings and figures.
The components included within the word limit are:
- The main text including the research question
- Analysis
- Conclusion and Evaluation, as well as all annotations over 10 words and any footnotes over 15 words.
- Students are ardently advised to adhere to the prescribed word limit, failure of which would entail the teachers and moderators to stop reading and students are likely to not gain as many marks under criteria such as E and F.
Internal assessment criteria—SL/HL
The assessment purpose common to SL and HL, is to evaluate the depth of the students’ ability to demonstrate the following learning objectives w.r.t the fieldwork research questions.
The assessment objectives on ib geography fieldwork research
1. Knowledge and understanding follows criteria A and D
2. Application and analysis follows criteria A and D
3. Synthesis and evaluation follows criteria D, E and F
4. Select, use and apply a variety of appropriate skills and techniques follows criteria B and C
There are six IA criteria for the fieldwork written report which are-
| Report component/section | Criterion | Marks allocated out of 25 | Suggested word limit within 2500 words |
| Fieldwork question and geographic context | A | 3 | 300 |
| Investigation methods used | B | 3 | 300 |
| Quality and treatment of information collected | C | 6 | 500 |
| Written analysis | D | 8 | 850 |
| Conclusion | E | 2 | 200 |
| Evaluation | F | 3 | 300 |
| Total | 25 | ~2450 |
The mark scheme
| Criterion | Criterion descriptor | Marks | Level descriptor |
| Fieldwork question and geographic context | The fieldwork question is necessarily geographical by nature. This criterion requires primary information on fieldwork investigation,framing of hypothesis based on the prediction,comment on geographic context as physical, spatial, socio-economic and so on.Map and/locations can be used to describe spatial elements.Students must state the areas of the syllabus to which the study relates,which geographic inquiry topic or sub-topic in the syllabus, whether it is fromthe optional themes, the core theme, or the HL extension. It can be an inter-connection between two or more themes.This criterion evaluates the highlights and geographic context of the fieldwork and to what extent the link between the fieldwork question and the geographic context is clearly defined. | 0 | The fieldwork doesn’t reach the set standards |
| 1 | The fieldwork question is not correctly formulated based on a relevant prescribed topic on Geography. It does not allow first-hand information and there is no use of location map. | ||
| 2 | The fieldwork question is relevant and there is of primary data usage. However, where it lacks is the apt use of locational map which is a copy of the existing map without precise conventions of mapping. | ||
| 3 | There is a relevant fieldwork question, use of primary data and map following the well-defined conventions of mapping. | ||
| Investigation methods used | The methods used should accommodate the sampling techniques, time, location and circumstance of information collection. The criterion assesses the justified reasons for the sampling techniques used and the apt use of primary and secondary data. | 0 | The work doesn’t meet the set standards. |
| 1 | The methods used for information and data collection are listed, but are not distinct or clear.Data collection techniques are not very clearly used. | ||
| 2 | The methods used for information and data collection are precise and distinct with a coherent relation with the hypotheses framed.The sampling techniques used are clearly defined for qualitative and quantitative analysis but are either univariate or bivariate. | ||
| 3 | The methods used for information and data collection are precise and distinct with a coherent relation with the hypotheses framed.The sampling techniques used are clearly defined for qualitative and quantitative analysis and may be multivariate in nature | ||
| Quality and treatment of information collected | A set of comprehensive techniques in the form of hypotheses testing, graphs, maps, infographics, matrices, field sketches can be used | 0 | The work fails to reach the set standards. |
| 1-2 | The data collected is not sufficient to back up the hypotheses.The information does not permit analysis of the question formulated.The graphs, tables, infographics etc. used contain errors. | ||
| 3-4 | The data collected is partly sufficient to back up the hypotheses.The data presentation is reasonably fair and appropriate.The maps, tables, infographics etc. used are reasonably accurate with occasional errors. | ||
| 5-6 | The data collected is sufficient to back up the hypotheses.The data presentation is fair and appropriate.The maps, tables, infographics etc. used are accurate and precise. | ||
| Written analysis | This criterion evaluates the quality of the analysed results, referring to links to the question and hypotheses formulated, prescribed geographic context, information collected, the statistics used (descriptive techniques—that is, graphs, charts, histograms and so on; as well as statistical techniques—that is, correlations, regression, and so on) and the diagrammatic presentations. | 0 | The work fails to reach the set standards. |
| 1-2 | The written analysis includes descriptive techniques that are not at all suitable to the dataand the question formulated.The data or information presented is without explicit link to the question orhypotheses formulated. In other words, there is no perfect citation.The statistical trends and patterns are listed. | ||
| 3-4 | The written analysis includes descriptive techniques that are appropriate to the data and thequestion formulated. Statistical techniques may not correlate with the question formulated or may contain errors.The data and information, trends and patterns presented which are described have precise citation to the question formulated.The written analysis allows for answering the question formulated in a descriptive way. | ||
| 5-6 | The written analysis includes appropriate descriptive and statistical techniques correlated to the data and the question formulated.The trends, patterns and statistics are described and linked explicitlyto the question or hypotheses formulated. The possible external information/ outliers and gaps/ anomalies in the data, are listed.formulated, although there are gaps inthe supporting evidence. | ||
| 7-8 | The written analysis includes descriptive and statistical techniques connected with the question and hypotheses.The trends, patterns and statistics found, with probable outliers and anomalies are explicitly defined and linked to the question formulated, hypotheses, geographical theory, thefieldwork location and methods used.The written analysis allows for answering the question formulated, with no or only minorgaps in the supporting evidence. | ||
Conclusion |
Summarization of the fieldwork findings. |
0 | The work does not suffice to the needs of the level descriptor.The conclusion submitted is partly supported by the analysis.There is a precise conclusion with all clarity and is supported by the analysis. |
| 1 | A conclusion to the fieldwork drawn is partly supported by the analysis. | ||
| 2 | A clear conclusion to the fieldwork question is supported by the analysis. | ||
| Evaluation | This criterion assesses the student’s ability to review the investigativemethodology used like use of primary data, by weighing up the strengths and/or weaknesses of the chosenmethod like the influence of claims and personal bias and external geographic influence, and suggest improvements. | 0 | The work does not suffice to the descriptor requirements. |
| 1 | Strengths/weakness of data collection method are inappropriate and not fully relevant to the study. | ||
| 2 | Strengths/weakness of data collection method are inappropriate and mostly relevant to the study. | ||
| 3 | The most appropriate and relevant strengths and/or weaknesses are explained regarding the datacollection methods, the formulation of the fieldwork research question, the presentation ofdata/information and the choice of location. Scope of improvement for these methods used is clearly mentioned. | ||
IB geography ia rubrics
The IB geography IA resources assessment criteria are a few in number and every student needs to be thorough right from the beginning.
Each assessment criterion has level descriptors to describe the specific levels of achievement of a student together with an appropriate range of marks. The level descriptors mainly reinforce on positive achievement, although for the lower levels failure is accommodated in the description.
Teachers evaluate the internally assessed work at SL and at HL against the criteria using the level descriptors, using the best-fit model. If a piece of work incidentally falls between two descriptors, both descriptors should be read again and the one that more appropriately describes the student’s work is chosen. Where there are two or more marks available within a level, teachers award the upper marks if the student’s work demonstrates the qualities described to a great extent.
Teachers award the lower marks if the student’s work demonstrates the qualities described to a lesser extent. Only whole numbers are recorded as assessment parameters. Teachers do not think in terms of a pass or fail boundary, rather identify the appropriate descriptor for each assessment criterion. The highest level descriptors do not imply flawless performance but is always feasible to attain. That’s the spirit infused in a student by the teacher.
It’s very pertinent to observe that a student who attains a high level of achievement in relation to one criterion may not necessarily attain high levels of achievement in relation to other criteria. Similarly, a student who attains a low level of achievement for one criterion may not necessarily attain low achievement levels for the other criteria. Achievement quotients for a student may vary across the wide range of criteria.
We guarantee quality process
Let’s join our community today
Join SEV7N's vibrant community of elite educators—a collaborative space where innovation meets expertise. Share resources, discuss teaching strategies, and stay ahead of educational trends. Benefit from a support network that enhances your professional growth, enriches your teaching practices, and elevates your impact on students. It's not just a community; it's your gateway to educational excellence.
