RELEVANCE and THE IA CRITERIA—A CLARIFICATION

“It is not necessary for every single aspect of

a level descriptor to be meet for that mark to
be awarded.”
“Also, not all indicators are always present.”
Physics Course Guide, pages 141 and 143

A given indicator statement may not fall within the same markband that contains the other
appropriate achievement level descriptors when using the best-fit assessment method.
Moreover, it may be the case that a given indicator is not even applicable to an investigation.
That is to say, it is not expected that all the criterion indicator statements will be suitable for
all the various types of student investigations. Indicator statements are not a required
checklist of investigation attributes but rather should act as guides for what might be
achieved under a given criterion. It is up to the student with a teacher’s guidance to
determine the relevance of indicator statements.
The Exploration descriptor statement about “the awareness of significant safety, ethical or
environmental issues…” may not be applicable to a given investigation; for example, when an
individual investigation uses a computer simulation or database. In such a case, this indicator
statement should be not applied in assessment at any markband level. The statement about
safety and environmental issues is then not relevant and should not be taken into account
when establishing a markband.
The Evaluation issue of “comparison to the accepted scientific context” may not be applicable
for an open-ended investigation (where is this no established value or known result).
However, a more general reading of “accepted scientific context” may also mean how well the
experimental results are in line with the relevant scientific theory. This implies that the
student should address the issue even if there is no accepted result.
If a mathematical model is devised then the only uncertainties might be the assumptions and
the number of decimal places or significant figures used. Other cases of where indictor
statements are not relevant may exist, and so it is up the student to address any relevant
issue and mention those that are not relevant.
Issues of experimental errors and
uncertainties appear under the IA
Criteria of Exploration, Analysis and
Evaluation, and yet each criterion
approaches errors and uncertainties
from a different perspective. See the
clarification document on perceived
criteria overlap, where you will learn
that there is no real overlap.

19 February 2015, Dr. Mark Headlee, IA Relevance

CLARIFICATION 2016.docx