The nature of the internal assessment
Candidates keep a portfolio in which they collect short extracts from published news media and comment on them in the light of their understanding of economics at that stage of the course.
Format of the study for higher level and standard level
Candidates are required to select three extracts and prepare three commentaries of no more than 750 words each. Moderators will not read beyond 750 words for each commentary. Each commentary must explain the linkages between the extract and an economic theory, concept or idea taken from the section of the syllabus on which the commentary is based. Each commentary must demonstrate economic insights into the implications of the extract. Each article must be based on a different section of the syllabus. The articles must be taken from a variety of sources and must be included in the portfolio. Each commentary is marked individually using criteria A-E, while the rubric requirements across the whole portfolio is assessed by criterion F.
Internal Assessment criteria
A printable version of these criteria may be viewed by clicking here.
Criterion A: Diagrams
This criterion assesses the extent to which the student is able to construct diagrams.
| Level | Descriptor |
|---|---|
| 0 | The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptor below. |
| 1 | Relevant diagrams are included but not explained, or the explanations are incorrect. |
| 2 | Relevant, accurate and correctly labelled diagrams are included, with a limited explanation. |
| 3 | Relevant, accurate and correctly labelled diagrams are included, with a full explanation. |
Criterion B: Terminology
This criterion assesses the extent to which the student uses appropriate economic terminology.
| Level | Descriptor |
|---|---|
| 0 | The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | Terminology relevant to the article is included in the commentary. |
| 2 | Terminology relevant to the article is used appropriately throughout the commentary. |
Criterion C: Application
This criterion assesses the extent to which the student recognizes, understands and applies economic information in the context of the article.
| Level | Descriptor |
|---|---|
| 0 | The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | Relevant economic concepts and / or theories are applied to the article. |
| 2 | Relevant economic concepts and/or theories are applied to the article appropriately throughout the commentary. |
Criterion D: Analysis
This criterion assesses the extent to which the student can explain and develop appropriate economic theories and / or concepts in the context of the article.
| Level | Descriptor |
|---|---|
| 0 | The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | There is limited economic analysis relating to the article. |
| 2 | There is appropriate economic analysis relating to the article. |
| 3 | There is effective economic analysis relating to the article. |
Criterion E: Evaluation
This criterion assesses the extent to which the student synthesizes his or her analysis in order to make judgments that are supported by reasoned arguments.
| Level | Descriptor |
|---|---|
| 0 | The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | Judgments are made that are unsupported, or supported, by incorrect reasoning. |
| 2 | Judgments are made that are supported by limited reasoning. |
| 3 | Judgments are made that are supported by appropriate reasoning. |
| 4 | Judgments are made that are supported by effective and balanced reasoning. |
Criterion F: Rubric requirements
This criterion assesses the extent to which the student meets the five rubric requirements for the complete portfolio.
- Each commentary does not exceed 750 words.
- Each article is based on a different section of the syllabus.
- Each article is taken from a different and appropriate source.
- Each article was published no earlier than one year before the writing of the commentary.
- The summary portfolio coversheet, three commentary coversheets and the article for each commentary are included.
| Level | Descriptor |
|---|---|
| 0 | The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. |
| 1 | Three rubric requirements are met. |
| 2 | Four rubric requirements are met. |
| 3 | All five rubric requirements are met. |
External assessment criteria
HL/SL paper 1
The structure of the paper
The paper consists of four extended-response questions based on the microeconomics and macroeconomics sections of the syllabus; there are two questions in section A and two questions in section B. Each question is divided into two parts: part a) is worth 10 marks and part b) is worth 15 marks, giving a total of 25 marks. While the focus of the questions will be microeconomics and macroeconomics, it is likely that students will be required to draw on other sections of the syllabus.
Examiners should consult the syllabus to see the area(s) of the course that candidates are required to cover in each question.
Students must answer one question from each section. The maximum mark for the paper is 50.
Notes on marking HL paper 1
All diagrams used by candidates must be fully and correctly labelled and relevant curves identified.
Assessment criteria
These criteria must be used in conjunction with the paper-specific markscheme to mark each question.
Examiners should give credit for unanticipated responses containing coherent ideas which are relevant to the question.
The student’s answer should be placed on the achievement level where the majority of descriptors correspond to the student's work.
All questions are structured in the same way.
A printable version of these criteria may be viewed by clicking here.
Part (a)
| Level | Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|---|
| 0 |
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
| 0 |
| 1 |
There is little understanding of the specific demands of the question.
Relevant economic terms are not defined.
There is very little knowledge of relevant economic theory.
There are significant errors.
| 1–3 |
| 2 |
There is some understanding of the specific demands of the question.
Some relevant economic terms are defined.
There is some knowledge of relevant economic theory.
There are some errors.
| 4–6 |
| 3 |
There is understanding of the specific demands of the question.
Relevant economic terms are defined.
Relevant economic theory is explained and applied.
Where appropriate, diagrams are included and applied.
Where appropriate, examples are used.
There are few errors.
| 7–8 |
| 4 |
There is clear understanding of the specific demands of the question.
Relevant economic terms are clearly defined.
Relevant economic theory is clearly explained and applied.
Where appropriate, diagrams are included and applied effectively.
Where appropriate, examples are used effectively.
There are no significant errors.
| 9–10 |
Part (b)
| Level | Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|---|
| 0 |
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
| 0 |
| 1 |
There is little understanding of the specific demands of the question.
Relevant economic terms are not defined.
There is very little knowledge of relevant economic theory.
There are significant errors.
| 1–5 |
| 2 |
There is some understanding of the specific demands of the question.
Some relevant economic terms are defined.
There is some knowledge of relevant economic theory.
There are some errors.
| 6–9 |
| 3 |
There is understanding of the specific demands of the question.
Relevant economic terms are defined.
Relevant economic theory is explained and applied.
Where appropriate, diagrams are included and applied.
Where appropriate, examples are used.
There is an attempt at synthesis or evaluation.
There are few errors.
| 10–12 |
| 4 |
There is clear understanding of the specific demands of the question.
Relevant economic terms are clearly defined.
Relevant economic theory is clearly explained and applied.
Where appropriate, diagrams are included and applied effectively.
Where appropriate, examples are used effectively.
There is evidence of appropriate synthesis or evaluation.
There are no significant errors.
| 13–15 |
HL/SL paper 2
The structure of the paper
This paper consists of four data response questions based on the international economics and development economics sections of the syllabus; there are two questions in section A and two questions in section B. Each question is worth 20 marks and is divided into four parts. While the focus of the questions will be international economics and development economics, it is likely that students will be required to draw on other sections of the syllabus.
Examiners should consult the syllabus to see the area(s) of the course that candidates are required to cover in each question.
Students must answer one question from each section. The maximum mark for the paper is 40.
Notes on marking HL paper 2
All diagrams used by candidates must be fully labelled and relevant curves identified.
Assessment criteria
These criteria must be used in conjunction with the paper-specific markscheme to mark each question.
Examiners should give credit for unanticipated responses containing coherent ideas which are relevant to the question.
The student’s answer should be placed on the achievement level where the majority of descriptors correspond to the student's work.
A printable version of these criteria may be viewed by clicking here.
Section A and section B
Part (a): (i) and (ii)
| Level | Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. | 0 |
| 1 | There is limited understanding or vague definition. | 1 |
| 2 | There is clear understanding or accurate definition. | 2 |
Part (b) and part (c)
| Level | Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. | 0 |
| 1 | The written response is limited. | 1–2 |
| 2 | The written response is accurate. | 3–4 |
Part (d)
| Level | Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. | 0 |
| 1 |
Few relevant concepts are recognized.
There is basic knowledge / understanding.
| 1–2 |
| 2 |
Relevant concepts are recognized and developed in reasonable depth.
There is clear knowledge / understanding.
There is some attempt at application / analysis.
| 3–5 |
| 3 |
Relevant concepts are recognized and developed in reasonable depth.
There is clear knowledge / understanding.
There is effective application / analysis.
There is synthesis / evaluation, supported by appropriate theory and evidence.
| 6–8 |
HL paper 3
The structure of the paper
This paper consists of three questions based on all four sections of the syllabus, of which candidates are required to answer two. Each question is worth 25 marks. The maximum possible mark for the paper is 50.
Question parts might require the use of a calculator. Calculators are allowed during the examination.
Responses are to be assessed using the analytic markscheme specific to the question paper, which indicates the required responses and any particular breakdown of marks. For questions worth 4 marks using AO2 command terms, such as ‘explain’, the following descriptors should be used along with the paper-specific markscheme to allocate marks. These should be used in conjunction with the “External assessment” section of these instructions.
| Level | Descriptor | Marks |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. | 0 |
| 1 | The written response is limited. | 1–2 |
| 2 | The written response is clear. | 3–4 |
No comments:
Post a Comment