Response does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
There is little understanding of the demands of the question. The response is poorly structured or, where there is a recognizable essay structure, there is minimal focus on the task.
Little knowledge is present. Where specific examples
are referred to, they are factually incorrect, irrelevant or vague.
The response contains little or no critical analysis. It may consist mostly of generalizations and poorly substantiated assertions.
The response indicates some understanding of the demands of the question. While there may be an attempt to follow a structured approach, the response lacks clarity and coherence.
is demonstrated but lacks accuracy and relevance. There is a superficial understanding of historical context. The answer makes use of specific examples, although these may be vague or lack relevance.
There is some limited analysis, but the response
is primarily narrative/ descriptive in nature, rather than analytical.
The response indicates an understanding of the demands of the question,
but these demands are only partially addressed. There is an attempt to follow a structured approach.
Knowledge is mostly accurate and relevant. Events are generally placed in their historical context. Examples used are appropriate and relevant.
The response moves beyond description to include some analysis or critical commentary, but this is not sustained.
The demands of the question
are understood and addressed. Answers are generally well structured and organized, although there may be some repetition or lack of clarity in places.
Knowledge is accurate and relevant. Events are placed in their historical context, and there is a
clear understanding of historical concepts. Examples used are appropriate and relevant, and are used to support the analysis/ evaluation.
Arguments are mainly clear and coherent. There is some awareness and evaluation of different perspectives.
The response contains critical analysis. Most of the main points are substantiated, and the response argues to a consistent conclusion.
are clearly focused, showing a high degree of awareness of the demands and implications of the question. Answers are well structured, balanced and effectively organized.
Knowledge is detailed, accurate and relevant. Events are placed in their historical
context, and there is a clear understanding of historical concepts.
Examples used are appropriate and relevant, and are used effectively to support the analysis/evaluation.
Arguments are clear and coherent. There is evaluation of different perspectives,
and this evaluation is integrated effectively into the answer.
The answer contains well-developed critical analysis. All, or nearly all, of the main points are substantiated, and the response argues to a reasoned conclusion.
See History guide
First examinations 2017
Published January 2015
Published by International Baccalaureate Organization
15 Route des Morillons 1218 Le Grand-Saconnex
Represented by IB Publishing Ltd, Churchillplein
6, The Hague, 2517JW The Netherlands
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2015