Upload your Business Management IA draft and get instant feedback aligned with official IB criteria.
Follow the same rubric-first flow students use to move from a raw draft to a submission-ready version.
Start by dropping in your coursework PDF. We built this flow to mirror how students prepare final submission drafts.
Drag and drop to upload
Limit 10 MB per file. Supported files: PDF
Sign in to start your first grading run.
Marksy maps your draft against the rubric so you can see where marks are gained or lost in each criterion.
Every important scoring decision is anchored to your writing so revision is evidence-based, not guesswork.
Get structured next actions so you can move from draft to stronger markband performance in the right order.
For class-wide workflows, the same logic extends to batch marking so feedback stays consistent across submissions.
Keep one grading system across IA, EE, TOK, and subject variants so your preparation process stays consistent.
Use this guide to keep the research question sharp, the evidence relevant, and the evaluation tied to the rubric.
Recommended Length
1,500-1,800 words
Build Timeline
4-6 weeks: define the question, gather evidence, apply tools, refine evaluation
Anchor Question
Does every section answer the question with business-specific evidence?
Want a full playbook format? Read Business Management IA Guide.
Use each criterion as a checklist for revision. Strong drafts make the scoring evidence obvious, not implied.
Examiner focus: To what extent does the student effectively integrate the analysis of the connection between the key concept and the organization under study throughout the internal assessment?
Top-band move: The student effectively integrates the analysis of the connection between the key concept and the organization under study throughout the internal assessment.
Common penalty: The student demonstrates knowledge of the key concept.
Examiner focus: To what extent does the student select three to five relevant supporting documents that address the research question in appropriate depth and breadth?
Top-band move: There are three to five supporting documents that are relevant, sufficiently in-depth and provide a range of ideas and views.
Common penalty: There are only one or two, or more than five, supporting documents **or** they are of marginal relevance.
Examiner focus: To what extent does the student effectively select and apply business management tools and theories that are relevant to the research question?
Top-band move: The business management tools and theories are effectively selected and applied with clear relevance to the research question.
Common penalty: There is a limited selection and application of business management tools and theories **or** these business management tools and theories are not relevant to the research question.
Examiner focus: To what extent does the student effectively select and use data from the supporting documents in their analysis and evaluation of the research question?
Top-band move: The selection and use of data from the supporting documents is effective, leading to a thorough analysis and evaluation of the research question. There is a sustained integration of ideas with consideration of the assumptions underpinning the arguments and implications.
Common penalty: There is limited selection and use of data from the supporting documents with no analysis and evaluation of the research question.
Examiner focus: To what extent is the student's conclusion consistent with the evidence presented and explicitly answers the research question?
Top-band move: Conclusions are consistent with the evidence presented and explicitly answer the research question.
Common penalty: Conclusions are inconsistent with the evidence presented, or conclusions are superficial.
Examiner focus: To what extent is the student's research project organized using an appropriate structure?
Top-band move: Appropriate structure.
Common penalty: Limited structure.
Examiner focus: To what extent is the student's business research project effectively presented with the use of required elements including a title page, an accurate table of contents, appropriate headings and sub-headings, and numbered pages?
Top-band move: All of the required elements of a well-presented research project are included.
Common penalty: One or more of the required elements of a well-presented research project is missing.
Match your draft to the descriptors below to identify the smallest edits that can move you into a higher band.
Points 0
Either the work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below **or** the key concept identified is neither change, creativity, ethics nor sustainability.
Points 1
The student demonstrates knowledge of the key concept.
Points 2
The student describes the connection between the key concept and the organization under study.
Points 3
The student analyses the connection between the key concept and the organization under study.
Points 4
The student partially integrates the analysis of the connection between the key concept and the organization under study in the internal assessment.
Points 5
The student effectively integrates the analysis of the connection between the key concept and the organization under study throughout the internal assessment.
Points 0
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
Points 1
There are only one or two, or more than five, supporting documents **or** they are of marginal relevance.
Points 2
There are three to five supporting documents that are generally relevant but some lack depth.
Points 3
There are three to five supporting documents that are relevant and sufficiently in-depth.
Points 4
There are three to five supporting documents that are relevant, sufficiently in-depth and provide a range of ideas and views.
Points 0
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
Points 1
There is a limited selection and application of business management tools and theories **or** these business management tools and theories are not relevant to the research question.
Points 2
There are some business management tools and theories selected and applied to the research question. Their relevance to the research question is superficial.
Points 3
The business management tools and theories are adequately selected and applied to the research question. Their relevance to the research question is not always clear.
Points 4
The business management tools and theories are effectively selected and applied with clear relevance to the research question.
Points 0
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
Points 1
There is limited selection and use of data from the supporting documents with no analysis and evaluation of the research question.
Points 2
The selection and use of data from the supporting documents is superficial, leading to limited analysis and evaluation of the research question.
Points 3
The selection and use of data from the supporting documents is adequate with some analysis and evaluation of the research question.
Points 4
The selection and use of data from the supporting documents is sufficient, leading to a mostly effective analysis and evaluation of the research question with some integration of ideas.
Points 5
The selection and use of data from the supporting documents is effective, leading to a thorough analysis and evaluation of the research question. There is a sustained integration of ideas with consideration of the assumptions underpinning the arguments and implications.
Points 0
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
Points 1
Conclusions are inconsistent with the evidence presented, or conclusions are superficial.
Points 2
Some conclusions are consistent with the evidence presented.
Points 3
Conclusions are consistent with the evidence presented and explicitly answer the research question.
Points 0
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
Points 1
Limited structure.
Points 2
Appropriate structure.
Points 0
The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
Points 1
One or more of the required elements of a well-presented research project is missing.
Points 2
All of the required elements of a well-presented research project are included.
Step 1
Choose one concept and keep returning to it so the analysis stays aligned with the rubric.
Step 2
Select three to five documents that are relevant, varied, and rich enough to support the investigation.
Step 3
Use business frameworks only where they help answer the research question rather than filling space.
Step 4
Make the conclusion answer the question directly and tie back to the evidence you actually used.
The key concept is visible throughout, not just named once.
Supporting documents are relevant, sufficient in depth, and varied.
Business tools and theories connect clearly to the research question.
The conclusion answers the question and stays consistent with the evidence.
Write a one-sentence business claim for each section before drafting.
Replace general commentary with data points from the supporting documents.
Use the same key terms consistently so the rubric language stays obvious.
The grader evaluates your submission against the active IB criteria for Business Management and returns criterion-level marks with actionable feedback.
Yes. Most students use draft grading to identify weak criteria, revise, and re-check before final submission.
Yes. Teachers can upload multiple files in one batch from the bulk grading route for faster class-wide feedback.
Absolutely. By default, nobody other than you can access your uploaded files, however you may make them shareable to others. Even then, you have full control to delete your files at any moment, and your files are not used to train AI models. More information here.
Upload a single submission and get criterion-by-criterion feedback aligned to IB descriptors.
Open Single GradingProcess up to 15 files in one run and keep feedback consistent across your class.
View Bulk Plan