Back To History

IA Playbook

History IA Criteria Guide

Turn source selection and evaluation into a tighter, more defensible investigation.

Use this guide to keep your question narrow, make source value and limitations explicit, and connect your reflection to historical method rather than summary.

History IA

Assessment criteria

See what each criterion measures, how many marks it carries, and what stronger evidence usually looks like.

This is Marksy's independently written criteria explanation, not an official IB publication.

Criterion A: Identification and evaluation of sources (6 marks)

How clearly the investigation identifies its question and evaluates two important sources for that inquiry.

Stronger evidence

The response addresses the criterion consistently and precisely. Evidence is well selected, reasoning is sustained, and important choices or limitations are handled convincingly.

Early-stage evidence

Only fragments of relevant evidence are visible. The response begins to address identification and evaluation of sources, but important parts remain missing, unclear, or unsupported.

Criterion B: Investigation (15 marks)

How effectively the investigation uses evidence and historical reasoning to answer the research question.

Stronger evidence

The response addresses the criterion consistently and precisely. Evidence is well selected, reasoning is sustained, and important choices or limitations are handled convincingly.

Early-stage evidence

Only fragments of relevant evidence are visible. The response begins to address investigation, but important parts remain missing, unclear, or unsupported.

Criterion C: Reflection (4 marks)

How thoughtfully the student reflects on methods used by historians and challenges of producing historical knowledge.

Stronger evidence

The response addresses the criterion consistently and precisely. Evidence is well selected, reasoning is sustained, and important choices or limitations are handled convincingly.

Early-stage evidence

Only fragments of relevant evidence are visible. The response begins to address reflection, but important parts remain missing, unclear, or unsupported.

Markband guide

Criterion A: Identification and evaluation of sources (6 marks)

MarksWhat the draft currently shows
0The submitted material does not provide assessable evidence for identification and evaluation of sources.
1-2Only fragments of relevant evidence are visible. The response begins to address identification and evaluation of sources, but important parts remain missing, unclear, or unsupported.
3Some relevant evidence is developed, although the response is inconsistent or leaves important connections unexplained.
4-5The response addresses the criterion securely in most places, using relevant evidence and generally clear reasoning, with limited gaps.
6The response addresses the criterion consistently and precisely. Evidence is well selected, reasoning is sustained, and important choices or limitations are handled convincingly.

Criterion B: Investigation (15 marks)

MarksWhat the draft currently shows
0The submitted material does not provide assessable evidence for investigation.
1-4Only fragments of relevant evidence are visible. The response begins to address investigation, but important parts remain missing, unclear, or unsupported.
5-8Some relevant evidence is developed, although the response is inconsistent or leaves important connections unexplained.
9-12The response addresses the criterion securely in most places, using relevant evidence and generally clear reasoning, with limited gaps.
13-15The response addresses the criterion consistently and precisely. Evidence is well selected, reasoning is sustained, and important choices or limitations are handled convincingly.

Criterion C: Reflection (4 marks)

MarksWhat the draft currently shows
0The submitted material does not provide assessable evidence for reflection.
1Only fragments of relevant evidence are visible. The response begins to address reflection, but important parts remain missing, unclear, or unsupported.
2Some relevant evidence is developed, although the response is inconsistent or leaves important connections unexplained.
3The response addresses the criterion securely in most places, using relevant evidence and generally clear reasoning, with limited gaps.
4The response addresses the criterion consistently and precisely. Evidence is well selected, reasoning is sustained, and important choices or limitations are handled convincingly.

Build Sequence

Did You Know? Most weak drafts fail from sequence chaos, not lack of ideas.

Step 1

Narrow the question

Define a question that can be answered with specific evidence instead of a broad historical overview.

Step 2

Evaluate the sources

Explain why your key sources matter by discussing origin, purpose, content, value, and limitations.

Step 3

Build the investigation

Organize your argument around evidence and interpretation, not just chronology.

Step 4

Write the reflection

Make the historian's methods and limitations explicit so the final section is clearly connected to the investigation.

Submission Checklist

  • The question is precise and researchable.
  • Two sources are explicitly evaluated for value and limitations.
  • Evidence from sources supports a sustained argument.
  • The reflection clearly discusses historical method and its limits.

Quick Wins

  • Trim the question until it fits one clear line of inquiry.
  • Note origin, purpose, and content for every key source before drafting.
  • Use one paragraph to compare perspectives instead of retelling events.

Did You Know?

Build A Cleaner History IA With Rubric Feedback

Marksy gives independently written feedback highlighting source-evaluation gaps and places where your argument and reflection need more precision. Every criterion mark is an estimate, not an official result. The result includes an estimated mark for every criterion, evidence from your draft, and the changes to make first. Your final mark may differ after teacher assessment or external moderation.

1. Upload your IA draft PDF to Marksy.
2. Get an estimated mark and feedback for every IA criterion.
3. Revise and resubmit with focused improvements.
Marksy grading results view

Instant Grading Results

See where your score is now, not just where it could be.

Marksy criterion feedback highlights

Criterion-By-Criterion Feedback

See the estimated mark, evidence, and next step for every assessment criterion.

Marksy list of fixes for an IB draft

Action List To Improve

Get concrete next edits instead of vague "improve analysis" advice.

Marksy AI detection and highlight review

Confidence And Integrity Signals

Review flagged sections and strengthen authenticity before submission.

Grade My History IASee PricingWhat Is Marksy?
OverviewCriteriaBuildDid You Know?More Guides
Grade My History IA