All Physics guides

Physics IA Criteria Guide

Design a controlled investigation, treat uncertainty seriously, and turn results into a defensible physical explanation.

This guide keeps the Physics IA anchored to a focused question, a reproducible method, clean data processing, and a conclusion that matches both the evidence and accepted physics context.

Assessment criteria

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

Criterion names, marks and mark bands follow the IB subject guide. The band descriptions are our own summaries, so check your subject guide for the exact wording.

Criterion A: Research Design (6 marks)

How clearly the report sets out its research question in context and explains a method someone else could repeat.

Stronger evidence
The question is set in a specific, well-chosen context, method considerations are explained, and the method is detailed enough for someone else to repeat.
Early-stage evidence
The research question appears without context, method considerations are only mentioned, and the method is too thin for someone else to repeat.

Criterion B: Data Analysis (6 marks)

How clearly and precisely the report records and processes data, including uncertainties, in ways that answer the question.

Stronger evidence
Recording and processing are clear and precise, uncertainties are handled appropriately, and the processing is correct and relevant to the question.
Early-stage evidence
Recording and processing are hard to follow and imprecise, uncertainties are barely considered, and processing has major gaps or errors.

Criterion C: Conclusion (6 marks)

How well the conclusion answers the research question from the analysis and compares the result with accepted science.

Stronger evidence
The conclusion is justified, fully consistent with the analysis, and supported by a relevant comparison with accepted science.
Early-stage evidence
A relevant conclusion is given, but the analysis does not support it and the comparison with accepted science is superficial.

Criterion D: Evaluation (6 marks)

How well the report judges the weaknesses of its method and suggests realistic improvements.

Stronger evidence
The report explains how much each specific weakness affected the results and explains realistic improvements that target them.
Early-stage evidence
Only generic weaknesses are named, and realistic improvements are simply listed.

Mark bands

Want to know where your IA sits in these bands? Upload your draft and get a mark for each criterion.

Grade my IA

How to build it

Most weak drafts fail on order, not on ideas.

  1. 1

    Frame a measurable relationship

    Choose one physical quantity or law that can be explored with a narrow, testable question.

  2. 2

    Control the experiment

    List variables, apparatus, and measurement strategy so the method is reproducible and the data is meaningful.

  3. 3

    Analyze with precision

    Show graphs, calculations, and uncertainty handling clearly so the physics argument is visible in the processing.

  4. 4

    Evaluate the model and method

    Compare the result to accepted physics and explain which limitations mattered most and why.

Before you submit

  • Question is narrow and physically testable.
  • Method can be replicated without guesswork.
  • Data processing includes units, uncertainty, and clear presentation.
  • Conclusion and evaluation are tied directly to the results.

Quick wins

  • Sketch the setup and label measurements before drafting the report.
  • Track uncertainty in the raw data table instead of adding it later.
  • End each analysis section with a direct statement of what the graph or calculation shows.

Turn Physics Results Into A Stronger IA

Marksy grades your Physics IA against the rubric, points out weak analysis or evaluation, and helps you improve before submission. The result includes a mark for every criterion, evidence from your draft, and the changes to make first.

Grade My Physics IASee Pricing
  1. 1

    Upload your IA draft as a PDF

  2. 2

    Get a mark and feedback for every IA criterion

  3. 3

    Revise and grade the new version

A mark for every criterion
A mark for every criterionSee where the draft is now, criterion by criterion.
Comments on your sentences
Comments on your sentencesEach comment points at the passage it is about.
What to fix first
What to fix firstConcrete next edits instead of "improve your analysis".