Order 736659: Report on my engagement activity as a volunteer to inform people about Turkish and Kurdish military war in the East side of Turkey

Internal assessment

Purpose of internal assessment

Internal assessment is an integral part of the course and is compulsory for both SL and HL students. It enables students to demonstrate the application of their skills and knowledge, and to pursue their personal interests, without the time limitations and other constraints that are associated with written examinations.

The internal assessment requirements of global politics at SL and at HL are briefly as follows.

• At SL and HL, students undertake an engagement through which they explore a political issue of personal interest experientially. They then produce a written report, in which they explain what they learned about the political issue through the engagement, and analyse and evaluate the issue, supported by additional complementary research.

• At HL, students additionally conduct in-depth research into two case studies of two global political challenges and prepare an oral presentation on chosen political issues in the case studies. The presentations are video recorded.

More information on the content of the internal assessment tasks is given in the “Syllabus content” section of this guide.

Time allocation

Internal assessment is an integral part of the global politics course, contributing 25% to the final assessment in the SL course and 40% to the final assessment in the HL course.

It is recommended that a total of approximately 20 hours of teaching time should be allocated to the engagement activity at SL and HL. This should include time for:

• the teacher to explain to students the requirements of the engagement activity and the ethical guidelines for the engagement activity

• students to work on the engagement activity and ask questions

• consultation between the teacher and each student

• reviewing and monitoring progress, and checking authenticity

The teaching time allocated for the HL extension work is 90 hours. This includes time for:

• the teacher to explain to students the requirements of the HL extension

• the whole class to familiarize themselves with the six global political challenges

• students to do their research

• students to do practice presentations

• the prescribed individual meetings between the teacher and students to review and monitor progress, and to check authenticity

• video recording and assessing the presentations

Guidance and authenticity

The written report submitted for the engagement activity at SL and HL and the video recorded presentations submitted for the HL extension must be the student’s own work. However, it is not the

Global politics guide 56

intention that students should decide upon a title or topic and be left to work on the internal assessment components without any further support from the teacher. The teacher should play an important role during both the planning stage and the period when the student is working on the internally assessed work. It is the responsibility of the teacher to ensure that students are familiar with:

• the requirements of the type of work to be internally assessed

• the ethical guidelines for the engagement activity at SL and HL

• the assessment criteria for the engagement activity at SL and HL and the marking rubric for the HL extension; students must understand that the work submitted for assessment must address the criteria and the rubric effectively.

Teachers and students must discuss the internally assessed work. Students should be encouraged to initiate discussions with the teacher to obtain advice and information, and students must not be penalized for seeking guidance. As part of the learning process, teachers should read and give advice to students on one draft of the written report for the engagement activity and on one draft of the written outline for each HL presentation. The teacher should provide oral or written advice on how the work could be improved, but not edit the draft or the outline. For the written report for the engagement activity, the next version handed to the teacher must be the final version for submission; for the HL extension, each presentation must only be performed once, for the video recording.

It is the responsibility of teachers to ensure that all students understand the basic meaning and significance of concepts that relate to academic honesty, especially authenticity and intellectual property. Teachers must ensure that all student work for assessment is prepared according to the requirements and must explain clearly to students that the internally assessed work must be entirely their own. Where collaboration between students is permitted, it must be clear to all students what the difference is between collaboration and collusion.

All work submitted to the IB for moderation or assessment must be authenticated by a teacher, and must not include any known instances of suspected or confirmed academic misconduct. Each student must confirm that the work is his or her authentic work and constitutes the final version of that work. Once a student has officially submitted the final version of the work, it cannot be retracted. The requirement to confirm the authenticity of work applies to the work of all students, not just the sample work that will be submitted to the IB for the purpose of moderation. For further details refer to the IB publication Academic honesty, The Diploma Programme: From principles into practice and the relevant articles in General regulations: Diploma Programme.

Authenticity may be checked by discussion with the student on the content of the work, and scrutiny of one or more of the following.

• The student’s initial proposals

• The first draft of the written report for the engagement activity and the written outline of each HL presentation

• The references cited

• the style of writing compared with work known to be that of the student

• the analysis of the written work by a web-based plagiarism detection service

• the style of delivery of the oral presentations compared with delivery known to be characteristic of the student.

Different political issues must be studied for the requirements of the engagement activity, the HL extension and a potential extended essay students may choose to write in global politics.

Group engagements may be undertaken by students. However each student must study a different political issue and individually write up his or her own written report. Group work is not permitted for the HL extension.

Global politics guide 57

Engagement activity

Duration: 20 hours

Weighting: 25% at SL; 20% at HL

Written report on a political issue explored through engagement and research

Students are required to write a maximum 2,000-word written report in which they explain what they learned about their chosen political issue through their engagement, and analyse and evaluate the issue, supported by additional complementary research. The requirements of the task are the same at both SL and HL. The maximum mark for the written report is 20 marks and it is assessed using assessment criteria.

Using assessment criteria For the engagement activity, a number of assessment criteria have been identified. Each assessment criterion has level descriptors describing specific achievement levels, together with an appropriate range of marks. The level descriptors concentrate on positive achievement, although for the lower levels failure to achieve may be included in the description.

Teachers must judge the written report at SL and at HL against the criteria using the level descriptors.

• The same assessment criteria are provided for SL and HL.

• The aim is to find, for each criterion, the descriptor that conveys most accurately the level attained by the student, using the best-fit model. A best-fit approach means that compensation should be made when a piece of work matches different aspects of a criterion at different levels. The mark awarded should be one that most fairly reflects the balance of achievement against the criterion. It is not necessary for every single aspect of a level descriptor to be met for that mark to be awarded.

• When assessing a student’s work, teachers should read the level descriptors for each criterion until they reach a descriptor that most appropriately describes the level of the work being assessed. If a piece of work seems to fall between two descriptors, both descriptors should be read again and the one that more appropriately describes the student’s work should be chosen.

• Where there are two or more marks available within a level, teachers should award the upper marks if the student’s work demonstrates the qualities described to a great extent; the work may be close to achieving marks in the level above. Teachers should award the lower marks if the student’s work demonstrates the qualities described to a lesser extent; the work may be close to achieving marks in the level below.

• Only whole numbers should be recorded; partial marks, (fractions and decimals) are not acceptable.

• Teachers should not think in terms of a pass or fail boundary, but should concentrate on identifying the appropriate descriptor for each assessment criterion.

• The highest level descriptors do not imply faultless performance but should be achievable by a student. Teachers should not hesitate to use the extremes if they are appropriate descriptions of the work being assessed.

• A student who attains a high achievement level in relation to one criterion will not necessarily attain high achievement levels in relation to the other criteria. Similarly, a student who attains a low achievement level for one criterion will not necessarily attain low achievement levels for the other criteria. Teachers should not assume that the overall assessment of the students will produce any particular distribution of marks.

• It is recommended that the assessment criteria be made available to students.

Assessment criteria for the written report Criterion A: Identification of issue and justification (4 marks)

• Is the political issue explored through the engagement identified?

Global politics guide 58

• Is there a clear explanation of why this particular engagement and political issue are of interest to the student?

• Is there a clear link between the engagement and political issue on one hand and course content on the other hand?

Marks Level descriptor

0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

1–2 The political issue raised by the engagement is implied but not explicitly identified. There is some limited explanation of why the student chose this engagement. There is some link between the engagement and course content.

3–4 The political issue explored through the engagement is clearly and explicitly identified. There is a clear explanation of why this engagement and political issue are of interest to the student. There is a clear link between the engagement and political issue on one hand and course content on the other hand.

Criterion B: Explanation of the engagement (4 marks)

• Is the description of the engagement and of what the student actually did clear and relevant for their chosen political issue?

• Is there a clear explanation of the ways in which the student’s experiences informed his or her understanding of the political issue?

Marks Level descriptor

0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

1–2 There is a description of the engagement and of what the student actually did. There is some limited explanation of what the student learned about global politics from undertaking the engagement.

3–4 The description of the engagement and of what the student actually did is clear and relevant for their chosen political issue. There is a clear explanation of the ways in which the student’s experiences informed his or her understanding of the political issue.

Global politics guide 59

Criterion C: Analysis of issue (6 marks)

• To what extent does the student analyse the political issue?

• To what extent does the student justify his or her main points?

Marks Level descriptor

0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

1–2 There is some attempt at analysis of the political issue but the response is largely descriptive. Few of the main points are justified.

3–4 There is some critical analysis of the political issue but this analysis lacks depth. The response is more descriptive than analytical. Some of the main points are justified.

5–6 The political issue is explored in depth, using the key concepts of the course where relevant, and the response contains clear critical analysis. All, or nearly all, of the main points are justified.

Criterion D: Synthesis and evaluation (6 marks)

• To what extent does the student synthesize his or her experiences and research in the discussion of the political issue?

• To what extent does the student show evidence of evaluation, underpinned by his or her experiences and adequate research, to allow multiple perspectives on the political issue?

Marks Level descriptor

0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

1–2 There are limited links between ideas. There are no conclusions, or the conclusions are not relevant.

3–4 There are some links between the student’s experiences and more theoretical perspectives on the political issue. Conclusions are stated but are not entirely consistent with the evidence presented. Multiple perspectives are acknowledged, where relevant.

5–6 The student’s experiences and more theoretical perspectives are synthesised so that an integrated and rich treatment of the political issue ensues. Conclusions are clearly stated, balanced and consistent with the evidence presented. There is evidence of evaluation of the political issue from multiple perspectives.

Global politics guide 60