Econ Grading
IB Econ Grading
The formal IB Economics Level grading guidelines (following the most recent exams) is as follows. So when you do your practice questions, this is what we will use to determine your IB Grade. These are based on the latest IB Economics exams levels (which change very slightly each year).
| Percent | Level |
| 75 — 100 | 7 |
| 64 — 74 | 6 |
| 51 — 63 | 5 |
| 39 — 50 | 4 |
| 26 — 38 | 3 |
| 12 — 25 | 2 |
| 00 – 11 | 1 |
For ‘other’, non-IB type assignments, quizes, tests, etc we use the normal Humanities Grade Boundaries:
Humanities Grading
The grade boundary for assessments that are not formal IB Economics material. This would include presentations, posters, multiple choice quizzes. We call these marks the OFS “Humanities Grade Boundaries.”
| Percent | Level |
| 80 — 100 | 7 |
| 70 — 79 | 6 |
| 57 — 69 | 5 |
| 44 — 56 | 4 |
| 30 — 43 | 3 |
| 20 — 29 | 2 |
| 0 — 19 | 1 |
How Exam Questions Are Marked
Short Answer Questions (10 Marks)
20 minutes per question.
This is higher paper 2 (HP2) . The exam will be 6 questions and you’ll choose 3 to do with 1 hour.
The assessment criteria apply to all questions. Evaluation is not needed to answer these questions. Just the simple DEED. Include a (real) real life example.
Level 0 Completely inappropriate answer. (0 marks)
Level 1 Limited understanding of the specific demands of the question. Very little recognition of the relevant economic theory. Relevant terms not defined. Significant errors. (1–3 marks)
Level 2 Some understanding of the specific demands of the question. Some recognition of relevant economic theory. Some relevant terms defined. Some errors. (4–6 marks)
Level 3 Understanding of the specific demands of the question. Relevant economic theory explained and developed. Relevant economic terms defined. Few errors. Where appropriate, diagrams included. (7–8 marks)
Level 4 Clear understanding of the specific demands of the question. Relevant economic theory clearly explained and developed. Relevant economic therms clearly defined. No major errors. Where appropriate, diagrams included and explained. Where appropriate, examples used. (9–10 marks)
Extended-response questions (25 marks)
You have 1 hour to answer 1 question
This is higher paper 1 (HP1) . The exam will be 4 questions and you will choose one and do it in one hour.
The assessment criteria apply to all questions.
Note that, in the 15-mark part, you’ll need to include a real-life example to score above a level 7 and (of course) you need to evaluate.
Part (a) [10 marks]
Level 0 Completely inappropriate answer. (0 marks)
Level 1 Little understanding of the specific demands of the question. Very little recognition of relevant economic theory. Relevant terms not defined. Significant errors. (1–3 marks)
Level 2 Some understanding of the specific demands of the question. Some recognition of relevant economic theory. Some relevant terms defined. Some errors. (4–6 marks)
Level 3 Understanding of the specific demands of the question. Relevant economic theory explained and developed. Relevant economic terms defined. Few errors. Where appropriate, diagrams included.(7–8 marks)
Level 4 Clear understanding of the specific demands of the question. Relevant economic theory clearly explained and developed. Relevant economic terms clearly defined. No major errors. Where appropriate, diagrams included and explained. Where appropriate, examples used. (9–10 marks)
Part (b) [15 marks]
Level 0 Completely inappropriate answer. (0 marks)
Level 1 Little understanding of the specific demands of the question. Very little recognition of relevant economic theory. Relevant terms not defined. Significant errors. (1–5 marks)
Level 2 Some understanding of the specific demands of the question. Some recognition of relevant economic theory. Some relevant terms defined. Some errors. (6–9 marks)
Level 3 Understanding of the specific demands of the question. Relevant economic theory explained and developed. Relevant economic terms defined. Few errors. Where appropriate, diagrams included. An attempt at evaluation.(10–12 marks)
Level 4 Clear understanding of the specific demands of the question. Relevant economic theory clearly explained and developed. Relevant economic terms clearly defined. No major errors. Where appropriate, diagrams included and explained. Where appropriate, examples used. Evidence of appropriate evaluation. (13–15 marks)
Data-response questions Each question is worth [20 marks].
40 minutes per question
This is higher paper 3 (HP3) . The exam will be 5 questions and you’ll choose 3 to do with 2 hours.
Tips from Mr McCarthy: Try not spend more than 2 mins per mark. So for the evaluation question D try to allow at least 16 minutes but probably slightly longer. Remember this exam requires lots of reading time, so factor this in to your time management. The shorter question B and C should take about 6–8 mins each.
(Click here for preparation strategies for this question type)
The assessment criteria apply to all questions.
Part (a) (i) [2 marks]
Level 0 Wrong Definition. (0 marks)
Level 1 Vague definition. (1 mark)
Level 2 Precise definition, or vague definition with appropriate example. (2 marks)
Part (a) (ii) [2 marks]
Level 0 Wrong Definition. (0 marks)
Level 1 Vague definition. (1 mark)
Level 2 Precise definition, or vague definition with appropriate example. (2 marks)
Part (b) [4 marks]
Level 0 Inappropriate answer. (0 marks)
Level 1 Identification of appropriate theory. (1–2 marks)
Level 2 Correct application of appropriate theory. (3–4 marks)
Part © [4 marks]
Level 0 Inappropriate answer. (0 marks)
Level 1 Identification of appropriate theory. (1–2 marks)
Level 2 Correct application of appropriate theory. (3–4 marks)
Part (d) [8 marks]
Level 0 No valid discussion. (0 marks)
Level 1 Few relevant concepts recognized. Little discussion, or only basic understanding. (1–2 marks)
Level 2 Relevant concepts recognized and developed in reasonable depth. Some attempt at application and analysis. (3–5 marks)
Level 3 Relevant concepts developed in reasonable depth demonstrating effective evaluation, supported by appropriate evidence or theory. (6–8 marks)
* If there is no direct reference to the data, then candidates may not be rewarded beyond Level 2.
Group 3 Grade Descriptors
Grade 7 Excellent performance
Demonstrates: conceptual awareness, insight, and knowledge and understanding which are evident in the skills of critical thinking; a high level of ability to provide answers which are fully developed, structured in a logical and coherent manner and illustrated with appropriate examples; a precise use of terminology which is specific to the subject; familiarity with the literature of the subject; the ability to analyse and evaluate evidence and to synthesize knowledge and concepts; awareness of alternative points of view and subjective and ideological biases, and the ability to come to reasonable, albeit tentative, conclusions; consistent evidence of critical reflective thinking; a high level of proficiency in analysing and evaluating data or problem solving.
Grade 6 Very good performance
Demonstrates: detailed knowledge and understanding; answers which are coherent, logically structured and well developed; consistent use of appropriate terminology; an ability to analyse, evaluate and synthesize knowledge and concepts; knowledge of relevant research, theories and issues, and awareness of different perspectives and contexts from which these have been developed; consistent evidence of critical thinking; an ability to analyse and evaluate data or to solve problems competently.
Grade 5 Good performance
Demonstrates: a sound knowledge and understanding of the subject using subject-specific terminology; answers which are logically structured and coherent but not fully developed; an ability to provide competent answers with some attempt to integrate knowledge and concepts; a tendency to be more descriptive than evaluative although some ability is demonstrated to present and develop contrasting points of view; some evidence of critical thinking; an ability to analyse and evaluate data or to solve problems.
Grade 4 Satisfactory performance
Demonstrates: a secure knowledge and understanding of the subject going beyond the mere citing of isolated, fragmentary, irrelevant or ‘common sense’ points; some ability to structure answers but with insufficient clarity and possibly some repetition; an ability to express knowledge and understanding in terminology specific to the subject; some understanding of the way facts or ideas may be related and embodied in principles and concepts; some ability to develop ideas and substantiate assertions; use of knowledge and understanding which is more descriptive than analytical; some ability to compensate for gaps in knowledge and understanding through rudimentary application or evaluation of that knowledge; an ability to interpret data or to solve problems and some ability to engage in analysis and evaluation.
Grade 3 Mediocre performance
Demonstrates: some knowledge and understanding of the subject; a basic sense of structure that is not sustained throughout the answers; a basic use of terminology appropriate to the subject; some ability to establish links between facts or ideas; some ability to comprehend data or to solve problems.
Grade 2 Poor performance
Demonstrates: a limited knowledge and understanding of the subject; some sense of structure in the answers; a limited use of terminology appropriate to the subject; a limited ability to establish links between facts or ideas; a basic ability to comprehend data or to solve problems.
Grade 1 Very poor performance
Demonstrates: very limited knowledge and understanding of the subject; almost no organizational structure in the answers; inappropriate or inadequate use of terminology; a limited ability to comprehend data or to solve problems.
Recent Comments