Economics Internal Assessment: what criteria are configured?
The table below is the 5-criterion, 14-mark model currently configured in iBacalao. Treat it as a reference until the subject-specific evidence pack has been reviewed.
| Criterion | Name | Marks |
|---|---|---|
| Diagrams | Diagrams | 3 |
| Terminology | Terminology | 2 |
| Application and Analysis | Application and Analysis | 3 |
| Key Concept | Key Concept | 3 |
| Evaluation | Evaluation | 3 |
| Total | 14 | |
How do Economics IA criteria work?
Each criterion describes a different part of the assessment, and its mark-band descriptors explain what evidence and reasoning earn credit.
Diagrams
Diagrams
What this criterion assesses
Relevant, accurate and correctly labelled diagram(s) included, with a full explanation. The best commentaries use dynamic diagrams — showing the shifts and movements the article describes — and explain every element that appears in them.
Mark band descriptors
Criterion A: Diagrams (0–3) — the extent to which the student is able to construct and explain diagrams relevant to the article: - 0: The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. - 1: Relevant diagram(s) are included but not explained, or the explanations are incorrect. - 2: Relevant, accurate and correctly labelled diagram(s) are included, with a limited explanation. - 3: Relevant, accurate and correctly labelled diagram(s) are included, with a full explanation. Note: Diagrams should be dynamic where the article describes a change (showing shifts/movements of the relevant curves), drawn by the student, and fully explained in the context of the article — as a rule of thumb, everything included in a diagram needs to be explained.
Common mistakes
- Static diagram where the article describes a change (no shifted curves)
- Axes, curves or equilibria left unlabelled
- Diagram included but never explained in the text
- Diagram not connected to the specific situation in the article
Terminology
Terminology
What this criterion assesses
Terminology relevant to the article used appropriately throughout the commentary. The goal is fluent, correct use of the language of economics in context — not defining every term.
Mark band descriptors
Criterion B: Terminology (0–2) — the extent to which the student uses appropriate economic terminology relevant to the article: - 0: The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. - 1: Terminology relevant to the article is used appropriately in places. - 2: Terminology relevant to the article is used appropriately throughout the commentary. Note: Definitions are not a formal requirement; the correct, sustained use of relevant terminology is what is assessed.
Common mistakes
- Everyday language where precise economic terms exist
- Long definition lists that eat the word count instead of applied usage
- Terms used incorrectly or in the wrong context
- Terminology only in the introduction, not sustained throughout
Application and Analysis
Application and Analysis
What this criterion assesses
Relevant economic theory applied to the article throughout the commentary, with effective economic analysis — the theory explains the events in the article rather than being recited in the abstract.
Mark band descriptors
Criterion C: Application and analysis (0–3) — the extent to which the student recognizes, understands and applies economic theory in the context of the article: - 0: The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. - 1: Relevant economic theory is applied to the article in a limited way. - 2: Relevant economic theory is applied to the article. Some analysis is included. - 3: Relevant economic theory is applied to the article throughout the commentary. Effective economic analysis relating to the article is included.
Common mistakes
- Theory explained in textbook terms without linking to the article
- Paraphrasing the article instead of analysing it
- Analysis that drifts from the article's actual events or data
- Only describing what happened, never explaining why (the economic mechanism)
Key Concept
Key Concept
What this criterion assesses
One of the nine key concepts (scarcity, choice, efficiency, equity, economic well-being, sustainability, change, interdependence, intervention) identified and its link to the article fully explained — used as a lens framing the analysis, not mentioned in passing.
Mark band descriptors
Criterion D: Key concept (0–3) — the extent to which the student recognizes, understands and links one of the nine key concepts to the article: - 0: The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. - 1: A key concept is identified. - 2: A key concept is identified and its link to the article is explained. - 3: A key concept is identified and its link to the article is fully explained. Note: Each commentary must use one of the nine prescribed key concepts (economic well-being, interdependence, scarcity, efficiency, choice, intervention, change, equity, sustainability), and each commentary in the portfolio must use a different one.
Common mistakes
- Key concept named once in the introduction and never returned to
- Concept chosen that doesn't fit the article's economics
- Link to the article asserted but not explained
- Using the same key concept as another commentary in the portfolio
Evaluation
Evaluation
What this criterion assesses
Judgments supported by effective and balanced reasoning — for example short-run vs long-run implications, impacts on different stakeholder groups, assumptions behind the theory, and a prioritized, substantiated conclusion. Evaluate what is in the article; do not invent alternative policies the article never mentions.
Mark band descriptors
Criterion E: Evaluation (0–3) — the extent to which the student's judgments are supported by effective, balanced and reasoned arguments: - 0: The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. - 1: Judgments are made that are unsupported, or supported by incorrect reasoning. - 2: Judgments are made that are supported by limited reasoning. - 3: Judgments are made that are supported by effective and balanced reasoning. Note: Balanced reasoning can include short-run versus long-run implications, effects on different stakeholder groups, assumptions made, and prioritization of arguments. Students should evaluate the policy or events in the article rather than suggest alternative policies the article does not mention.
Common mistakes
- Judgments stated without reasoning to support them
- One-sided evaluation (no balance of winners and losers)
- Proposing alternative policies not mentioned in the article
- No consideration of short-run vs long-run or stakeholder impacts
Sources & verification
Primary-source references used to verify key assessment facts on this page. Last source check: September 22, 2026.
The exact subject guide for Economics is the authority for the task, criteria and limits. Some IB subject guides do not have a stable public URL, so this page names the configured assessment session and links the official IB update hubs instead of fabricating a direct source link.
- IB - Diploma Programme assessment and examsOfficial overview of criterion-related assessment and internal assessment in the Diploma Programme.
- IB - current curriculum updatesOfficial update hub for subject and first-assessment changes. Use it to confirm that your exam session matches the criteria shown here.
Ready to review your Economics Economics commentary (one of the three IA portfolio commentaries)?
Use the dedicated review workflow to check your draft against the configured Economics criteria for this assessment session.
Review Economics draft →