Philosophy · Philosophical Analysis of a Non-Philosophical Stimulus (IA)
IB Philosophy IA Grader
Upload your Philosophical Analysis of a Non-Philosophical Stimulus (IA) and get criterion-by-criterion feedback against the IB assessment criteria in the official IB Philosophy internal assessment criteria (philosophical analysis of a non-philosophical stimulus; unchanged in the first-assessment-2025 guide). Whether you are at Higher Level (HL) and Standard Level (SL), iBacalao shows where your draft meets the mark scheme and what to improve before formative submission. Free to start in the Mac app; sign-in is required to keep reviews and usage limits tied to your account.
IB assessment criteria — 25 marks total
Your Philosophical Analysis of a Non-Philosophical Stimulus (IA) is graded against 5 criteria in the official mark scheme. iBacalao scores each one and tells you exactly where to gain marks.
Identification of Issue and Justification
The philosophical issue raised by the stimulus (a film, image, article, song…) clearly and explicitly identified, with a clear justification of the connection between the stimulus and the philosophical issue.
Clarity
A well-structured, focused and effectively organized response that is clear and coherent throughout.
Knowledge and Understanding
Relevant, accurate and detailed philosophical knowledge, a well-developed explanation of the philosophical issue, and appropriate use of philosophical vocabulary throughout.
Analysis
Well-developed critical analysis rather than description, with well-chosen examples that support the argument, and counter-arguments identified and analysed in a convincing way.
Evaluation
Clear evaluation of alternative interpretations or points of view, with all or nearly all of the main points justified, arguing from a consistently held position to a clearly stated conclusion consistent with the argument.
Common mistakes to avoid
The most frequent reasons students drop marks on each criterion.
Identification of Issue and Justification
- Issue implied by the discussion but never explicitly stated
- No justification of why the stimulus raises this issue
- Stimulus treated as decoration rather than the source of the issue
- Issue too broad ("ethics") instead of a focused philosophical question
Clarity
- No recognizable structure (issue, analysis, evaluation, conclusion)
- Paragraphs that drift from the task
- Reader can't tell what the answer is trying to convey
- Stimulus summary crowding out the philosophy
Knowledge and Understanding
- Philosophical positions named but not accurately explained
- Philosophical vocabulary absent or misused
- Knowledge recited without connection to the issue
- Only one philosophical tradition or thinker considered where the issue invites more
Analysis
- Describing the stimulus or the positions instead of analysing them
- No examples, or examples that don't support the argument
- Counter-arguments never raised
- Counter-arguments stated but immediately dismissed without analysis
Evaluation
- Alternative interpretations mentioned but never weighed
- Main points asserted without justification
- Position shifts midway through the response
- Conclusion missing, or inconsistent with the argument made
Common questions
How is the IB Philosophy Philosophical Analysis of a Non-Philosophical Stimulus (IA) marked?
Your Philosophical Analysis of a Non-Philosophical Stimulus (IA) is marked against 5 criteria totalling 25 marks using the official IB Philosophy internal assessment criteria (philosophical analysis of a non-philosophical stimulus; unchanged in the first-assessment-2025 guide): Identification of Issue and Justification (/3), Clarity (/4), Knowledge and Understanding (/4), Analysis (/8), Evaluation (/6). Each criterion has its own mark bands, and your teacher's marks are moderated by the IBO.
What are the most common mistakes in the IB Philosophy Philosophical Analysis of a Non-Philosophical Stimulus (IA)?
The two criteria worth the most marks are where students lose the most. On Analysis: Describing the stimulus or the positions instead of analysing them; No examples, or examples that don't support the argument. On Evaluation: Alternative interpretations mentioned but never weighed; Main points asserted without justification. The full list for every criterion is above.
Which criterion is worth the most marks in the IB Philosophy Philosophical Analysis of a Non-Philosophical Stimulus (IA)?
The highest-weighted criterion is "Analysis" and is worth 8 marks. The top mark band for this criterion is the most detailed, so missing any element it mentions is the fastest way to lose marks.
What is the word limit for the Philosophy Philosophical Analysis of a Non-Philosophical Stimulus (IA)?
Word and page limits for the Philosophical Analysis of a Non-Philosophical Stimulus (IA) are set in the official IB Philosophy internal assessment criteria (philosophical analysis of a non-philosophical stimulus; unchanged in the first-assessment-2025 guide) rather than being the same across subjects, so check your subject guide for the exact figure. Going over the limit risks examiners stopping at the limit and not marking what follows.
Can I use AI to help with my Philosophy IA?
The IBO allows AI for research support and feedback, but the submitted work must be entirely your own. iBacalao gives criterion-by-criterion feedback on your draft — the same kind of comment your teacher would give — without generating any text for your IA.