Section+D

=Section D: Analysis, 6 marks=

There are 6 marks are available for the analysis section, out of a total of 25 for the entire investigation, so it is important that you get this right. The IB moderator will be looking for the following:


 * an analysis, that is clearly expressed and consistent in its approach and focused on the question. It should be objective, though not necessarily impartial. An analysis breaks down complex issues in order to bring out the essential elements, any underlying assumptions and any interrelationships involved
 * an understanding of the issue in its historical context.
 * a critical examination of the factual material presented in section B in the form of an argument supported by relevant detail.
 * an awareness of the significance of the sources used, especially those evaluated in section C.
 * a consideration of different interpretations of evidence, where appropriate. The analysis should not be one sided.

Given the tight word limits, you need to:


 * synthesise ideas, be succinct and organised
 * avoid unsupported generalisations by using a range of supporting material
 * think critically by comparing and contrasting alternative interpretations directly related to the specific research question
 * place the study into its broader historical context

Suggested word count: 500 - 600 words

D Analysis, Marks Level descriptor
0 = There is no analysis. 1–2 = There is some attempt at analysing the evidence presented in section B. 3–4 = There is analysis of the evidence presented in section B and references are included. There may be some awareness of the significance to the investigation of the sources evaluated in section C. Where appropriate, different interpretations are considered. 5–6 = There is critical analysis of the evidence presented in section B, accurate referencing, and an awareness of the significance to the investigation of the sources evaluated in Section C. Where appropriate, different interpretations are analysed

What to do:
This section is the "essay" part of the investigation. You will use the evidence you provided in section B and the resources you evaluated in section C to write an analysis of your question. this section must include the following elements.
 * An analysis of the key issues related to your question must appear. You have already developed different themes in your list of evidence in section B. You now present each case or theme in turn and explain why.
 * You must show an understanding of the issue or question in its historical context.
 * You must make critical use of the evidence presented in section B. The evidence from section B will be synthesized into your analysis as supporting examples for each line of argument.
 * You must extensively cite/reference Section D.
 * This section should be an analysis of the question as a whole; not simply an analysis of its separate parts.
 * DO NOT include new information or evidence. Everything you analyse in D must be presented in B.
 * Click here for an explanation of the difference between B and D.
 * An awareness of the significance of the sources used, especially those in section C, must be evident.
 * Where appropriate, there should be consideration of different interpretations.
 * You must reference all evidence used in this section. As with section B, each time you include evidence you must reference it here. This should be done thoroughly and be correctly formatted.
 * You must connect the analysis section with the original research question. This is true for the entire paper. There should be a thread running through the entire paper connecting all sections back to the research question.
 * The information your analyse should flow towards a logical conclusion, which you will present in Section E (Conclusion).

What the examiners say:
After every round of exams, IAs and EEs, the IB examiners prepare a "Subject Report". See example here.

It is very useful to read the comments for all areas (Papers, IAs and EEs) as it gives you valuable pointers.

At the upper mark level candidates successfully utilized critical analysis of the evidence presented in section B with explicit references to the significance of the sources evaluated in section C. At the lower mark levels critical analysis was often limited with many candidates not fully analyzing the evidence presented in section B or demonstrating explicit awareness of the significance of the sources evaluated in section C. There seems to be an increase in new evidence being placed in this section which attempts to compensate for a lack of evidence in section B. The candidate would improve the quality of the summary of evidence as well as receiving credit for the material if it was correctly placed. In samples where research questions were not clearly stated, the resulting analysis was unfocused and lacked depth. There continues to be a lack of understanding by some candidates and centres that it is necessary to include references to be awarded a mark above two.
 * Criterion D - Analysis (May 2012)**

This section continues to provide some challenges for the candidates. Most of the investigations attempt some analysis of the evidence in Section B but a number of candidates simply restated Section B with limited comments. When analysis was blended into evidence in Section B candidates would often then introduce new evidence into Section D and comment on that material. Two areas that were particular problems in this section were the lack of awareness of the significance of the sources evaluated in Section C and referencing. If there are no references in this section a maximum of 2 marks can be awarded. Not addressing the sources evaluated in Section C limits the maximum mark that can be awarded to 4. These two issues impacted a significant number of this year‟s investigations. Candidates are asked in this section to analyze the evidence as it applies to the research question and many candidates actually analyzed the components of the question but did not analyze the full question, which is necessary to successfully reach a conclusion.
 * Criterion D: Analysis (May 2011)**

A large number of candidates complied with the new specific requirements to include in this section an analysis of the selected sources in C. But, as in section B, one of the problems with the section was the lack of references. With regard to references, the new criteria specify for Section B: the need for references (differences between 3-4 and 5-6) and in Section D: there is the need for references again (differences between 3-4 and 5-6). Some candidates approached this section by making allusions to B: “as mentioned in B…” and C: “mentioned in C…” but without including the required references. If no references are included only a maximum of 2 marks can be awarded. This section is an analysis of the factual knowledge summarized in B, and no new evidence should be introduced in section D.
 * Criterion D: Analysis (May 2010)**