The portfolio is assessed against six criteria that are related to the assessment objectives of the ITGS course.

Criterion A Presentation of the issue 4 marks
Criterion B The IT background of the issue 5 marks
Criterion C The impact of the issue 5 marks
Criterion D A solution to a problem arising from the issue 5 marks
Criterion E Selection and use of sources 2 marks
Criterion F Expression of ideas relevant to the social issue 4 marks
Total 25 marks

Criterion A Presentation of the issue
Failure to refer to the news item will result in a penalty of 1 mark.
Level Descriptor
0 Level 1 is not achieved or the news item is in the same area of impact as a previous piece of work.
1 The student identifies an appropriate social and/or ethical issue related to an IT system.
2 The student outlines an appropriate social and/or ethical issue related to an IT system.
3 The student describes an appropriate social and/or ethical issue related to an IT system.
4 The student explains an appropriate social and/or ethical issue related to an IT system.

Criterion B The IT background of the issue
1
The student has only stated the IT background. This type of response will be characterized by lists with no further development.
2–3
For 2 marks the response will be largely a list, but with limited development. This may mean that only some of the major components are described or the description of the major components is superficial.
For 3 marks the description will be full for all of the major components, but there may be omissions of some
of the minor components. At this level students should also be using appropriate IT terminology.
These marks should be seen as a continuum. The student will have described the IT background, but the determinant of the mark will be the breadth or depth of the description. The appropriate annotation explaining why the work has been awarded 2 or 3 marks is paramount especially if it is requested for the team leader’s or principal examiner’s sample.
4
The student will have explained the operation of the major components of the IT system.
However, it would not need to be exhaustive and the key determinant of the student reaching this level will be their explanation of the concepts linked to the issue in the news item.
5
The student will have demonstrated evidence of the analysis of the IT background in the context of the issue.
This again need not be exhaustive, but should be achievable by a student bearing in mind their age and the word limit for the individual portfolio item.
The key determinant of this level will be that the student has analysed the IT system rather than explained it.

Criterion C The impact of the issue
Level Descriptor
0 Level 1 is not achieved.
1 The student outlines the impact of the issue on society, and identifies at least one related problem.
2 The student describes the impact of the issue on society, and identifies at least one related problem.
3 The student explains the impact of the issue on society, and identifies at least one related problem.
4 The student analyses (citing supporting research) the impact of the issue on society, and identifies at least one related problem.
5 The student evaluates (citing supporting research) the impact of the issue on society, and identifies at least one related problem.

Criterion D A solution to a problem arising from the issue
• The solution must address one problem identified in criterion C. A non IT solution is acceptable.
• If the problem has not been identified in criterion C or D, the student receives no marks for criterion D.
• The “solution” may also take the form of further questions.
Level Descriptor
1 The student has only listed the “solution”.
This type of response will be characterized by a single point with no further development.
2–3
For 2 marks the response will probably be a single point to state the “solution” with limited description of it. For 3 marks there will be a full description of the solution that covers the key aspects of it. The description does not have to be exhaustive.
These marks should be seen as a continuum. The student will have described the IT background, but the determinant of the mark will be the breadth or depth of the description. The appropriate annotation explaining why the work has been awarded 2 or 3 marks is paramount, especially if it is requested for the team leader’s or principal examiner’s sample.
4
The student will have explained how the “solution” has solved the problem but will not have commented on its effectiveness in solving the problem.
5
The student will have evaluated the “solution” and how it solves the problem, partially solves the problem, or raises further issues.
This again need not be exhaustive, but should be achievable by a student.

Criterion E Selection and use of sources
• Use any standard format for bibliography and footnotes.
• A copy of the news item must be attached to the piece of work.
Level Descriptor
0 Level 1 is not achieved or the news item is not attached.
1 The student has provided a list of references (minimum 4, including the news item).
2 The student has provided a list of references (minimum 4, including the news item) and properly cited those references in the text.

Criterion F Expression of ideas relevant to the social issue
Level Descriptor
0 Level 1 is not achieved.
1 The student expresses ideas with supporting arguments.
2 The student expresses ideas with supporting arguments and relevant examples.
3 The student expresses ideas coherently with supporting arguments and relevant examples.
4 The student expresses ideas coherently with supporting arguments and extended relevant examples.

Assessment criteria for the HL portfolio extension
The portfolio extension is assessed against five criteria that are related to the objectives of the HL ITGS course.
Criterion N Discussion and analysis of the interview 3 marks
Criterion O Reflection on the interview 4 marks
Criterion P Projection of broader implications from the interview and portfolio research 4 marks
Criterion Q
Interview process
• Appropriateness of the choice of the interviewee
• Appropriateness of the interview questions
• Comprehensive record of the interview(s)
7 marks
Criterion R Quality of communication 2 marks
Total 20 marks

Criterion N Discussion and analysis of the interview
Level Descriptor
0 The student has not achieved level 1.
1 The student describes the interview and refers to the summary of the interview.
2 The student discusses the interview and refers to the summary of the interview with some analysis.
3 The student discusses the interview and refers to the summary of the interview with extensive analysis.

Criterion O Reflection on the interview
Level Descriptor
0 Level 1 is not achieved.
1 An attempt has been made to relate ideas arising from the interview to the portfolio research.
2 There is some reflection on ideas arising from the interview and applied to the portfolio research with supportive examples.
3 There is an extensive reflection on ideas arising from the interview and applied to the portfolio research with supportive examples.
4 There is an extensive reflection on ideas arising from the interview and applied to the portfolio research with supportive examples and new relationships are established.

Criterion P Projection of broader implications from the interview and portfolio research
Level Descriptor
0 The student has not achieved level 1.
1 An attempt has been made to project implications as a result of the interview or the portfolio research.
2 There is some projection of implications as a result of the interview or the portfolio research.
3 There is some projection of implications as a result of the interview and the portfolio research with supportive examples.
4 There is an extensive projection of implications as a result of the interview and portfolio research with supportive examples.

Criterion Q Interview process
Level Appropriateness of the choice of the interviewee
0 The choice of interviewee is not appropriate.
1 The choice of interviewee is appropriate.
Level Appropriateness of the interview questions
0 There is no record of the interview questions.
1–2 The interview questions are partially appropriate.
3 The interview questions are appropriate.
Level Comprehensive record of the interview(s)
0 There is no record of the interview(s).
1–2 There is a partial record of the interview(s).
3 There is a comprehensive record of the interview(s).

Criterion R Quality of communication
Level Descriptor
0 The student has not achieved level 1.
1 The student expresses arguments in a coherent or structured manner.
2 The student expresses arguments in a coherent and structured manner.