The HL Portfolio and Extension is 20% of the overall course. You must produce:

3 pieces of written work on social and ethical issues based on three different areas of impact, each 800–1,000 words

an extension to one of the portfolio pieces, 800–1,000 words.

The portfolio is marked out of 25. There are 6 criterion (A - F).
The extension is out of 20. This is a total of 45 marks.

For the portfolio you have to do three papers. That means that you get 3 marks for each criterion and you are awarded.

The ITGS guide (page 37) states: "The final mark for each criterion is not an average of the three pieces of work. Teachers should review the three pieces of work included in the portfolio and for each criterion award the mark that best represents the level of achievement reached by the student at the end of the course. The final mark for each criterion must have been achieved on at least one of the pieces of work in the portfolio"

Here is an example to explain this:

Criterion

Total Possible Marks

P1

P2

P3

Final Level

Comments_ommed,kfgj kndfgk dfgnt

A

4

2

3

3

3

Level 3 reached for A in 2nd and 3rd paper so clearly a level 3

B

5

3

2

2

2

Although a level 3 reached in the first paper, a level 2 would best reflect the student achievement

C

5

3

3

5

5 or 3

Re-read carefully criterion C for p1 and p2. This is a judgement call. Does p1 or p2 have elements of a level 5. For example, is there some analysis? Has the student not cited sources therefore unable to achieve more than a level 3 even though there is an evaluation and some analysis? Is the p3 a 'solid' level 5 or is it just enough? If the student has elements of a level 5 in paper 2 and 3 and the final paper is a strong level 5, then award the level 3. Otherwise, award a level 3.

D

5

3

5

3

3

It is not possible to award a level that the student has not achieved - so only a level 3 or level 5. In this case, it would appear that the level is 3.

E

2

0

1

2

1 or 2

Review criterion for paper 2 and paper 3. If paper 3 has 'just' achieved a level 2 (a minor error to two but enough to award a 2), then this would be a level 1. If paper 3 has clearly achieved a level 2, then award a level 2 overall.

F

4

1

4

1

1

See comments for D above. This is a judgement call. It can only be a level 1 or level 4. In this case, it would probably be a level 1. However review the marks allocated for each paper. Is the final paper a level 1 or could it be a level 2? In this case the final level could be a level 2.

## Mrs Brookes' Guide to the HL Portfolio

Download this assessment criteria:

Here is a TEMPLATE for your final version (download and replace all the text highlighted):

The HL Portfolio and Extension is 20% of the overall course. You must produce:

The portfolio is marked out of 25. There are 6 criterion (A - F).

The extension is out of 20. This is a total of 45 marks.

For the portfolio you have to do three papers. That means that you get 3 marks for each criterion and you are awarded.

The ITGS guide (page 37) states: "The final mark for each criterion is not an average of the three pieces of work. Teachers should review the three pieces of work included in the portfolio and for each criterion award the mark that best represents the level of achievement reached by the student at the end of the course. The final mark for each criterion must have been achieved on at least one of the pieces of work in the portfolio"

Here is an example to explain this:

## Criterion

## P1

## P2

## P3

## Final Level

## Comments_ommed,kfgj kndfgk dfgnt

If the student has elements of a level 5 in paper 2 and 3 and the final paper is a strong level 5, then award the level 3. Otherwise, award a level 3.

Level 1: 0 - 2

Level 2: 3 - 5

Level 3: 6 - 8

Level 4: 9 - 12

Level 5: 13 - 15

Level 6: 16 - 18

Level 7: 19 - 25