Use this rubric when students are evaluating historical sources and constructing an evidence-based analysis.
This page offers an example MYP-style source analysis rubric. It keeps the strand-based structure visible and makes clear that this task assesses Criteria A, B, and D, while Criterion C is left for another task.
TA39 drafts from the rubric you choose; you review, adapt, and decide what fits your assignment.
At a Glance
| Field | Details |
|---|---|
| Level | IB MYP Year 3 / Grade 8 equivalent |
| Subject Area | Individuals and Societies / History |
| Task Type | Source-based historical analysis |
| Useful For | primary and secondary source analysis, OPVL work, historical argument writing |
| Framework / Curriculum Reference | IB Middle Years Programme Individuals and Societies |
| Scoring Model | 24 marks across MYP Criteria A, B, and D; Criterion C is not assessed in this task |
| Reference Notes | Framework references are included for context. Teachers should adapt this example to their current curriculum, assessment policy, and assignment expectations. |
What This Rubric Covers
- Historical knowledge and concepts
- Source evaluation
- Evidence use
- Corroboration and perspective
- Structure, clarity, conventions, and referencing
Download
For easier reuse, the rubric and scoring summary are packaged as a separate Markdown file inside this zip:
Rubric
Score: ___ / 24
| MYP Criterion | Strand | Marks | Standard Met | Approaching Standard | Nearly Approaching | Not Met |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Criterion A: Knowing and Understanding | Knowledge of Historical Content | 4 | Detailed and accurate knowledge explains historical context with clear causes and consequences. | Relevant knowledge explains key events with basic support. | Some relevant knowledge describes the context, but detail or analysis is limited. | Limited, superficial, or inaccurate knowledge. |
| Criterion A: Knowing and Understanding | Use of Concepts and Terminology | 4 | Precise use of historical concepts and terminology such as causation, continuity, change, and perspective. | Appropriate terminology and concepts, with occasional lapses. | Some relevant terminology, but conceptual understanding is basic. | Limited or incorrect terminology. |
| Criterion B: Investigating | Source Evaluation (OPVL) | 3 | Thorough source evaluation, including reliability, bias, utility, and context of production. | Relevant analysis of origin, purpose, value, and limitations. | Basic description of origin and purpose with superficial evaluation. | Only basic source information is identified. |
| Criterion B: Investigating | Use of Evidence | 3 | Evidence from multiple sources is selected, synthesised, and analysed to build an argument. | Relevant evidence supports claims with generally effective integration. | Some evidence is used, but links to claims are basic. | Limited reference to sources or unclear evidence use. |
| Criterion B: Investigating | Corroboration and Perspective | 2 | Sources are corroborated through agreements, contradictions, gaps, and perspective. | Sources are compared and perspectives are considered. | Basic comparisons are made, with limited awareness of perspective. | Little or no comparison or perspective. |
| Criterion D: Communicating | Structure and Clarity | 4 | Sophisticated organisation, clear signposting, and effective transitions. | Logical organisation and clear communication. | Basic structure with limited organisation. | Lacks clear structure and is difficult to follow. |
| Criterion D: Communicating | Conventions and Referencing | 4 | Accurate language conventions and consistently formatted source references. | Effective conventions and generally accurate referencing. | Some conventions and attempted referencing, with errors. | Limited conventions and inconsistent or missing references. |
Performance Conversion
| Raw Score | Indicative MYP Grade |
|---|---|
| 20-24 | Grade 7 - Excellent |
| 17-19 | Grade 6 - Very Good |
| 14-16 | Grade 5 - Good |
| 10-13 | Grade 4 - Satisfactory |
| 7-9 | Grade 3 - Mediocre |
| 4-6 | Grade 2 - Poor |
| 1-3 | Grade 1 - Very Poor |
Teacher Adaptation Notes
- Make clear to students that Criterion C is not assessed in this task.
- Adjust OPVL language if your school uses a different source-evaluation framework.
- If your MYP department uses local grade boundaries, replace the indicative boundaries.
- Ensure all MYP criteria are assessed across a wider unit or year, even if this task uses only A, B, and D.
Standards and Framework References
The framework reference below is included to help teachers understand the assessment tradition this example draws from. IB schools should check the current guide, assessment criteria, and school policy before using or adapting a rubric.
| Reference | How It Connects to This Rubric |
|---|---|
| IB Middle Years Programme | Useful context for the MYP framework, subject groups, and inquiry-based curriculum. |
Source and Attribution
This example is based on an IB MYP Individuals and Societies source-analysis rubric document prepared for TA39 rubric-library work and has been formatted for teacher review and adaptation in TA39.
This page is not an official IB assessment document and does not imply endorsement by the International Baccalaureate Organization.
Teachers should check the current syllabus, guide, school policy, or mark scheme before using or adapting this example.
Want to Build or Adapt a Different Rubric?
You can adapt this structure for a different assignment by keeping the scoring model clear, naming the criteria that matter most, and replacing the descriptors with language that matches the work students will actually submit.
TA39 can help turn a rubric or reference document into a format you can review and adapt. You still review the criteria, adjust the wording, and decide whether it fits your assignment.