Quick Answer
In an exam question, evaluate means make an appraisal by weighing up the strengths and limitations of something, then reach a supported judgement about its value, effectiveness or importance. That is the IB's definition. You need criteria, evidence on both sides and a clear verdict. Describing or explaining, however well, does not count as evaluation on its own.
What You'll Learn
- Evaluate = make an appraisal by weighing up the strengths and limitations (IB definition).
- Every evaluation needs criteria, evidence on both sides and a clear judgement.
- Weighing is the key step: say which points matter more, and why.
- Put your judgement in the introduction, in each paragraph and in the conclusion.
- Description and explanation are the raw material, not the evaluation itself.
What does evaluate mean?
The IB's glossary of command terms, printed in the DP subject guides, defines evaluate as 'make an appraisal by weighing up the strengths and limitations'. In the IB Psychology guide it sits under assessment objective 3, synthesis and evaluation. English exam boards use the word the same way: AQA, following the Ofqual list of command words, defines evaluate as 'judge from available evidence'. In everyday English, to evaluate something is to judge its worth, quality or importance. So an evaluate question asks you to do three things.
- 1Set criteria: decide what good, effective, valid or important means for this question.
- 2Weigh the evidence: set out strengths and limitations, and say which carry more weight.
- 3Judge: reach a clear conclusion that answers the question and follows from your weighing.
Pro Tip
When you see evaluate, ask yourself: what is my verdict, and what is the single strongest reason for it? If you can answer both before you write, the rest of the answer has a direction.
What are you evaluating against? Choosing criteria
A judgement is only as strong as the standard behind it. Saying a policy is good means little until you say good at what. Pick two or three criteria that fit the question and use them throughout. Common criteria by question type:
- Effectiveness: did it achieve its aim? How fully, how quickly, and at what cost? Useful for policies, strategies and treatments.
- Significance or importance: how large was the effect, how long did it last, how many people or areas did it touch? Useful for historical events, factors and causes.
- Reliability and validity: is the evidence trustworthy, and does it measure what it claims to? Useful for studies, experiments, sources and data.
- Generalisability: does the finding apply beyond this sample, setting or time? Useful in psychology and the sciences.
- Stakeholders: who gains and who loses? Useful in economics, business management and geography.
- Short term against long term: does the judgement change over time?
- Ethics: is it acceptable, and for whom? Useful in biology, psychology and TOK-style questions.
How to structure an evaluate answer
The structure depends on the marks. For a short evaluate question worth a few marks, a compact form works: state the point, give one strength and one limitation with evidence, and finish with a one-sentence judgement. For an essay, use this sequence.
- 1Introduction: define any key terms, name your criteria and state your overall judgement in one sentence.
- 2Body paragraph opening: make one argument linked to a criterion, not a fact.
- 3Evidence: support it with data, a study, a case, an example or a source.
- 4Strength and limitation: show what the evidence supports and where it falls short.
- 5Mini-judgement: end the paragraph by saying what this point adds to your overall verdict.
- 6Repeat for two to four points, putting the most important one first or last on purpose.
- 7Conclusion: restate your judgement, name the decisive reason, and note the main condition or limitation on it.
An evaluation paragraph, built step by step
Here is an illustrative paragraph for the question 'Evaluate the use of a tax on sugary drinks to reduce obesity.' It was written for this guide to show the moves, not as a model answer from a markscheme. A tax raises the price of sugary drinks, so consumption should fall. However, demand for these drinks may be price inelastic, especially for habitual buyers, so a modest tax could cut consumption only slightly. Its effect may come less from consumers than from firms, which can reformulate products to contain less sugar where the tax depends on sugar content. The tax is also regressive, taking a larger share of income from poorer households. On balance, it is a useful but limited tool: effective at changing what is sold, weaker at changing what people eat overall, so it works best alongside other measures. The moves in that paragraph:
- Analysis first: the price rise and the expected fall in consumption.
- Limitation tested with a concept: price inelastic demand.
- A second mechanism that changes the picture: reformulation by firms.
- A further criterion: fairness, through the tax's regressive effect.
- A mini-judgement with a reason and a condition: useful but limited, best combined with other policies.
Phrases that show you are evaluating
These phrases make your weighing visible to the examiner. Use them to carry an argument, not as decoration at the end of a paragraph.
- Weighing: 'The most significant factor is... because...'; 'While X has merit, Y is more convincing because...'
- Limiting: 'This is only true when...'; 'The effectiveness is limited by...'; 'This assumes that...'
- Testing evidence: 'This finding is reliable because...'; 'The sample limits how far this can be generalised to...'
- Turning: 'However, this must be weighed against...'; 'This is offset by...'
- Judging: 'On balance, the evidence suggests...'; 'Ultimately, the strengths outweigh the limitations because...'
- Conditional verdicts: 'This is effective in the short term but not in the long term because...'
Common mistakes to avoid
These errors keep evaluate answers out of the top markbands.
- Describing without judging: presenting information without saying how good, important or convincing it is.
- Explaining without judging: a clear account of how something works, with no verdict on how well it works.
- One-sided arguments: only strengths, or only limitations, so nothing is weighed.
- Lists instead of weighing: three advantages, three disadvantages, and no view on which matter more.
- Unsupported conclusions: a verdict that does not follow from the evidence in the body.
- Vague evaluation: 'it is quite good', 'more research is needed' or 'it depends' without saying on what.
- No conclusion at all: the answer stops after the last point.
Watch Out
An answer that explains but does not judge is not an evaluation. You must take a position and defend it.
What evaluate looks like in different subjects
The core skill is the same everywhere, but the criteria change by subject. These examples are illustrative.
- Economics: 'Evaluate the effectiveness of a minimum wage in reducing poverty.' Weigh higher incomes for those in work against possible job losses, the level of the wage relative to market rates, and who is actually in low-paid work. Judge under what conditions it helps.
- History: 'Evaluate the significance of the Treaty of Versailles.' Assess its short- and long-term consequences, compare them with other factors, and reach a verdict on its overall significance.
- Biology: 'Evaluate the hypothesis using the data.' Judge how far the data support the hypothesis, consider sample size, controls, uncertainties and anomalies, and say whether the hypothesis is supported, partly supported or not supported.
- Psychology: 'Evaluate a study or theory.' Weigh methodology, reliability, validity, generalisability, ethics and supporting or conflicting evidence, then judge how far it explains the behaviour in question.
- Business management: 'Evaluate this strategy for the company.' Weigh its likely effects on different stakeholders, its costs and risks, and its fit with the company's objectives, then recommend whether to adopt it.
- Geography: 'Evaluate a strategy for managing flood risk.' Weigh costs, effectiveness, environmental effects and who benefits, at local and wider scales, then judge how sustainable it is.
Evaluate vs similar command terms
Several IB command terms involve judgement or close analysis. Knowing exactly how evaluate differs helps you give the examiner what each question asks. The quoted definitions are the IB's.
- Analyse: 'break down in order to bring out the essential elements or structure'. You show how something works. Evaluate goes on to judge how well it works.
- Discuss: 'offer a considered and balanced review that includes a range of arguments, factors or hypotheses'. Discuss reviews a range of views. Evaluate appraises strengths and limitations. Both end in a supported conclusion.
- To what extent: 'consider the merits or otherwise of an argument or concept'. The judgement is specifically about degree: how far a claim holds.
- Examine: 'consider an argument or concept in a way that uncovers the assumptions and interrelationships of the issue'. The focus is on assumptions, not mainly on a verdict.
- Comment: 'give a judgement based on a given statement or result of a calculation'. A short judgement on something given to you.
- Justify: 'give valid reasons or evidence to support an answer or conclusion'. You defend one answer rather than weighing both sides.