- SEHS IA at a Glance: Rules for Exams From May 2026
- What Makes a Strong Sports Science IA?
- The Four SEHS IA Criteria and What Examiners Look For
- SEHS IA Topic Ideas and Example Research Questions
- Research Design: Method, Variable Control and Ethics
- Data Analysis: Processing, Uncertainty and Graphs
- Conclusion and Evaluation: Where Half the Marks Are
- How to Structure a 3,200-Word SEHS Report
- Common Sports Science IA Mistakes
- Why the IA Matters in SEHS
Quick Answer
The IB Sports, Exercise and Health Science (SEHS) IA is a scientific investigation: you design and run your own experiment, then write it up in a report of up to 3,200 words. It takes about 10 hours, is worth 24% of your grade at both SL and HL, and is marked out of 24 across four criteria: research design, data analysis, conclusion and evaluation.
What You'll Learn
- The current SEHS guide was first assessed in May 2026, so every student sitting SEHS in November 2026, May 2027 or May 2028 follows the same IA rules
- The report has a 3,200-word maximum, takes about 10 hours and counts for 24% of the final grade at SL and HL
- There are four criteria worth 6 marks each: research design, data analysis, conclusion and evaluation, so half the marks sit in conclusion and evaluation
- You may share a method with a small group if your independent or dependent variable differs and your data is your own, but the report is always individual
- The best topics have one measurable independent variable, a precise dependent variable and a protocol you can repeat safely
SEHS IA at a Glance: Rules for Exams From May 2026
The IB introduced a new Sports, Exercise and Health Science guide for first teaching in August 2024, and it was examined for the first time in May 2026. That means everyone sitting SEHS from May 2026 onwards, including the November 2026, May 2027 and May 2028 sessions, completes the same internal assessment. SL and HL students do the identical task, marked against the same criteria.
- Task: a scientific investigation into a research question you formulate yourself, written up as an individual report
- Length: a maximum of 3,200 words
- Time: about 10 hours of class time for planning, data collection and writing
- Weighting: 24% of your final SEHS grade at both SL and HL
- Marks: 24 in total, 6 for each of four criteria (research design, data analysis, conclusion and evaluation)
- Collaboration: you may work in a small group and share a similar method, as long as your independent or dependent variable differs and the data you collect is unique to you
- The rest of the grade: Paper 1 (multiple-choice questions plus data-based and experimental questions) is worth 36% and Paper 2 (short-answer and extended-response questions) is worth 40%
Watch Out
Many IA guides, checklists and exemplars online were written for the previous SEHS guide, which used criteria such as personal engagement, exploration and communication. Those criteria no longer apply. Use older material for topic inspiration only, and check any marking advice against the current four criteria.
What Makes a Strong Sports Science IA?
A strong SEHS IA answers one focused question about human performance, health or movement, using a method another student could repeat and get comparable data. Examiners reward the thinking behind the investigation more than expensive equipment. A jump height measured with a phone app can score as well as a lab test if the protocol is controlled and the analysis is honest about its limits. The course has three themes: exercise physiology and nutrition, biomechanics, and sports psychology and motor learning. Your question should sit clearly inside one of them, so you can explain the mechanism behind your results using course theory.
- One independent variable that you change deliberately, ideally with several levels or conditions
- One dependent variable you can measure precisely and repeatedly, such as jump height, sprint time, heart rate or reaction time
- Controlled variables you can genuinely hold constant, such as warm-up, footwear, surface, time of day and rest periods
- A clear link to SEHS theory, so you can explain why the result happened, not just what happened
Pro Tip
Test your question by saying it aloud in the form: what is the effect of X on Y in Z participants? If you cannot name X, Y and Z precisely, the question is not ready yet.
The Four SEHS IA Criteria and What Examiners Look For
Each criterion is marked out of 6 using level descriptors. Your teacher marks the report and the IB moderates a sample from your school. The IB has said the revised criteria put more weight on higher-order thinking, with half of the 24 marks going to conclusion and evaluation, so plan your word budget around that.
- Research design (6 marks): a research question set in a specific SEHS context, with the relevant background theory explained. Your methodological choices (controls, sampling, ethics, equipment and variables) are explained, and the method is detailed enough for someone else to reproduce it.
- Data analysis (6 marks): raw data recorded clearly and precisely, processed accurately and in a way that is relevant to the research question, and presented so the answer is visible. Uncertainty is considered, for example instrument resolution and the spread of repeated trials.
- Conclusion (6 marks): a conclusion that is justified by and consistent with your analysis, compared with accepted research in sports, exercise and health science, with the practical implications of the findings explained.
- Evaluation (6 marks): specific weaknesses in your method, an explanation of how much each one affected the results, and realistic improvements tied directly to those weaknesses.
Pro Tip
The SEHS conclusion criterion asks about practical, real-world implications. Say what your findings mean for athletes, coaches, patients or the public, for example how a coach might change a warm-up routine.
SEHS IA Topic Ideas and Example Research Questions
The ideas below are illustrative starting points, not ready-made titles. Each one has a measurable independent and dependent variable and can run in a school with modest equipment. Adapt the levels, participants and protocol to what you can control, and agree the final question with your teacher.
- Warm-up type and power: what is the effect of static stretching, dynamic stretching and no stretching on countermovement jump height in 16 to 18-year-old basketball players? It works because jump height is easy to repeat and links to muscle temperature and the stretch-shortening cycle.
- Rest interval and repeated sprints: how does recovery time (30, 60 or 90 seconds) affect the decline in 20 m sprint time over six sprints? It works because it tests energy system recovery with simple timing gates or slow-motion video.
- Music tempo and perceived exertion: what is the effect of music tempo on rating of perceived exertion during a fixed-intensity 10-minute cycle? It works because intensity is held constant while one psychological variable changes.
- Stimulus type and reaction time: how does a visual versus an auditory stimulus affect simple reaction time? It works because many repeated trials are quick to collect, which strengthens the analysis.
- Fatigue and skill accuracy: what is the effect of a standardised shuttle-run protocol on free-throw accuracy? It works because it links physiology and motor control, but you must standardise the fatigue level carefully.
- Cool-down and heart rate recovery: how does an active versus a passive cool-down affect heart rate one, two and three minutes after exercise? It works because heart rate monitors give precise, repeatable data.
- Knee angle and jump height: what is the effect of starting knee angle (60, 90 or 120 degrees) on squat jump height? It works because a measured angle gives a clear biomechanical independent variable.
- Release angle and throwing distance: how does release angle affect the distance of a seated chest pass with a 2 kg medicine ball? It works because it applies projectile motion theory, and a seated throw removes many uncontrolled body movements.
- Practice schedule and motor learning: does blocked or random practice lead to better retention of a new throwing task tested 24 hours later? It works because motor learning theory makes a clear prediction you can test.
- Mental imagery and accuracy: what is the effect of a five-minute imagery routine on dart or penalty accuracy? It works because it tests a psychological skill with a simple accuracy score.
- Breathing technique and recovery: what is the effect of slow diaphragmatic breathing versus normal breathing on heart rate recovery after a standard step test? It works because the step test is a widely used, standardised protocol.
- Stance leg and balance: how does standing on the dominant versus the non-dominant leg affect stork balance time in footballers? It works because it is safe and quick, though you must justify why the comparison matters.
Watch Out
Avoid anything that could injure participants or push untrained people to exhaustion, and avoid giving participants caffeine, supplements or other substances, which most schools will not approve. Questions that need lab equipment you cannot access every session also tend to stall halfway.
Research Design: Method, Variable Control and Ethics
Human participants vary far more than test tubes, so the method is where many SEHS IAs are won or lost. A strong research design section explains why each choice was made, not just what you did.
- 1State the independent variable, the dependent variable and the units, and explain how the dependent variable will be measured and to what resolution.
- 2Choose participants deliberately, for example a similar age, training status and experience, and explain how you recruited them and why that group suits the question.
- 3Decide between repeated measures (each participant does every condition) and separate groups. Repeated measures reduces the effect of individual differences, but you then need to counterbalance or randomise the order of conditions to limit learning and fatigue effects.
- 4Standardise everything you can: warm-up, instructions, footwear, surface, time of day, rest between trials and verbal encouragement.
- 5Plan repeat trials for each condition and decide in advance how you will handle a trial that goes wrong, so you are not tempted to delete inconvenient data later.
- 6Run a pilot test with one or two people. It reveals timing problems, ceiling effects and unclear instructions before they spoil your real data.
- 7Write the method as numbered steps with a diagram or photo of the set-up, so another student could repeat it exactly.
Watch Out
Ethics is part of research design. Get informed consent, tell participants they can withdraw at any time, keep their data anonymous, check for injuries or health conditions before testing, and follow your school's rules on working with people under 18. Your teacher must approve your method before you collect data.
Data Analysis: Processing, Uncertainty and Graphs
A table of raw results is not analysis. You need to process the data so the answer to your research question becomes visible, and show how confident anyone can be in that answer.
- Record raw data in clear tables with units and the resolution of each instrument, for example heart rate to 1 beat per minute or time to 0.01 s
- Calculate a mean for each condition and a measure of spread, such as standard deviation or range, so variation between trials and participants is visible
- Choose the graph that fits the question: a bar chart with error bars for categories, or a scatter graph with a trend line for a continuous independent variable
- Where your data suits it, use a statistical test, such as a t-test for two conditions or a correlation coefficient for a relationship, and explain the result in plain words
- Use percentage change when raw differences are hard to compare between participants of different ability
- Comment on anomalies and explain how you treated them, rather than quietly removing them
Conclusion and Evaluation: Where Half the Marks Are
Because conclusion and evaluation carry 12 of the 24 marks, these sections deserve a large share of your 3,200 words. They are also where weaker reports turn generic.
- Answer the research question directly, with numbers: state the size of the effect, not just its direction
- Explain the result with SEHS theory, for example muscle temperature, the phosphocreatine system or attentional focus
- Compare your findings with published studies and explain why your results agree or differ
- Spell out the practical implications for a coach, athlete or health professional, and how far your sample lets you generalise
- In the evaluation, name specific weaknesses, for example a learning effect across trials or hand timing, and explain how much each one affected your data
- Propose improvements that fix those exact weaknesses, such as counterbalancing the order of conditions or using timing gates, rather than generic advice like using more participants
Pro Tip
A quick test for your evaluation: if a sentence could appear in anyone's IA, it is too generic. Tie every weakness to your own data, such as the trial where results jumped or the participant who could not hold the position.
How to Structure a 3,200-Word SEHS Report
The criteria do not dictate headings, but a clear structure helps your teacher and the moderator find the evidence for each criterion. The word ranges below are a rough planning guide, not an IB rule.
- 1Research question and background theory: about 400 to 500 words
- 2Methodology, including variables, participants, ethics and the step-by-step procedure: about 600 to 700 words
- 3Results: raw and processed data tables and graphs, with about 300 to 400 words of commentary
- 4Analysis, including uncertainty and any statistical testing: about 400 words
- 5Conclusion, with comparison to published research and practical implications: about 600 to 700 words
- 6Evaluation of weaknesses and improvements: about 500 to 600 words
- 7References in one consistent citation style
Common Sports Science IA Mistakes
These are the problems that most often keep SEHS reports in the middle mark bands. An IB Sports Science tutor can explain, using other investigations, how to design a protocol that controls variables and produces reliable data.
- A broad question such as whether exercise improves fitness, with no single measurable variable
- Too few repeat trials, so one bad attempt changes the conclusion
- Running conditions in the same order for everyone, which mixes the effect you are testing with learning or fatigue
- Describing results without explaining them through SEHS theory
- A conclusion that claims more than the data shows, for example generalising from six classmates to all athletes
- An evaluation that lists flaws without saying how much each one affected the results
- Following a checklist written for the old criteria, which spends words on sections that are no longer marked separately
Why the IA Matters in SEHS
At 24% of the grade, the IA is the component you control most directly, and the marks are banked before your exams begin. In May 2026, the first session under the new guide, 6,313 candidates sat SEHS at SL and 1,942 at HL. The mean grade was 3.9 at SL and 4.7 at HL, and 1.9% of SL and 6.9% of HL candidates achieved a 7 (May 2026, IB provisional statistical bulletin). A well-planned IA, finished before revision season, takes pressure off Papers 1 and 2.