IB Economics Evaluation Techniques (CLASPP): The Complete FAQ

Evaluation is tested directly in the part (b) 25-mark essays on Paper 1 (micro/macro) and in the extended response questions on Paper 2, plus in every commentary for HL Paper 3 extension. Examiners look for it explicitly under the markbands' top band descriptors, which reward reasoned judgement, not just extra analysis.

CLASPP is a mnemonic teachers use to structure evaluative comments: Consequences, Long run vs short run, Assumptions, Significance/magnitude, Priorities (trade-offs), and Point of view (stakeholder perspective). You don't need all six in one essay — two or three, well-developed, beat six shallow ones.

Analysis explains why something happens using theory and a diagram — for instance, why a subsidy shifts supply right. Evaluation asks so what — does it actually work, for whom, under what conditions, and compared with what alternative? Analysis is descriptive; evaluation is judgement.

Pick two CLASPP angles per essay and develop each into 3–4 full sentences rather than listing six one-liners. Anchor each point to the actual context in the question — a real country, policy, or figure — and link it back to the stakeholder or objective the question asks about.

A strong evaluation paragraph names the specific limitation, explains the economic mechanism behind it, and states the real-world consequence for a named stakeholder — all in the context given, not generically. It's usually 3–4 sentences, not a one-line caveat tacked onto the end.

Two well-developed evaluation points, properly explained and linked to the question's context, are enough to reach the top markband. Examiners reward depth over quantity — a page of one-line caveats scores lower than two paragraphs that reason through consequences, assumptions, or trade-offs properly.

The most common one, in my experience marking mocks, is bolting a single 'however' sentence onto the end of an analysis paragraph and calling it evaluation. Examiners want it developed, specific to the context, and ideally compared against an alternative policy or outcome.

Yes — both papers' part (b) 25-mark essays require evaluation to reach the top markband, whether the topic is microeconomics, macroeconomics, or the global economy. Paper 1 tests one theme in depth; Paper 2 tests real-world data response alongside essay writing, but the evaluation demand is identical.

There's no separate 'evaluation criterion' as in some other DP subjects — instead, evaluation is built into the single markband used for each 25-mark essay, where band 4 (17–25 marks) explicitly requires 'well-developed evaluation' alongside relevant theory, diagrams, and application.

The evaluation skill itself is identical at SL and HL — same command terms, same markbands, same expectation of developed judgement. The difference is volume and depth of content: HL students cover more theory (and Paper 3 quantitative work), giving them more material to evaluate against.

The most useful thing you can do at home is ask 'so what?' after your child explains any economic effect — that's exactly the habit examiners reward. Reading a current news article on tax, trade, or inflation together and asking who wins and who loses builds the same instinct CLASPP is meant to teach.

Past paper part (b) questions marked against the official markbands are the single best practice tool, because they show exactly what separates a band 3 from a band 4 answer. On RevisionPrep, the Economics Revision Notes and Topical Worksheets include model evaluation paragraphs alongside mark-scheme style feedback for self-marking.