Biology by Bradford
cramly
One page of feedback on your draft: for each criterion, what is working and the move that gains the next mark, in plain words and using your own numbers. You still do the thinking.
It is being tested with a small group first. If you have been given an access code, enter it here; it is remembered on this device.
Enter your email and I’ll send a sign-in code: no password. Credits are $1 each, from 15 for $15 and cheaper in bigger packs; an IA draft takes 5. A class code from a teacher works too.
A sign-in code is on its way to . Type it below: it works once and expires in an hour. Not there in a couple of minutes? Look in spam. The email has a link too, which works if you open it in this same browser.
← Back to your practice paper Your answers and your marking are saved.
One balance of credits, for both markers:
Credits are $1 each, or 30 for $25, 50 for $40 and 125 for $95. Need more? Change the number of packs on the payment page. An IA draft takes 5; a marked practice paper from the exam maker takes 1 for up to 20 written marks, 2 for up to 40, and so on. Paid on Stripe’s page, in your local currency; the credits land on within a minute and work in both markers, in any mix. Teachers: buy for the class and mark from here, or send students to buy their own.
| Student | When | Report | RD | DA | Con | Eval | Total | Grade |
|---|
No markings yet from students on your codes. A code needs an owner to appear here: see the setup notes.
Each one is kept for 90 days from marking, then deleted. Open one on any device you sign in on.
Practice papers you had checked, with the feedback, kept for 90 days. Open the paper to sit it again.
Drop your report here
A PDF, up to 20 MB. Or click to choose one. One marking is used per report.
This is a guide, not a grade, and it is strict on purpose. It marks the way a moderator does, because teachers’ marks are moderated down far more often than up. So the number is usually lower than your teacher would give the same draft, and the three moves are the point. The writing must be your own, and the IB allows written feedback on one draft only.
Acknowledge it. The IB asks that any AI tool used on assessed work is acknowledged. The sheet ends with a one-line acknowledgement you can paste into your report; your teacher will say where, usually the acknowledgements or the end of the report.
What happens to the file. It is sent to Anthropic’s Claude to be marked and comes straight back. This site never keeps the report or its text. Your email and the marks are recorded, and the feedback sheet is kept for 90 days so you can open it again.
Reading the whole report first, then each criterion in turn, recalculating your statistics from your raw data along the way. Two minutes, longer for a report full of photographs. If your connection drops, the marking carries on and the sheet lands in Your sheets.
It is hard to know how to tweak an IA to gain a mark. Sometimes even a teacher struggles to say exactly why a conclusion is not quite there. This says it, criterion by criterion.
“My teacher said my conclusion needs more depth.” What does that actually mean?
Twenty-five IAs, and the IB lets you give feedback on one draft.
Credits are $1 each and an IA draft takes 5, so a report that goes round three times is 15. The same credits check a practice paper from the exam maker: 1 for up to 20 written marks, 2 for up to 40, and so on. 30 credits are $25, 50 are $40, and 125, a class set of drafts, are $95. The same for students and teachers; a teacher who buys for a class marks from their own account.
No. It asks questions and names moves; it does not write your IA. The one sentence it starts for you stops where your own reasoning has to begin. The IB asks you to acknowledge any AI tool you use, so every sheet ends with a line you can paste in, and your teacher decides where it goes.
The mark is a guide; the feedback is what you are paying for. Where you and the marker disagree, your teacher’s judgement wins. It is strict on purpose: the IB moderates every school’s marks, and they are moved down far more often than up.
IB examiners. It marks against the IB’s own criteria, and was checked against IAs whose marks the IB has moderated. It is independent: not affiliated with or endorsed by the International Baccalaureate.
Asked cold, a chatbot tends to be generous, vague about the criteria and sometimes wrong about them. This works from the real criteria, the habits of moderators and a set of moderated examples, and it is built to be specific and to mark low.
Either buy a pack and mark your students’ drafts from your own account, or send students here to buy their own. Every sheet has a student view and a teacher view; the teacher view adds the band and the reasoning behind each mark.
If a marking fails, or the file is not a Biology IA (a Chemistry IA, an Extended Essay, a class write-up), the credits go straight back on your account. It marks Biology IAs only.
A check of your marking on any practice paper from the exam maker, IB or AP. Sit the paper, mark it yourself against the markscheme, then press “Check my marking”: the marker goes through your written answers point by point and shows where it agrees with your ticks. It costs 1 credit for every 20 written marks you answered; multiple choice is marked for free as always.
It is read once to be marked and never stored by this site; the feedback sheet is kept for 90 days so you can open it again.
Your PDF is sent to Claude, the model made by Anthropic, much as you might hand a paper copy to a second teacher. It reads the report once, writes the feedback, and that is the end of the exchange. It has no memory from one report to the next: the next one it sees starts from nothing, and it cannot recall yours. That is why there is no instruction telling it “don’t remember this”. There is nothing to remember with.
It is not learning from your work either. Anthropic’s commercial terms, which cover this kind of use, say that what is sent through their API is not used to train their models.
Your email address, the four marks, the total and grade, the word count, which version of the marking rules and which model ran, and, if you leave one, your thumbs up or down and the one-line comment beside it. Not your name, and never the report or a word of its text. The feedback sheet itself is kept for 90 days, so you can open it again from any device you sign in on, and is then deleted; you can delete it sooner from the page. It carries the title of your investigation and the numbers and phrases the marker quotes back to you, and nothing else of the report.
A checked practice paper is kept the same way: its feedback, the marks, and a link back to the paper stay in Your checked papers for 90 days, then go. The feedback may quote a few of your words back to you; your typed answers themselves are never kept.
If you buy credits, the payment happens on Stripe’s own page: this site never sees a card number. It keeps the number of credits bought and Stripe’s reference for the payment, so a refund can take back what was not used.
A report under 4 MB goes straight through and is never written to disk here at all. A bigger one, which usually means photographs, is too large to send in one go, so it waits in a private folder for the minute the marking takes and is deleted the moment it ends, whether the marking worked or not.
If you signed in with a class code, the teacher who made that code can see your marks in their class view, and open your sheet while it is kept. That is the point of a class code; it is how they check the marking and annotate from it.
Anthropic sees the file, because they do the marking. They say they hold what comes through the API for a short period, up to 30 days, to check for misuse, and then delete it. That is their word, set out in their terms, and nothing here can see or change it.
The marker is told to treat a name or a school in the report as something to remove (the IB requires the work to be anonymous) and never to repeat it on the sheet, for a student or a teacher. The safest thing is still to take it out before you upload, which you will have to do for submission anyway.
Nothing goes to Turnitin or any similarity service, nothing is published, and no copy is added to any index a checker searches. Marking a draft here does not put it into those databases. On AI detectors: the only words this tool writes for you are the start of one sentence in the how-to box, built from your own numbers and stopping where your thinking has to begin. Everything else is questions and pointers. Finish that sentence in your own words, keep the rest of the writing your own, and tell your teacher you used it, as your school’s policy asks.
Students are going to ask an AI about their work; that is already happening. Asked cold, a chatbot is generous, vague about the criteria, and often wrong about them. This puts the real IB criteria, the habits of moderators and a set of moderated exemplars in front of a model built to mark low and to be specific, and it hands back questions and moves rather than finished sentences. That is what a good annotation from a teacher does, and it leaves the work where it has to be: yours. Switch to the teacher sheet and you see the same marking with the band each mark sits in and the reasoning behind it, which is what a teacher needs to check it and annotate from it, and what a curious student can read too.
The mark is indicative. The criteria are the ones every school marks against and the IB moderates every school’s sample, so treat the number as a guide and the wishes as the point. Notes on the IA · Statistics toolkit