IBDP Biology HL Results Analysis
SOS-Hermann Gmeiner International College
Overall Pass Rates
Performance against IB grade thresholds
Summary Table
| Threshold | Passed | Failed | Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 5+ | 14 | 9 | 60.9% |
| Grade 4+ | 23 | 0 | 100.0% |
Grade 5+ Threshold
Grade 4+ Threshold
Comparison Bar Chart
Component Pass Rate Analysis
Performance breakdown across all four assessment components
Pass Rates at Grade 5+
| Component | Passed | Total | Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Paper 1 MCQ | 16 | 23 | 69.6% |
| Paper 1B | 17 | 23 | 73.9% |
| Practical Work | 18 | 23 | 78.3% |
| Paper 2 | 12 | 23 | 52.2% |
Pass Rates at Grade 4+
| Component | Passed | Total | Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Paper 1 MCQ | 21 | 23 | 91.3% |
| Paper 1B | 22 | 23 | 95.7% |
| Practical Work | 22 | 23 | 95.7% |
| Paper 2 | 19 | 23 | 82.6% |
Grouped Bar: Both Thresholds
Horizontal: Grade 5+ by Component
Grade Distribution
Distribution of grades across the cohort
Overall Final Grade Distribution
Grade Distribution by Component
Detailed Grade Distribution Table
| Grade | Overall | Paper 1 MCQ | Paper 1B | Practical Work | Paper 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 7 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Grade 6 | 9 | 7 | 8 | 5 | 5 |
| Grade 5 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 13 | 7 |
| Grade 4 | 9 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 7 |
| Grade 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| Grade 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Grade 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Predicted vs Actual Grades
How students performed relative to teacher predictions
Exceeded Prediction
6 (26.1%)
Met Prediction
14 (60.9%)
Below Prediction
3 (13.0%)
Scatter Plot: Predicted vs Actual
Grade Accuracy Detail
| Student | Pred. | Actual | Diff | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MENSAH MANNOH | 6 | 6 | 0 | Met |
| OWUSU-BREFO | 7 | 6 | -1 | Below |
| WULFF-CAESAR | 6 | 6 | 0 | Met |
| NKANSAH | 5 | 6 | +1 | Exceeded |
| TAMPULI | 5 | 6 | +1 | Exceeded |
| ASEM | 6 | 6 | 0 | Met |
| ACQUAYE | 6 | 6 | 0 | Met |
| ABAYENA | 7 | 6 | -1 | Below |
| ADDO-KUFUOR | 5 | 6 | +1 | Exceeded |
| OPARE | 4 | 5 | +1 | Exceeded |
| ATAKORAH | 5 | 5 | 0 | Met |
| POKU-AMANFO | 5 | 5 | 0 | Met |
| KRAKANI | 5 | 5 | 0 | Met |
| ESSUMAN | 4 | 5 | +1 | Exceeded |
| ASOMANING | 5 | 4 | -1 | Below |
| GASENGAYIRE | 4 | 4 | 0 | Met |
| TURKSON | 4 | 4 | 0 | Met |
| AMOAH | 4 | 4 | 0 | Met |
| ISHIMWE | 4 | 4 | 0 | Met |
| OBENG-KENZO | 3 | 4 | +1 | Exceeded |
| ADONG | 4 | 4 | 0 | Met |
| BUAHIN | 4 | 4 | 0 | Met |
| SAKYI-ADDO | 4 | 4 | 0 | Met |
5-Year Historical Comparison
Track pass rate trends over time — enter historical data below
Enter Historical Pass Rates (HL)
Enter pass rate percentages for each year. 2026 is pre-filled from current HL data. Historical entries are tracked separately for HL and SL.
| Year | Grade 5+ (%) | Grade 4+ (%) |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | ||
| 2023 | ||
| 2024 | ||
| 2025 | ||
| 2026 |
Trend Line Chart
Scaled Total Distribution
Statistical analysis of overall scaled totals
Statistical Summary
Mean
57.5
Median
55.0
Std Dev
12.8
Min
38
Max
75
Range
37
Distribution Histogram
Component Performance Comparison
Average performance per component normalised to percentage of maximum
Radar Chart
Component Averages
| Component | Avg Scaled | Max Scaled | % of Max |
|---|---|---|---|
| Paper 1 MCQ | 14.39 | 19 | 75.8% |
| Paper 1B | 9.88 | 17 | 58.1% |
| Practical Work | 12.32 | 20 | 61.6% |
| Paper 2 | 20.97 | 44 | 47.7% |
Strongest: Paper 1 MCQ (75.8%)
Weakest: Paper 2 (47.7%)
Grade Boundary Proximity Analysis
Students within 1–3 marks of the next grade boundary per component
| Student | Component | Moderated Mark | Current Grade | Next Boundary | Marks Needed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OWUSU-BREFO | Paper 1 MCQ | 35 | 6 | 36 | 1 |
| ACQUAYE | Paper 1 MCQ | 35 | 6 | 36 | 1 |
| OPARE | Paper 1 MCQ | 31 | 5 | 32 | 1 |
| POKU-AMANFO | Paper 1 MCQ | 26 | 4 | 27 | 1 |
| ISHIMWE | Paper 1 MCQ | 26 | 4 | 27 | 1 |
| OBENG-KENZO | Paper 1 MCQ | 17 | 2 | 18 | 1 |
| SAKYI-ADDO | Paper 1 MCQ | 26 | 4 | 27 | 1 |
| NKANSAH | Paper 1B | 27 | 6 | 28 | 1 |
| ADONG | Paper 1B | 21 | 5 | 22 | 1 |
| OWUSU-BREFO | Practical Work | 16 | 5 | 17 | 1 |
| WULFF-CAESAR | Practical Work | 16 | 5 | 17 | 1 |
| TAMPULI | Practical Work | 16 | 5 | 17 | 1 |
| ASEM | Practical Work | 19 | 6 | 20 | 1 |
| OPARE | Practical Work | 13 | 4 | 14 | 1 |
| TURKSON | Practical Work | 13 | 4 | 14 | 1 |
| AMOAH | Practical Work | 13 | 4 | 14 | 1 |
| MENSAH MANNOH | Paper 2 | 58 | 6 | 59 | 1 |
| ADDO-KUFUOR | Paper 2 | 47 | 5 | 48 | 1 |
| ATAKORAH | Paper 2 | 35 | 4 | 36 | 1 |
| OBENG-KENZO | Paper 2 | 24 | 3 | 25 | 1 |
| ADONG | Paper 2 | 24 | 3 | 25 | 1 |
| ADDO-KUFUOR | Paper 1 MCQ | 34 | 6 | 36 | 2 |
| ATAKORAH | Paper 1 MCQ | 30 | 5 | 32 | 2 |
| KRAKANI | Paper 1 MCQ | 34 | 6 | 36 | 2 |
| ESSUMAN | Paper 1 MCQ | 34 | 6 | 36 | 2 |
| GASENGAYIRE | Paper 1 MCQ | 21 | 3 | 23 | 2 |
| AMOAH | Paper 1 MCQ | 30 | 5 | 32 | 2 |
| ADONG | Paper 1 MCQ | 30 | 5 | 32 | 2 |
| BUAHIN | Paper 1 MCQ | 30 | 5 | 32 | 2 |
| TAMPULI | Paper 1B | 26 | 6 | 28 | 2 |
| ACQUAYE | Paper 1B | 26 | 6 | 28 | 2 |
| OPARE | Paper 1B | 20 | 5 | 22 | 2 |
| ATAKORAH | Paper 1B | 20 | 5 | 22 | 2 |
| POKU-AMANFO | Paper 1B | 20 | 5 | 22 | 2 |
| TURKSON | Paper 1B | 14 | 4 | 16 | 2 |
| AMOAH | Paper 1B | 14 | 4 | 16 | 2 |
| ISHIMWE | Paper 1B | 8 | 3 | 10 | 2 |
| BUAHIN | Paper 1B | 14 | 4 | 16 | 2 |
| MENSAH MANNOH | Practical Work | 18 | 6 | 20 | 2 |
| NKANSAH | Practical Work | 18 | 6 | 20 | 2 |
| ABAYENA | Practical Work | 18 | 6 | 20 | 2 |
| ADDO-KUFUOR | Practical Work | 15 | 5 | 17 | 2 |
| KRAKANI | Practical Work | 15 | 5 | 17 | 2 |
| ISHIMWE | Practical Work | 12 | 4 | 14 | 2 |
| SAKYI-ADDO | Practical Work | 15 | 5 | 17 | 2 |
| NKANSAH | Paper 2 | 57 | 6 | 59 | 2 |
| ESSUMAN | Paper 2 | 46 | 5 | 48 | 2 |
| WULFF-CAESAR | Paper 1 MCQ | 33 | 6 | 36 | 3 |
| NKANSAH | Paper 1 MCQ | 33 | 6 | 36 | 3 |
| WULFF-CAESAR | Paper 1B | 25 | 6 | 28 | 3 |
| ACQUAYE | Practical Work | 17 | 6 | 20 | 3 |
| ATAKORAH | Practical Work | 14 | 5 | 17 | 3 |
| POKU-AMANFO | Practical Work | 14 | 5 | 17 | 3 |
| ESSUMAN | Practical Work | 14 | 5 | 17 | 3 |
| ASOMANING | Practical Work | 14 | 5 | 17 | 3 |
| GASENGAYIRE | Practical Work | 14 | 5 | 17 | 3 |
| OBENG-KENZO | Practical Work | 14 | 5 | 17 | 3 |
| ADONG | Practical Work | 14 | 5 | 17 | 3 |
| BUAHIN | Practical Work | 8 | 3 | 11 | 3 |
| TAMPULI | Paper 2 | 56 | 6 | 59 | 3 |
| ASEM | Paper 2 | 45 | 5 | 48 | 3 |
Key Insights
Automated analysis highlights from the results data
All 23 students (100%) achieved the minimum passing grade of 4.
The overall pass rate at grade 5+ is 60.9% (14 of 23 students).
9 students (39.1%) achieved grade 4, making it the most common grade.
Practical Work is the strongest component with 78.3% achieving grade 5+.
Paper 2 is the weakest component with 52.2% achieving grade 5+.
6 students (26.1%) exceeded their predicted grade.
14 students (60.9%) met their predicted grade exactly.
3 students (13.0%) fell below their predicted grade.
The mean final grade is 5.00 and the mean scaled total is 57.5 out of 100.
Paper 1B has the highest pass rate at grade 4+ with 95.7%.
Student Performance Matrix
Color-coded heatmap of grades per component — sorted by final grade
| # | P1 MCQ | P1B | Practical | Paper 2 | Final | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.MENSAH MANNOH | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 75 |
| 2.NKANSAH | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 75 |
| 3.ABAYENA | 7 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 75 |
| 4.TAMPULI | 7 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 74 |
| 5.ASEM | 7 | 7 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 73 |
| 6.OWUSU-BREFO | 6 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 72 |
| 7.ACQUAYE | 6 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 68 |
| 8.WULFF-CAESAR | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 65 |
| 9.ADDO-KUFUOR | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 65 |
| 10.ESSUMAN | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 64 |
| 11.KRAKANI | 6 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 61 |
| 12.ATAKORAH | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 55 |
| 13.OPARE | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 52 |
| 14.POKU-AMANFO | 4 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 5 | 51 |
| 15.ADONG | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 49 |
| 16.BUAHIN | 5 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 49 |
| 17.AMOAH | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 48 |
| 18.ASOMANING | 4 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 46 |
| 19.ISHIMWE | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 43 |
| 20.GASENGAYIRE | 3 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 42 |
| 21.OBENG-KENZO | 2 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 41 |
| 22.SAKYI-ADDO | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 4 | 41 |
| 23.TURKSON | 4 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 38 |