ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
Assessment of the extended essay is a combination of formative assessment (the Reflections on planning and progress form) and summative assessment (the extended essay itself).
Criterion A: focus and method |
Criterion B: knowledge and understanding |
Criterion C: critical thinking |
Criterion D: presentation |
Criterion E: engagement |
|
|
|
|
|
MARK |
MARK |
MARK |
MARK |
MARK |
6 |
6 |
12 |
4 |
6 |
Criterion A: Focus and method
This criterion focuses on the topic, the research question and the methodology. It assesses the explanation of the focus of the research (this includes the topic and the research question), how the research will be undertaken, and how the focus is maintained throughout the essay.
Level |
Descriptor of strands and indicators |
The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors below. |
|
1-2 |
The topic is communicated unclearly and incompletely.
|
3-4 |
The topic is communicated.
|
5-6 |
The topic is communicated accurately and effectively.
|
You should identify an issue (topic) of global significance and examine it through one or more local manifestations. The significance and importance of the global issue must be established in the introduction (this might take rather longer than in other subjects). In this way the issue is accurately and effectively communicated.
The research question should appropriately connect the global issue to the local manifestation. Early in the essay, you should:
If the topic or research question is deemed inappropriate for the subject in which the essay is registered, no more than four marks can be awarded for this criterion. This applies to WSEE essays where the issue is not contemporary. (“Contemporary” is defined here as an issue that is relevant during the student’s lifetime.)
The research question should appropriately connect the global issue to the local manifestation. Early in the essay, you should:
- explain or justify their research question
- identify the IB academic disciplines and appropriate key concepts they are going to use
- explain why the research question requires an interdisciplinary approach and indicate the benefits of an integrative approach
- highlight the materials, sources, data and evidence from the two subjects they will be using, with some explanation of why they have been chosen.
If the topic or research question is deemed inappropriate for the subject in which the essay is registered, no more than four marks can be awarded for this criterion. This applies to WSEE essays where the issue is not contemporary. (“Contemporary” is defined here as an issue that is relevant during the student’s lifetime.)
Criterion B: Knowledge and understanding
This criterion assesses the extent to which the research relates to the subject area/discipline used to explore the research question, or in the case of the world studies extended essay, the issue addressed and the two disciplinary perspectives applied, and additionally the way in which this knowledge and understanding is demonstrated through the use of appropriate terminology and concepts.
Level |
Descriptor of strands and indicators |
The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors below. |
|
1-2 |
Knowledge and understanding is limited.
|
3-4 |
Knowledge and understanding is good.
|
5-6 |
Knowledge and understanding is excellent.
|
You should select concepts, theories, perspectives, findings or examples from two Diploma Programme subjects. They need to demonstrate a sound grasp of:
The award of achievement levels of 2 or above requires evidence that two subjects have been used in the essay. Higher levels (3 or 4) require increasingly explicit awareness of the strengths and limitations of the individual subject concepts or ideas.
You should show that they understand the conceptual framework of both subjects, even of one you are not studying for the Diploma Programme. For example, if you are using history to explore an issue, you must use the skills of the historian such as establishing causation, partiality, reliability of sources etc. Simple narrative is never enough.
Use of language must be effective and include terminology and concepts relevant to the issue and subjects under study. You should define contested or ambiguous terms when necessary. The essay should be accessible and acceptable to audiences from the different subjects being integrated.
- the knowledge bases of the different subjects
- modes of understanding of the different subjects
- methods of communication of the different subjects.
The award of achievement levels of 2 or above requires evidence that two subjects have been used in the essay. Higher levels (3 or 4) require increasingly explicit awareness of the strengths and limitations of the individual subject concepts or ideas.
You should show that they understand the conceptual framework of both subjects, even of one you are not studying for the Diploma Programme. For example, if you are using history to explore an issue, you must use the skills of the historian such as establishing causation, partiality, reliability of sources etc. Simple narrative is never enough.
Use of language must be effective and include terminology and concepts relevant to the issue and subjects under study. You should define contested or ambiguous terms when necessary. The essay should be accessible and acceptable to audiences from the different subjects being integrated.
Criterion C: Critical thinking
This criterion assesses the extent to which critical-thinking skills have been used to analyse and evaluate the research undertaken
Level |
Descriptor of strands and indicators |
The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors below. |
|
1-3 |
The research is limited.
|
4-6 |
The research is adequate.
|
7-9 |
The research is good.
|
10-12 |
The research is excellent.
|
Research can incorporate the methodologies of the two subjects chosen, such as:
You should analyse and evaluate your evidence in a manner appropriate to the research question and the Diploma Programme subjects employed in the essay.
You should present your ideas in the form of a logical and coherent argument that is relevant to the research question. The argument should be substantiated with evidence and examples. Straightforward descriptive or narrative accounts that lack analysis do not usually advance an argument and should be avoided.
Successful interdisciplinary essays require an integrative argument or explanation—that is, the different subjects should be coherently brought together to address the question through, for example:
In a world studies EE there is an element of risk: it may be that evaluation of the findings of a two-subject approach leads to new and original conclusions, or that conclusions are uncertain, or that it is not possible to make conclusions. Failure to integrate the two subjects’ analyses into the conclusion or to reach a firm conclusion will not prevent the award of high marks: no news is still news so long as it is true to the research question. Indeed, such outcomes can be used to review opportunities for further research and research lessons learned.
- library and online research
- generation of primary data through questionnaires
- or many others.
You should analyse and evaluate your evidence in a manner appropriate to the research question and the Diploma Programme subjects employed in the essay.
You should present your ideas in the form of a logical and coherent argument that is relevant to the research question. The argument should be substantiated with evidence and examples. Straightforward descriptive or narrative accounts that lack analysis do not usually advance an argument and should be avoided.
Successful interdisciplinary essays require an integrative argument or explanation—that is, the different subjects should be coherently brought together to address the question through, for example:
- a complex causal explanation
- a leading metaphor
- a model
- an analogy.
- effective and nuanced analysis and evaluation of information and findings
- evaluation of the success and limitations of their own integrative approach to the issue.
In a world studies EE there is an element of risk: it may be that evaluation of the findings of a two-subject approach leads to new and original conclusions, or that conclusions are uncertain, or that it is not possible to make conclusions. Failure to integrate the two subjects’ analyses into the conclusion or to reach a firm conclusion will not prevent the award of high marks: no news is still news so long as it is true to the research question. Indeed, such outcomes can be used to review opportunities for further research and research lessons learned.
Criterion D: Presentation
This criterion assesses the extent to which the presentation follows the standard format expected for academic writing and the extent to which this aids effective communication.
Level |
Descriptor of strands and indicators |
The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors below. |
|
1-2 |
Presentation is acceptable.
|
3-4 |
Presentation is good.
|
Any charts, images or tables from literature sources included in the essay must be carefully selected and labelled. They should only be used if they:
Large tables of raw data collected are best included in an appendix, where they should be carefully labelled. It is not necessary to include all responses to questionnaires; a single sample is sufficient. Tables of processed data should be designed to clearly display the information in the most appropriate form. Graphs or charts drawn from the analysed data should be selected to highlight only the most pertinent aspects related to the argument. Too many graphs, charts and tables will detract from the overall quality of the communication.
Only processed data that is central to the argument of the essay should be included in the body of the essay, as close as possible to its first reference. The inclusion of non-relevant or superfluous material will not be rewarded and may actually detract from the argument.
Any tables should enhance a written explanation and should not themselves include significant bodies of text. If they do, then these words must be included in the word count.
You must take care in their use of appendices as examiners are not required to read them.
All information with direct relevance to the analysis, discussion and evaluation of the essay must be contained in the main body of the essay.
Any material that is not original must be carefully acknowledged, with specific attention paid to the acknowledgment and referencing of quotes and ideas. This acknowledgment and referencing is applicable to audiovisual material, text, graphs and data published in print and electronic sources. If the referencing does not meet the minimum standard as indicated in the guide (name of author, date of publication, title of source and page numbers as applicable), and is not consistently applied, work will be considered as a case of possible academic misconduct.
A bibliography is essential and has to be presented in a standard format. Title page, table of contents, page numbers, etc must contribute to the quality of presentation.
The essay must not exceed 4,000 words of narrative. Graphs, figures, calculations, diagrams, formulas and equations are not included in the word count. Students should be aware that examiners will not read beyond the 4,000-word limit, nor assess any material presented thereafter.
- are directly relevant to the research question
- contribute towards the understanding of the argument
- are of a good graphic quality.
Large tables of raw data collected are best included in an appendix, where they should be carefully labelled. It is not necessary to include all responses to questionnaires; a single sample is sufficient. Tables of processed data should be designed to clearly display the information in the most appropriate form. Graphs or charts drawn from the analysed data should be selected to highlight only the most pertinent aspects related to the argument. Too many graphs, charts and tables will detract from the overall quality of the communication.
Only processed data that is central to the argument of the essay should be included in the body of the essay, as close as possible to its first reference. The inclusion of non-relevant or superfluous material will not be rewarded and may actually detract from the argument.
Any tables should enhance a written explanation and should not themselves include significant bodies of text. If they do, then these words must be included in the word count.
You must take care in their use of appendices as examiners are not required to read them.
All information with direct relevance to the analysis, discussion and evaluation of the essay must be contained in the main body of the essay.
Any material that is not original must be carefully acknowledged, with specific attention paid to the acknowledgment and referencing of quotes and ideas. This acknowledgment and referencing is applicable to audiovisual material, text, graphs and data published in print and electronic sources. If the referencing does not meet the minimum standard as indicated in the guide (name of author, date of publication, title of source and page numbers as applicable), and is not consistently applied, work will be considered as a case of possible academic misconduct.
A bibliography is essential and has to be presented in a standard format. Title page, table of contents, page numbers, etc must contribute to the quality of presentation.
The essay must not exceed 4,000 words of narrative. Graphs, figures, calculations, diagrams, formulas and equations are not included in the word count. Students should be aware that examiners will not read beyond the 4,000-word limit, nor assess any material presented thereafter.
Criterion E: Engagement
This criterion assesses the student’s engagement with their research focus and the research process. It will be applied by the examiner at the end of the assessment of the essay, and is based solely on the candidate’s reflections as detailed on the RPPF, with the supervisory comments and extended essay itself as context.
Level |
Descriptor of strands and indicators |
The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors or a RPPF has not been submitted. |
|
1-2 |
Engagement is limited.
|
3-4 |
Engagement is good.
|
5-6 |
Engagement is excellent.
|
This criterion assesses the engagement with your research focus and the research process. It will be applied by the examiner at the end of the assessment of the essay, and is based solely on your reflections as detailed on the RPPF, with the supervisory comments and extended essay itself as context.
You are expected to provide reflections on the decision-making and planning process undertaken in completing the essay. You must demonstrate how you arrived at a topic as well as the methods and approach used. This criterion assesses the extent to which you evidence the rationale for decisions made throughout the planning process and the skills and understandings developed.
For example, you may reflect on:
The reflections must provide the examiner with an insight into your thinking, creativity and originality within the research process. Your voice must be clearly present and demonstrate the learning that has taken place.
You are expected to provide reflections on the decision-making and planning process undertaken in completing the essay. You must demonstrate how you arrived at a topic as well as the methods and approach used. This criterion assesses the extent to which you evidence the rationale for decisions made throughout the planning process and the skills and understandings developed.
For example, you may reflect on:
- the approach and strategies they chose, and their relative success
- the Approaches to learning skills they have developed and their effect on the student as a learner
- how their conceptual understandings have developed or changed as a result of their research
- challenges they faced in their research and how they overcame these
- questions that emerged as a result of their research
- what they would do differently if they were to undertake the research again.
The reflections must provide the examiner with an insight into your thinking, creativity and originality within the research process. Your voice must be clearly present and demonstrate the learning that has taken place.