Skip to Main Content

Extended Essay Resources: Assessment

Find resources and links for the Extended Essay

Assessment of the EE

Assessment of the extended essay

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).

Generic assessment criteria are used with subject-specific interpretations.

Overview

Criterion A: focus and method Criterion B: knowledge and understanding Criterion C: critical thinking Criterion D: presentation Criterion E: engagement
  • Topic
  • Research question
  • Methodology
  • Context
  • Subject-specific terminology and concepts
  • Research
  • Analysis
  • Discussion and evaluation
  • Structure
  • Layout
  • Process
  • Research focus
Marks Marks Marks Marks Marks
6 6 12 4 6

Total marks available: 34

Assessment Criteria - 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
0 The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors below.
1–2 The topic is communicated unclearly and incompletely.
  • Identification and explanation of the topic is limited; the purpose and focus of the research is unclear, or does not lend itself to a systematic investigation in the subject for which it is registered.

The research question is stated but not clearly expressed or too broad.

  • The research question is too broad in scope to be treated effectively within the word limit and requirements of the task, or does not lend itself to a systematic investigation in the subject for which it is registered.
  • The intent of the research question is understood but has not been clearly expressed and/or the discussion of the essay is not focused on the research question.

Methodology of the research is limited.

  • The source(s) and/or method(s) to be used are limited in range given the topic and research question.
  • There is limited evidence that their selection was informed.
3–4

The topic is communicated.

  • Identification and explanation of the research topic is communicated; the purpose and focus of the research is adequately clear, but only partially appropriate.

The research question is clearly stated but only partially focused.

  • The research question is clear but the discussion in the essay is only partially focused and connected to the research question.

Methodology of the research is mostly complete.

  • Source(s) and/or method(s) to be used are generally relevant and appropriate given the topic and research question.
  • There is some evidence that their selection(s) was informed.

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.
5–6

The topic is communicated accurately and effectively.

  • Identification and explanation of the research topic is effectively communicated; the purpose and focus of the research is clear and appropriate.

The research question is clearly stated and focused.

  • The research question is clear and addresses an issue of research that is appropriately connected to the discussion in the essay.

Methodology of the research is complete.

  • An appropriate range of relevant source(s) and/or method(s) has been selected in relation to the topic and research question.
  • There is evidence of effective and informed selection of sources and/or methods.

Assessment Criteria - 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
0 The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors below.
1–2

Knowledge and understanding is limited.

  • The application of source material has limited relevance and is only partially appropriate to the research question.
  • Knowledge of the topic/discipline(s)/issue is anecdotal, unstructured and mostly descriptive with sources not effectively being used.

Use of terminology and concepts is unclear and limited.

  • Subject-specific terminology and/or concepts are either missing or inaccurate, demonstrating limited knowledge and understanding.
3–4

Knowledge and understanding is good.

  • The application of source material is mostly relevant and appropriate to the research question.
  • Knowledge of the topic/discipline(s)/issue is clear; there is an understanding of the sources used but their application is only partially effective.

Use of terminology and concepts is adequate.

  • The use of subject-specific terminology and concepts is mostly accurate, demonstrating an appropriate level of knowledge and understanding.

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.
5–6

Knowledge and understanding is excellent.

  • The application of source materials is clearly relevant and appropriate to the research question.
  • Knowledge of the topic/discipline(s)/issue is clear and coherent and sources are used effectively and with understanding.

Use of terminology and concepts is good.

  • The use of subject-specific terminology and concepts is accurate and consistent, demonstrating effective knowledge and understanding.

Assessment Criteria- 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
0 The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors below.
1–3

The research is limited.

  • The research presented is limited and its application to support the argument is not clearly relevant to the research question.

Analysis is limited.

  • There is limited analysis.
  • Where there are conclusions to individual points of analysis these are limited and not consistent with the evidence.

Discussion/evaluation is limited.

  • An argument is outlined but this is limited, incomplete, descriptive or narrative in nature.
  • The construction of an argument is unclear and/or incoherent in structure hindering understanding.
  • Where there is a final conclusion, it is limited and not consistent with the arguments/evidence presented.
  • There is an attempt to evaluate the research, but this is superficial.

If the topic or research question is deemed inappropriate for the subject in which the essay is registered no more than three marks can be awarded for this criterion.
4–6

The research is adequate.

  • Some research presented is appropriate and its application to support the argument is partially relevant to the research question.

Analysis is adequate.

  • There is analysis but this is only partially relevant to the research question; the inclusion of irrelevant research detracts from the quality of the argument.
  • Any conclusions to individual points of analysis are only partially supported by the evidence.

Discussion/evaluation is adequate.

  • An argument explains the research but the reasoning contains inconsistencies.
  • The argument may lack clarity and coherence but this does not significantly hinder understanding.
  • Where there is a final or summative conclusion, this is only partially consistent with the arguments/evidence presented.
  • The research has been evaluated but not critically.
7–9 The research is good.
  • The majority of the research is appropriate and its application to support the argument is clearly relevant to the research question.

Analysis is good.

  • The research is analysed in a way that is clearly relevant to the research question; the inclusion of less relevant research rarely detracts from the quality of the overall analysis.
  • Conclusions to individual points of analysis are supported by the evidence but there are some minor inconsistencies.

Discussion/evaluation is good.

  • An effective reasoned argument is developed from the research, with a conclusion supported by the evidence presented.
  • This reasoned argument is clearly structured and coherent and supported by a final or summative conclusion; minor inconsistencies may hinder the strength of the overall argument.
  • The research has been evaluated, and this is partially critical.
10–12

The research is excellent.

  • The research is appropriate to the research question and its application to support the argument is consistently relevant.

Analysis is excellent.

  • The research is analysed effectively and clearly focused on the research question; the inclusion of less relevant research does not significantly detract from the quality of the overall analysis.
  • Conclusions to individual points of analysis are effectively supported by the evidence.

Discussion/evaluation is excellent.

  • An effective and focused reasoned argument is developed from the research with a conclusion reflective of the evidence presented.
  • This reasoned argument is well structured and coherent; any minor inconsistencies do not hinder the strength of the overall argument or the final or summative conclusion.
  • The research has been critically evaluated.

Assessment Criteria - 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
0

The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors below.
1–2

Presentation is acceptable.

  • The structure of the essay is generally appropriate in terms of the expected conventions for the topic, argument and subject in which the essay is registered.
  • Some layout considerations may be missing or applied incorrectly.
  • Weaknesses in the structure and/or layout do not significantly impact the reading, understanding or evaluation of the extended essay.
3–4

Presentation is good.

  • The structure of the essay clearly is appropriate in terms of the expected conventions for the topic, the argument and subject in which the essay is registered.
  • Layout considerations are present and applied correctly.
  • The structure and layout support the reading, understanding and evaluation of the extended essay.

Assessment Criteria - 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. Only the first 500 words are assessable.

Level Descriptor of strands and indicators
0 The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors, an RPPF has not been submitted, or the RPPF has been submitted in a language other than that of the essay.
1–2

Engagement is limited.

  • Reflections on decision-making and planning are mostly descriptive.
  • These reflections communicate a limited degree of personal engagement with the research focus and/or research process.
3–4

Engagement is good.

  • Reflections on decision-making and planning are analytical and include reference to conceptual understanding and skill development.
  • These reflections communicate a moderate degree of personal engagement with the research focus and process of research, demonstrating some intellectual initiative.
5–6

Engagement is excellent.

  • Reflections on decision-making and planning are evaluative and include reference to the student’s capacity to consider actions and ideas in response to challenges experienced in the research process.
  • These reflections communicate a high degree of intellectual and personal engagement with the research focus and process of research, demonstrating authenticity, intellectual initiative and/or creative approach in the student voice.

Assessment Grade Descriptors

Grade A

Demonstrates effective research skills resulting in a well-focused and appropriate research question that can be explored within the scope of the chosen topic; effective engagement with relevant research areas, methods and sources; excellent knowledge and understanding of the topic in the wider context of the relevant discipline; the effective application of source material and correct use of subject-specific terminology and/or concepts further supporting this; consistent and relevant conclusions that are proficiently analysed; sustained reasoned argumentation supported effectively by evidence; critically evaluated research; excellent presentation of the essay, whereby coherence and consistency further supports the reading of the essay; and present and correctly applied structural and layout elements.

Engagement with the process is conceptual and personal, key decision-making during the research process is documented, and personal reflections are evidenced, including those that are forward-thinking.
Grade B

Demonstrates appropriate research skills resulting in a research question that can be explored within the scope of the chosen topic; reasonably effective engagement with relevant research areas, methods and sources; good knowledge and understanding of the topic in the wider context of the relevant discipline; a reasonably effective application of source material and use of subject-specific terminology and/or concepts; consistent conclusions that are accurately analysed; reasoned argumentation often supported by evidence; research that at times evidences critical evaluation; and a clear presentation of all structural and layout elements, which further supports the reading of the essay.

Engagement with the process is generally evidenced by the reflections and key decision-making during the research process is documented.
Grade C

Demonstrates evidence of research undertaken, which has led to a research question that is not necessarily expressed in a way that can be explored within the scope of the chosen topic; partially effective engagement with mostly appropriate research areas, methods and sources—however, there are some discrepancies in those processes, although these do not interfere with the planning and approach; some knowledge and understanding of the topic in the wider context of the discipline, which is mostly relevant; the attempted application of source material and appropriate terminology and/or concepts; an attempted synthesis of research results with partially relevant analysis; conclusions partly supported by the evidence; discussion that is descriptive rather than analytical; attempted evaluation; satisfactory presentation of the essay, with weaknesses that do not hinder the reading of the essay; and some structural and layout elements that are missing or are incorrectly applied.

Engagement with the process is evidenced but shows mostly factual information, with personal reflection mostly limited to procedural issues.
Grade D

Demonstrates a lack of research, resulting in unsatisfactory focus and a research question that is not answerable within the scope of the chosen topic; at times engagement with appropriate research, methods and sources, but discrepancies in those processes that occasionally interfere with the planning and approach; some relevant knowledge and understanding of the topic in the wider context of the discipline, which are at times irrelevant; the attempted application of source material, but with inaccuracies in the use of, or underuse of, terminology and/or concepts; irrelevant analysis and inconsistent conclusions as a result of a descriptive discussion; a lack of evaluation; presentation of the essay that at times is illogical and hinders the reading; and structural and layout elements that are missing.

Engagement with the process is evidenced but is superficial, with personal reflections that are solely narrative and concerned with procedural elements.
Grade E (failing condition)

Demonstrates an unclear nature of the essay; a generally unsystematic approach and resulting unfocused research question; limited engagement with limited research and sources; generally limited and only partially accurate knowledge and understanding of the topic in the wider context of the relevant discipline; ineffective connections in the application of source material and inaccuracies in the terminology and/or concepts used; a summarizing of results of research with inconsistent analysis; an attempted outline of an argument, but one that is generally descriptive in nature; and a layout that generally lacks or incorrectly applies several layout and structural elements.

Engagement with the process is limited, with limited factual or decision-making information and no personal reflection on the process.

Unpacking the criteria

The following is intended to help you understand each criterion in terms of what should be included in the extended essay to achieve the highest level.

Each criterion is organized at three levels of information. Firstly, the markband, which relates to the mark range available; secondly, the strand, which relates to what is being assessed; and, thirdly, the indicators, which are the demonstration of the strands within a markband. For example:

Markband

1–2

(Strand) The topic is communicated unclearly and incompletely.

(Indicators of the strand)

  • Identification and explanation of the topic is limited; the purpose and focus of the research is unclear, or does not lend itself to a systematic investigation in the subject for which it is registered.

(Strand) The research question is stated but not clearly expressed or too broad.

(Indicators of the strand)

  • The research question is too broad in scope to be treated effectively within the word limit and requirements of the task, or does not lend itself to a systematic investigation in the subject for which it is registered.
  • The intent of the research question is understood but has not been clearly expressed and/or the discussion of the essay is not focused on the research question.

(Strand) Methodology of the research is limited.

(Indicators of the strand)

  • The source(s) and/or method(s) to be used are limited in range given the topic and research question.
  • There is limited evidence that their selection was informed.
Criterion Unpacking the 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 title and the research question), how the research will be undertaken, and how the focus is maintained throughout the essay.

  1. The topic chosen is identified and explained to readers in terms of contextualizing and justifying its worthiness.
    • How well does the research paper identify and communicate the chosen topic?
  2. The title is a formal requirement on the title page of the essay. If the title is missing, it will be considered on balance with the other formal requirements against criterion D. While there is no explicit penalty in criterion A, the title will help address the requirements as it expands on the student’s intended focus. Without a title, students lose an opportunity to clarify their focus.
  3. The purpose and focus of the research to be addressed is within the scope of a 4,000-word extended essay, is outlined in the introduction and specified as a research question.
    • Is the research question appropriate given the scope of the task? For example, is the topic sufficiently focused to be adequately addressed within the requirements of the task?
    • Is the research question clearly stated, focused and based on/situated against background knowledge and understanding of the chosen subject/topic area?
    • Is the focus of the research question maintained throughout the essay?
  4. The research is planned and appropriate methods of data collection (methodology) are chosen and identified in order to address the research question.
    • Is there evidence of effective and informed source/method selection with regard to the choice of appropriate sources and/or method(s) used to gather information, including narrowing of scope the range of sources/methods, in order to address the research question within the constraints of the word limit?
  5. Sources/methods are considered relevant/appropriate or sufficient in so far as the academic standards for the discipline are concerned. For example, for an economics essay, it would not be sufficient to only use textbooks but rather include reports and data. The quality of the research question itself is not considered when assessing source selection on balance.
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.

  1. The research question being investigated is put into the context of the subject/discipline/issue.
    • Demonstration of the appropriate and relevant selection and application of the sources is identified.
  2. Knowledge and understanding of the topic chosen and the research question posed is demonstrated with appropriate subject-specific terminology.
    • The use of subject-specific terminology and/or concepts is an indicator of knowledge and understanding of the discipline(s)/issue discussed.
  3. Sources/methods are assessed here in terms of their application to support knowledge and understanding in response to the research question.
C: Critical thinking

This criterion assesses the extent to which critical thinking skills have been used to analyse and evaluate the research undertaken.

  1. The appropriateness of sources/methods in terms of how they have been used in the development of the argument presented.
  2. The analysis of the research is effective and focused on the research question.
  3. The discussion of the research develops a clear and coherent reasoned argument in relation to the research question.
  4. There is a critical evaluation of the arguments presented in the essay.
  5. Unlikely or unexpected outcomes can also demonstrate critical thinking.
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.

  1. Structure: the structure of the essay is compatible with the expected conventions of a research paper in the subject for which the essay has been submitted. (Examiners, supervisors and students are advised to check the guidance given in the Extended essay guide for the relevant subject.)
  2. Layout: title page, table of contents, page numbers, section headings (where appropriate), effective inclusion of illustrative materials (tables, graphs, illustrations, appropriately labelled) and quotations, bibliography and referencing.
    • The referencing system should be correctly and consistently applied and should contain the minimum information as detailed in the Effective citing and referencing document.*
    • The extended essay has not exceeded the maximum word limit.**
  3. Appropriate formatting: as described in the “Presentation” section of this guide.

* Referencing and bibliographies are only assessed against criterion D based on their visual layout (for example, consistent presentation of footnotes) and presence (bibliography as a structural requirement). The content and completeness of a reference or bibliography should not be assessed. Insufficient or incomplete references or bibliographies will be raised by examiners as a case of “suspected malpractice” for further investigation prior to issue of results, with no undue assessment penalties applied.

** While there is no explicit penalty in criterion D for exceeding 4,000 words, students should be aware that examiners will not read beyond the 4,000-word limit. Criterion D specifically may be impacted if, in exceeding 4,000 words, one of the structural requirements of the essay (for example, the conclusion, or important illustrative material) is unassessed by the examiner because he or she is not required to read beyond 4,000 words.
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, after considering the student’s Reflections on planning and progress form.

  1. Engagement with the process: the student has engaged in discussions with their supervisor in the planning and progress of their research; the student is able to reflect on and refine the research process, and react to insights gained through the exploration of their research question; the student is able to evaluate decisions made throughout the research process and suggest improvements for their own working practices.
  2. Engagement with their research focus: an insight into the student’s thinking, intellectual initiative and creative approach through reflections on the thought and research process; the extent to which the student voice is present rather than that of the supervisor and academics; is the student’s engagement reflected?