“Top-scoring Extended Essays are focused, disciplined, and precise. They are not about writing a lot of content or sounding impressive, they are about thinking clearly and showing it effectively. This checklist is designed to guide you through the final stages of your EE, ensuring you meet all IB requirements, avoid common pitfalls, and maximise marks. It reflects exactly how examiners read and evaluate Extended Essays, so following it closely gives you the best chance of scoring an A.
These are IB’s own pages describing the Extended Essay and assessment approach:
IB’s main Extended Essay page (what it is, how it’s assessed): International Baccalaureate Extended Essay overview https://www.ibo.org/programmes/diploma-programme/curriculum/dp-core/extended-essay/what-is-the-extended-essay
IB’s Extended Essay Guide (official subject brief and assessment details) — direct from the IB programme page: Official Extended Essay Guide (PDF via IB DP subject briefs)https://www.ibo.org/programmes/diploma-programme/curriculum/dp-core/extended-essay/
Criterion A: Focus and Method (6 marks)
-
Research Question Precision
- Is the research question explicitly stated on the title page and in the introduction?
- Is the RQ sharply focused, not descriptive, and not double-barrelled?
- Can the RQ realistically be answered within 4,000 words using available data/texts?
- Does the RQ clearly signal analysis, not narration (e.g. “To what extent”, “How effective”, “How does X influence Y”)?
Examiner mindset: If the RQ is vague, marks are capped early — even with good content.
- Methodological Appropriateness
- Is the chosen methodology explicitly justified in the introduction?
- Is the method appropriate to the subject-specific expectations (e.g. economic theory for Economics, close textual analysis for Literature, experimental design for Sciences)?
- Have you avoided methods that belong to another subject group?
Red flag: unexplained surveys, interviews, or statistical tools that are not justified within the subject framework.
Criterion B: Knowledge and Understanding (6 marks)
-
Subject Knowledge
- Is terminology used accurately, consistently, and in context?
- Are key concepts explained when first introduced (not assumed knowledge)?
- Does the essay demonstrate understanding beyond the textbook level?
-
Contextual Understanding
- Is there clear awareness of the academic context of the topic (historical, theoretical, or scholarly)?
- Are sources used to support arguments, not replace them?
High-scoring EEs show control of subject language — not volume of facts.
Criterion C: Critical Thinking (12 marks)
This is the most heavily weighted criterion and the most common reason EEs score a C or below.
-
Analysis Over Description
- Does every major paragraph contain analysis, not just explanation?
- Are claims consistently supported by evidence AND reasoning?
- Is there a clear logical chain from evidence → interpretation → implication?
-
Evaluation and Insight
- Have you considered alternative interpretations or counterarguments?
- Are limitations of data, sources, or methodology explicitly acknowledged?
- Do you evaluate the significance of findings, not just restate them?
Examiner question: “Is the student thinking — or reporting?”
Criterion D: Presentation (4 marks)
-
Formal Requirements
- Total word count does not exceed 4,000 words
- No analysis is hidden in footnotes or appendices
- Pages are numbered and clearly structured
-
Structure and Layout
- Title page includes research question, not a topic title
- Table of contents matches headings exactly
- Headings reflect argument progression, not generic sections
- Tables, figures, and diagrams are labelled and referenced in-text
Presentation marks are easy to secure — losing them is avoidable.
Criterion E: Engagement (6 marks) — RPPF
-
Reflection Quality (Not Summary)
- All three reflections are completed and authenticated
- Reflections focus on decision-making, challenges, and intellectual growth
- You explain why choices were made, not just what you did
-
Evidence of Independent Thinking
- Challenges are specific and genuine (not generic difficulties)
- Reflections show evolution of thinking across the research process
Weak reflections do not fail because they are short — they fail because they are shallow.
Academic Integrity & Referencing
- All sources are cited consistently (APA / MLA / Chicago)
- Every in-text citation appears in the bibliography
- No unexplained data, images, or quotations
- Turnitin similarity is within school expectations
- AI tools (if used) were limited to planning or language support — not analysis or content generation
Final Submission Checklist
Before uploading:
- EE uploaded as one single PDF
- Correct subject selected in IBIS
- Final version approved by supervisor
- File name follows school guidelines
Take a breath. Read your conclusion one last time.
If it clearly answers the research question and reflects critical judgement, you are ready.
Final Thought
If you’ve followed this checklist, addressed the research question, evaluated your evidence, and reflected thoughtfully in your RPPF, you are submitting work that meets exactly what examiners are looking for. Take a moment to review, trust your preparation, and submit with confidence — or reach out for a final review if you want that extra level of assurance.
