Can an EE supervisor help write the research question?

A supervisor may discuss, challenge and help refine the research question, but the final intellectual choice must belong to the student. Effective support involves asking whether the question is focused, researchable, analytical and appropriate for the registered subject. The supervisor can identify excessive breadth or a mismatch between the question and proposed method. They should not simply dictate a ready-made question that determines the student's investigation. Asking the student to justify each key term is often the best test of genuine ownership.

How much feedback can a supervisor give on an EE draft?

A supervisor may read and comment on one completed draft of the Extended Essay. Feedback may identify general problems involving focus, argument, evidence, method, structure, presentation or referencing. It must not become direct editing, proofreading, sentence rewriting or correction of calculations and citations. The student should interpret the comments and decide how to revise the essay independently. Supervisors should clearly record when the official draft was received and when feedback was returned.

What should happen during the EE interim reflection?

The interim reflection should take place after substantial research has been completed and an argument has begun to emerge. The student should explain the current research question, provisional findings, significant challenges and any changes in method or scope. The supervisor should test whether the available evidence can support a reasoned answer rather than a descriptive report. The discussion should end with specific priorities for drafting and resolving remaining gaps. Reflection is strongest when the student explains why a decision changed and what effect that change had.

What should a supervisor ask during the viva voce?

The viva voce should explore the student's research process, learning and ownership after the final essay has been submitted. Useful questions concern important decisions, unexpected evidence, methodological limitations and changes in the student's understanding. The supervisor can also ask the student to explain a distinctive argument, source or result from the essay. This supports reflection and helps confirm that the work is authentic. It is not an oral examination of every factual detail and must not become an additional editing session.

What should a supervisor do if AI misuse or plagiarism is suspected?

The supervisor should first discuss the concern with the student and ask them to explain their research and writing process. Relevant evidence may include notes, source records, version history, earlier writing and the student's explanation of particular claims. An AI detector or similarity percentage should not be treated as conclusive evidence by itself. If the concern remains, the supervisor must follow the school's academic integrity procedure and inform the DP or EE coordinator. The supervisor should document observations objectively rather than attempting to determine or impose a penalty independently.

Back to all posts

EE Supervision Guide: A Practical Plan for Teachers

Q: How many times should an Extended Essay supervisor meet a student?

The student must participate in three formal reflection sessions: the initial reflection, interim reflection and final viva voce. Additional check-ins are permitted and often useful for monitoring research, deadlines and academic integrity. The IB recommends approximately 3-5 hours of supervision in total, including the formal sessions. A six-meeting structure provides enough continuity without making the project teacher-directed. Schools may establish their own calendar, but local scheduling cannot remove the three formal sessions.

IB Teachers IA and EE Supervision IB IB Extended Essay

• 28 Sept 2026•11

EE Supervision Guide: A Practical Plan for Teachers

Join 650k+ students breezing through the IBReady to breeze through the IB?

EE Supervision Guide: A Practical Plan for Teachers | RevisionDojo

Back to all posts

EE Supervision Guide: A Practical Plan for Teachers

IB Teachers IA and EE Supervision IB IB Extended Essay

• 28 Sept 2026•11

Supervising an Extended Essay means helping a student make sound research decisions without becoming a co-author. An effective EE supervision guide needs clear milestones, purposeful questions, accurate records and firm boundaries around feedback.

The model below uses six meetings: three mandatory formal reflections and three recommended check-ins. Schools may adapt the timing, but supervisors must confirm which Extended Essay guide applies to the student's examination session.

Check the examination session before supervising

The Extended Essay is an independent research project culminating in a paper of up to 4,000 words. The requirements change for first assessment 2027. November 2026 candidates remain under the previous guide, while May 2027 candidates use the revised model announced in the official IB Extended Essay update.

Feature	Through November 2026	First assessment 2027
Formal reflections	Three	Three
Final meeting	Viva voce	Viva voce
Reflection form	RPPF	RPF
Assessment total	34 marks	30 marks
Reflection evidence	Three entries totalling no more than 500 words	One reflective statement of no more than 500 words

For 2027, the revised criteria assess the research framework, knowledge and understanding, analysis and argument, discussion and evaluation, and reflection. Teachers should use the guide, forms and criteria supplied by their coordinator or the IB Programme Resource Centre for the relevant session.

What the supervisor is responsible for

The supervisor helps the student select a feasible topic, develop an appropriate research question, choose suitable methods, locate credible resources and meet ethical and academic integrity expectations. The role also includes monitoring progress, conducting formal reflections, providing permitted feedback and reading the final essay before the viva voce.

The IB describes the EE as independent, self-directed research supported by a supervisor. The supervisor should challenge weak decisions, but the student must produce the research, analysis and writing.

A useful boundary is: question, diagnose and signpost, but do not rewrite. Asking “Where does this paragraph answer your research question?” preserves independence. Replacing the paragraph does not.

The IB recommends approximately 3-5 hours of supervision, including formal reflections. Additional short check-ins are permitted when the total support remains appropriate and formal and informal meetings are clearly distinguished.

A session-by-session EE supervision plan

Session	Status	Main outcome	Student brings
1. Orientation	Recommended	Viable subject area and expectations	Initial interests and possible topics
2. Initial reflection	Mandatory	Working question and research plan	Preliminary research and proposal
3. Research check	Recommended	Evidence, method and scope reviewed	Source log, notes or early data
4. Interim reflection	Mandatory	Refined question and viable argument	Outline and substantial research
5. Draft feedback	Recommended	Prioritized revision plan	One complete draft
6. Viva voce	Mandatory	Reflection and authenticity discussion	Final essay and process notes

Session 1: orientation and feasibility

Clarify responsibilities, deadlines, permitted support and the correct assessment criteria. Ask why the topic belongs in the proposed subject, because an interesting topic is not automatically suitable for that subject's research conventions.

Test feasibility through four questions:

Can the question be investigated within 4,000 words?
Are suitable primary or secondary sources accessible?
Does the proposed method fit the registered subject?
Are there safety, privacy, consent or environmental concerns?

Do not approve a polished-sounding question without testing the available evidence. End with a preliminary reading task and a deadline for a short proposal.

Session 2: initial formal reflection

Hold the initial reflection after the student has completed enough preliminary research to discuss genuine options. The goal is a defensible working research question, not an irreversible final formulation.

Ask what early reading changed, which sources appear useful and what method will produce relevant evidence. Record attendance on the applicable form and prompt the student to document decisions according to the rules for their examination session.

Agree on an observable milestone, such as “evaluate eight relevant sources and produce an argument map,” rather than “do more research.” RevisionDojo's guide to Extended Essay reflection sessions can help students prepare evidence for the discussion.

Session 3: research and method check

This check-in should occur before weak research habits become embedded. Review the source log, sampling approach, experimental design, textual selection or data-processing plan, depending on the subject.

Ask the student to justify the role of each major source. The RevisionDojo guide to EE integrity provides a useful basis for discussing traceable notes and transparent citation.

If human participants, personal data or hazardous procedures are involved, stop unsuitable work before data collection. Escalate uncertainty to the EE coordinator and consult current subject guidance rather than improvising an ethical rule.

Session 4: interim formal reflection

Schedule this meeting once substantial research has been completed and the student has begun developing an argument. Both parties should leave knowing whether the question, evidence and method can support a coherent essay.

Useful prompts include:

What is your provisional answer to the research question?
Which evidence most strongly challenges that answer?
Where are you summarizing rather than analysing?
What limitation affects the strength of your conclusion?
What changed in your approach, and why?

A strong reflection identifies a decision and its consequence. “I found research difficult” is descriptive; explaining that conflicting datasets led to a narrower time period demonstrates reflection. The 2027 EE assessment criteria overview can support discussion, but teachers must apply the official criteria for the student's session.

Session 5: feedback on the completed draft

The supervisor may read and comment on one completed draft, but may not directly edit it. Label this official feedback opportunity clearly and avoid providing successive rounds through shared-document comments.

Feedback can identify broad weaknesses in focus, method, argument, evidence, presentation or referencing. It should not correct sentences, rewrite passages, repair calculations, supply missing analysis or provide line-by-line editing.

For example, write “Several claims in this section need traceable evidence,” rather than correcting every citation. Ask the student to create a prioritized revision list. The one-draft rule explained for supervisors summarizes this boundary.

Session 6: final reflection and viva voce

The viva voce occurs after the final essay has been submitted. It is not another feedback meeting, and the student cannot revise the submitted work afterward.

Use the conversation to explore learning and help confirm authenticity. Ask about a difficult decision, unexpected source, methodological limitation, development of the argument and what the student would do differently.

If answers conflict sharply with the submitted work, follow the school's academic integrity procedure and involve the coordinator. Do not conduct an improvised interrogation. The IB's official Extended Essay subject brief explains the final reflection and its connection to academic integrity.

Keep supervision records simple

Maintain a dated log containing the meeting type, material reviewed, questions discussed, agreed next action and any integrity or safeguarding concern. Do not write the student's reflection or turn the log into an unofficial assessment form.

A simple workflow is sufficient:

Student submits a brief agenda before the meeting.
Supervisor asks questions and records decisions.
Student states the next action and deadline.
Supervisor records attendance where required.
Both retain evidence of draft and submission dates.

This protects continuity and helps demonstrate how authorship was monitored. The RevisionDojo EE guide hub can supplement school materials with planning and subject-specific explanations.

Common supervision mistakes

Approving a topic too quickly: Require preliminary evidence before confirming feasibility.
Treating reflections as administration: Examine choices, changes and learning rather than merely recording progress.
Giving vague feedback: Replace “needs more analysis” with a question about where evidence is interpreted or evaluated.
Over-supporting a student: Smaller deadlines and clearer questions are legitimate; supplied arguments and rewritten prose are not.
Ignoring changes in voice or quality: Discuss concerns, compare process evidence and consult the coordinator. AI detection scores alone are not proof.
Using the wrong guide: Check the examination session, form and criteria before the first formal reflection.

Conclusion

Effective supervision combines structure with restraint. Set milestones, ask subject-specific questions, monitor ethics and authenticity, and protect the student's ownership of every important intellectual decision.

RevisionDojo can support this process through its EE Guides, Coursework Review and Jojo AI, particularly when students need to organize questions or understand criterion language. These tools should supplement, never replace, the appointed supervisor and current IB documentation.

Sources and referenced URLs

Add as a preferred source on Google