Can I use Wikipedia for my IB History IA?

Wikipedia can help you understand an unfamiliar topic, identify useful terminology, and locate references during preliminary research. It should not become the main evidence for your investigation because it is a tertiary overview designed to summarize existing knowledge. Follow its citations to academic books, journal articles, archives, official documents, or other identifiable original sources. Check that each referenced work genuinely supports the statement for which you plan to use it. Your final IA should demonstrate that you selected, read, and evaluated the underlying evidence yourself.

How many sources should an IB History IA use?

The answer depends on your assessment cohort. For first assessment 2028, the IB officially permits a maximum of seven sources, so each source must have a clear and substantial role. Students following the course assessed through 2027 should use a suitable range, but the quality and deployment of sources matter more than collecting a large bibliography. In either course, avoid citing numerous works once merely to make the research appear extensive. Confirm the applicable source and formatting requirements with your teacher before finalizing the investigation.

What counts as original analysis in a History IA?

Original analysis is your reasoned interpretation of the evidence, not a claim that no historian has previously made. You show it by deciding what evidence proves, comparing competing explanations, and judging which factor or perspective is most convincing. A paragraph becomes analytical when it moves beyond what a source says to explain why that evidence matters. Qualifications also demonstrate independence, especially when you identify what the evidence cannot establish. Your conclusion should therefore emerge from your comparison of sources rather than repeat the conclusion of one historian.

Should every IB History IA use both primary and secondary sources?

A combination is usually valuable because primary and secondary sources perform different functions. Primary material can reveal contemporary decisions, experiences, language, and perspectives, while secondary scholarship supplies context and developed historical interpretations. However, neither category is automatically reliable or useful simply because of its label. Source choice must be justified in relation to the inquiry question and the claim being tested. Follow your current guide and teacher's instructions, especially because the first-assessment-2028 course places an explicit limit on the total number of sources.

How do I reduce description without removing necessary context?

Keep context that enables the reader to understand your evidence or evaluate your argument. Compress broad background into a few precise sentences, then devote most of the paragraph to claims, evidence, comparison, and judgement. Try removing a contextual sentence and ask whether the reasoning still makes sense. If it does, that sentence may not be earning its place. Organizing the investigation by analytical factors rather than chronology also makes unnecessary narrative easier to identify.

How can I compare historians without simply listing their opinions?

Begin by identifying the precise point on which the historians disagree, such as causation, significance, measurement, or responsibility. Explain the evidence, definitions, timeframe, or assumptions underlying each interpretation. Test both positions against primary evidence or independent data instead of treating the historians' authority as proof. You can then decide whether one interpretation is stronger, whether each explains a different dimension, or whether both require qualification. This process turns historiography into evidence for your argument rather than a collection of quotations.

Back to all posts

How to Write an IB History IA That Is Not Wikipedia

IB History Internal Assessment IB IA

• 5 Oct 2026•10

How to Write an IB History IA That Is Not Wikipedia

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

How to Write an IB History IA That Is Not Wikipedia | RevisionDojo

Back to all posts

How to Write an IB History IA That Is Not Wikipedia

IB History Internal Assessment IB IA

• 5 Oct 2026•10

An IB History IA should not read like an encyclopedia entry. Instead of recounting everything that happened, it must answer a focused question by comparing evidence, evaluating interpretations, and reaching a defensible historical judgement. The essential shift is from reporting information to using information as evidence.

This guide explains how to select varied sources, produce original analysis, synthesize evidence, and revise descriptive paragraphs. It also distinguishes the IA structures applying before and from first assessment 2028.

Check Which IB History IA Course Applies

Students taking their final assessment in 2027 or earlier follow the previous course. Students first assessed in May 2028 follow the revised course.

Assessment cohort	IA structure and rules
Final assessment by 2027	Identification and evaluation of sources; Investigation; Reflection. Maximum 2,200 words, marked out of 25, worth 25% at SL and 20% at HL.
First assessment from 2028	Historical inquiry question; Sources and perspectives; Synthesis and evaluation. Marked out of 24, worth 30% at SL and 20% at HL, with a maximum of seven sources.

The official History curriculum update confirms that the revised IA removes the separate reflection section and emphasizes developing the inquiry question and selecting sources. The 2028 History subject brief outlines the revised inquiry process, while the previous History subject brief summarizes the earlier assessment model.

Confirm your cohort with your teacher. Although the sections differ, both versions require an argument based on historical evidence rather than a narrative.

Why History IAs Sound Like Wikipedia

A Wikipedia-style investigation usually moves chronologically from one event to another without explaining how the information answers the research question. Warning signs include:

paragraphs beginning with dates rather than claims
excessive political or biographical background
one source being paraphrased for several paragraphs
quotations receiving no interpretation
historians being listed without comparison
conclusions that repeat the narrative

Context is necessary only when it helps readers understand the argument, assess evidence, or follow a judgement. Facts that perform none of those functions probably do not deserve space.

Begin With an Arguable Question

A descriptive question produces descriptive writing. “What were the effects of the New Deal?” invites a catalogue. “To what extent did the New Deal reduce unemployment in the United States between 1933 and 1939?” requires criteria, evidence, and judgement.

A workable inquiry question is focused, time-bounded, arguable, researchable, and analytical. It should require assessment of causation, significance, change, consequence, or competing perspectives.

Before committing, write two plausible answers that disagree and identify evidence capable of testing each one. If only one obvious answer exists, or the available evidence merely supplies facts, refine the question. The RevisionDojo guide to focused History IA questions offers additional checks and examples.

Build a Varied Source Base

Source variety means choosing evidence that performs different functions, not collecting unrelated material. Government records can establish official policy, speeches reveal intended messages, testimony shows individual experience, statistics indicate scale, and academic scholarship supplies developed interpretations.

Primary and secondary are not quality rankings. The UCLA guide to primary and secondary sources explains that primary evidence still requires critical interpretation, while secondary works analyze and synthesize earlier evidence. RevisionDojo's primary-source analysis guide explains why usefulness depends on the question being asked.

Use Wikipedia, textbooks, and general websites for orientation and source discovery, not as the foundation of the final argument. Follow citations to identifiable documents, scholarly books, journal articles, archives, or official data. Never cite a work you have not examined.

Give Every Source a Job

Organize notes by claim or issue, not source. For each planned claim, record supporting evidence, challenging evidence, relevant source limitations, and a provisional judgement.

A source might:

establish essential context
provide direct evidence
corroborate or challenge another source
introduce a historical interpretation
reveal a perspective or assumption
expose uncertainty or an evidential gap

This prevents the structure “Historian A says this, then Historian B says that.” Paragraphs should be controlled by your argument rather than the order in which sources were discovered.

Turn Evidence Into Original Analysis

Original analysis does not mean discovering something unknown to professional historians. At IB level, it means making your own reasoned judgement about what the evidence supports instead of borrowing one author's conclusion.

A strong analytical paragraph usually contains five moves:

Claim: Answer one part of the inquiry question.
Evidence: Introduce precise, relevant evidence.
Interpretation: Explain what it suggests and why.
Comparison or evaluation: Test it against another source, perspective, or limitation.
Link: State how the resulting judgement affects the overall answer.

A descriptive paragraph might state that unemployment remained high in 1938, one historian considered the New Deal unsuccessful, and federal employment programmes existed. An analytical version would argue that persistent unemployment supports the view that full recovery was not achieved, but that national totals understate the immediate relief supplied by work programmes. It could then conclude that the New Deal reduced hardship more successfully than it restored self-sustaining employment.

The analytical version defines what the evidence proves, recognizes its limits, and reaches a qualified judgement.

Synthesize and Evaluate Sources

Synthesis means combining evidence from several sources to reach a conclusion that no single source provides independently. Sources can corroborate, qualify, contradict, or complement one another.

Do not stop by saying that historians disagree. Ask whether they use different archives, definitions, timeframes, social groups, or standards of success. For example, a government statement may demonstrate intended policy, while regional data shows inconsistent implementation. Together, they support the judgement that formal scope should not be confused with practical effect.

Source evaluation must also be connected to the question. Avoid generic claims that a source is “biased” or valuable merely because it is primary. A persuasive speech may be weak evidence of actual conditions but strong evidence of official messaging.

Consider what the creator could know, which audience was targeted, what might be omitted, and whether the source measures intentions, perceptions, implementation, or results. Explain how those characteristics affect the particular conclusion you can draw.

Revise With an Analysis Audit

Label each draft sentence C for context, E for evidence, A for analysis, or J for judgement. Long sequences of C and E show where the investigation is narrating rather than analyzing.

Check that every paragraph begins with a claim, interprets its evidence, compares sources where appropriate, and ends with a mini-judgement. Quotations should never be left to explain themselves. The conclusion must answer the exact wording of the inquiry question, including terms such as “to what extent” or “most significant.”

You can consult annotated History IA examples, use the History IA analysis guide, and check criterion alignment with the RevisionDojo History IA Grader. Treat automated feedback as a revision prompt, not a replacement for teacher guidance or your own historical judgement.

Conclusion

An IB History IA stops sounding like Wikipedia when its organizing principle changes from chronology to argument. Use a focused question, assign every source a purpose, compare evidence within paragraphs, evaluate what sources can prove, and make qualified judgements.

RevisionDojo's History IA exemplars, analysis guides, and IA Feedback tools can help identify descriptive passages and test criterion alignment. Use them to strengthen work you have researched and written yourself alongside feedback from your History teacher.