Browse top scoring exemplars of IB Geography EE with A-E grades, examiner-style feedback, criteria breakdowns, and real student Extended Essay exemplars.
15 minute read
14 minute read
7 minute read
7 minute read
8 minute read
6 minute read
8 minute read
1 minute read
5 minute read
4 minute read
8 minute read
The help center covers plans, billing, marking and troubleshooting, and you can message us from there.
Visit the help center
This page provides a comprehensive guide to understanding the assessment criteria for the IB Geography Extended Essay (EE). By breaking down each criterion, offering annotated examples, and explaining grade boundaries, you'll gain clarity on how your work is evaluated. Additionally, a free embedded grader is available to help you self-assess your essay efficiently.
Before using the grader, ensure you have the following:
The IB Geography EE is assessed using five criteria, totaling 34 marks. Here's a breakdown:
What It Tests: Your ability to formulate a clear research question, select appropriate methods, and structure your essay logically.
Performance Levels:
Common Mistakes:
Mark Band Descriptors:
| Mark Band | Description | Evidence Required |
|---|---|---|
| 5-6 | Clear research question, appropriate methods, and logical structure. | Explicitly stated question, justified methodology, and well-organized sections. |
| 3-4 | Some clarity in question and methods; structure has minor issues. | Question stated but may lack focus; methods mentioned but not fully justified; structure somewhat clear. |
| 1-2 | Unclear question, inappropriate methods, and poor structure. | Question vague or missing; methods inappropriate or absent; structure disorganized. |
What It Tests: Your grasp of the geographical context and integration of subject-specific concepts.
Performance Levels:
Common Mistakes:
Mark Band Descriptors:
| Mark Band | Description | Evidence Required |
|---|---|---|
| 5-6 | Comprehensive understanding with effective application of concepts. | Accurate use of geographical terminology and integration of relevant theories. |
| 3-4 | General understanding with some application of concepts. | Use of geographical terms with occasional inaccuracies; some integration of theories. |
| 1-2 | Limited understanding with minimal application of concepts. | Inaccurate or missing geographical terminology; little to no integration of theories. |
What It Tests: Your ability to critically analyze data and construct a coherent argument.
Performance Levels:
Common Mistakes:
Mark Band Descriptors:
| Mark Band | Description | Evidence Required |
|---|---|---|
| 5-6 | Thorough analysis with a clear, well-supported argument. | Critical evaluation of data; logical progression of ideas; strong evidence supporting conclusions. |
| 3-4 | Adequate analysis with a somewhat supported argument. | Some evaluation of data; argument present but may lack depth; evidence partially supports conclusions. |
| 1-2 | Superficial analysis with a weak or unsupported argument. | Minimal evaluation of data; unclear argument; little to no evidence supporting conclusions. |
What It Tests: Your ability to interpret findings, discuss their significance, and evaluate the research process.
Performance Levels:
Common Mistakes:
Mark Band Descriptors:
| Mark Band | Description | Evidence Required |
|---|---|---|
| 7-8 | In-depth discussion with critical evaluation of findings and methods. | Thorough interpretation of results; identification of study limitations; reflection on research process. |
| 5-6 | General discussion with some evaluation of findings and methods. | Interpretation of results; acknowledgment of some limitations; limited reflection on research process. |
| 3-4 | Limited discussion with little evaluation of findings and methods. | Basic interpretation of results; minimal acknowledgment of limitations; little reflection on research process. |
What It Tests: Your ability to reflect on your learning journey throughout the research process.
Performance Levels:
Common Mistakes:
Mark Band Descriptors:
| Mark Band | Description | Evidence Required |
|---|---|---|
| 3-4 | Insightful reflection showing significant personal and academic growth. | Detailed reflection on challenges faced, skills developed, and lessons learned. |
| 2 | General reflection with some evidence of growth. | Reflection on challenges and skills developed, but lacks depth. |
| 1 | Superficial reflection with little evidence of growth. | Minimal reflection on challenges and skills; lacks insight. |
The embedded grader provides a score out of 34, corresponding to the IB grading scale:
If You're Between Bands or Uncertain:
Improvement Actions:
The help center covers plans, billing, marking and troubleshooting, and you can message us from there.
Visit the help centerGet annotated suggestions, strengths, and actionable feedback for your work.
View your feedback in the context of the subject rubric and broken down by criteria strands.
All files are deleted within 48 hours. We do not train on your data.
