What are Global Politics EE examples?

Global Politics EE examples are real student coursework samples that help you understand structure, rubric expectations, and the standard of work expected in IB Extended Essay.

How should I use these examples?

Use them to compare structure, evidence, feedback, and scoring patterns. Do not copy the topic or wording; use the examples to improve your own planning and revision decisions.

Are these examples useful for understanding IB marking?

Yes. Examples with score and feedback signals help you connect concrete student work to the assessment criteria and understand what stronger submissions tend to do well.

IB Global Politics EE Examples

Global Politics EE Grader

This page provides a comprehensive guide to understanding the assessment criteria for the IB Global Politics Extended Essay (EE). By breaking down each criterion, offering annotated examples, and explaining grade boundaries, you'll gain clarity on how your essay is evaluated. Additionally, a free embedded grader is available to assist you in self-assessing your work efficiently.

Quick Start Checklist

Before you begin self-assessing your Global Politics EE, ensure you have the following:

Final Draft of Your Essay: Ensure it's within the 4,000-word limit.
Research Question: Clearly stated and focused.
Bibliography and Citations: Properly formatted and complete.
Reflections on Planning and Progress Form (RPPF): Completed with thoughtful reflections.
- Assessment Criteria: Familiarize yourself with the five criteria:
- Focus and Method
- Knowledge and Understanding
- Critical Thinking
- Presentation
- Engagement

Rubric Breakdown (Paraphrased & Plain English)

The Global Politics EE is assessed based on five criteria, totaling 34 marks. Below is a breakdown of each criterion, what it evaluates, and how to excel.

Criterion A: Focus and Method (6 marks)

What It Tests: Your ability to clearly state and maintain a focused research question, and the appropriateness of the methods used to investigate it.

High Performance: A well-defined research question with a clear explanation of its relevance. The chosen methods are appropriate and effectively applied.

Common Mistakes: Vague research questions, lack of focus, or inappropriate methods.

Mark Band Descriptors:

Mark Band	What It Means	Evidence You Must Show
0	The work does not meet the standard described by the descriptors below.	None.
1–2	The research question is stated but not clearly focused.	Limited explanation of the research question's relevance; methods are inappropriate or poorly applied.
3–4	The research question is clear and focused.	Adequate explanation of relevance; methods are appropriate but may lack effective application.
5–6	The research question is sharply focused and effectively communicated.	Comprehensive explanation of relevance; methods are appropriate and effectively applied.

Criterion B: Knowledge and Understanding (6 marks)

What It Tests: Your grasp of the topic and its context within the subject area.

High Performance: Demonstrates in-depth knowledge with clear connections to Global Politics concepts.

Common Mistakes: Superficial understanding or lack of context.

Mark Band Descriptors:

Mark Band	What It Means	Evidence You Must Show
0	The work does not meet the standard described by the descriptors below.	None.
1–2	Limited knowledge with minimal context.	Basic understanding; weak connections to Global Politics concepts.
3–4	Adequate knowledge with some context.	Moderate understanding; some connections to Global Politics concepts.
5–6	Extensive knowledge with clear context.	Deep understanding; strong connections to Global Politics concepts.

Criterion C: Critical Thinking (12 marks)

What It Tests: Your ability to analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information.

High Performance: Critical analysis with well-supported arguments and evaluation of different perspectives.

Common Mistakes: Descriptive rather than analytical writing; lack of evaluation.

Mark Band Descriptors:

Mark Band	What It Means	Evidence You Must Show
0	The work does not meet the standard described by the descriptors below.	None.
1–4	Limited analysis; mostly descriptive.	Basic arguments; minimal evaluation of perspectives.
5–8	Some analysis with occasional evaluation.	Moderate arguments; some evaluation of perspectives.
9–12	Consistent analysis with thorough evaluation.	Strong arguments; comprehensive evaluation of perspectives.

Criterion D: Presentation (4 marks)

What It Tests: The structure, organization, and formatting of your essay.

High Performance: Logical structure with clear headings; consistent formatting and citation style.

Common Mistakes: Disorganized structure; inconsistent formatting.

Mark Band Descriptors:

Mark Band	What It Means	Evidence You Must Show
0	The work does not meet the standard described by the descriptors below.	None.
1–2	Some organization; inconsistent formatting.	Basic structure; occasional formatting errors.
3–4	Well-organized; consistent formatting.	Clear structure; consistent formatting and citation style.

Criterion E: Engagement (6 marks)

What It Tests: Your reflection on the research process and personal engagement.

High Performance: Insightful reflections demonstrating growth and critical thinking.

Common Mistakes: Superficial reflections; lack of personal insight.

Mark Band Descriptors:

Mark Band	What It Means	Evidence You Must Show
0	The work does not meet the standard described by the descriptors below.	None.
1–2	Limited reflection; minimal insight.	Basic reflections; little evidence of personal growth.
3–4	Adequate reflection; some insight.	Moderate reflections; evidence of personal growth.
5–6	Thoughtful reflection; deep insight.	Comprehensive reflections; clear evidence of personal growth.

How to Interpret Your Grade from the Tool

The embedded grader provides a score for each criterion, which you can sum to determine your total out of 34. This total corresponds to a grade boundary, which we'll discuss below.

If You're Between Bands or Uncertain:

Review Feedback: Examine the feedback for each criterion to identify areas for improvement.
Seek Clarification: Consult with your supervisor or peers to gain different perspectives.
Revise Accordingly: Focus on the criteria where you scored lower to enhance your essay.

Improvement Actions Tied to Each Criterion:

Focus and Method: Refine your research question; ensure methods are appropriate.
Knowledge and Understanding: Deepen your research; connect findings to Global Politics concepts.
Critical Thinking: Analyze data critically; evaluate multiple perspectives.
Presentation: Organize content logically; adhere to formatting guidelines.
Engagement: Reflect deeply on your research journey; document challenges and growth.

Annotated Examples

High-Band Excerpt:

"The research question, 'To what extent did social media influence the outcome of the 2016 US presidential election?' is explored through a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative analysis of social media metrics with qualitative interviews of campaign strategists. This methodology allows for a comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted impact of social media on voter behavior."

Why It Scores High:

Clear and focused research question.
Appropriate and effectively applied methodology.
Demonstrates deep understanding and critical analysis.

Mid/Low-Band Excerpt:

"Social media played a role in the 2016 US presidential election. Many people used platforms like Twitter and Facebook to express their opinions."

What's Missing:

Lacks a clear research question.
Superficial analysis without supporting evidence.
No connection to Global Politics concepts.