Browse top scoring exemplars of IB Philosophy EE with A-E grades, examiner-style feedback, criteria breakdowns, and real student Extended Essay exemplars.
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 Philosophy Extended Essay (EE). By breaking down each criterion, offering annotated examples, and highlighting common pitfalls, you'll be equipped to self-evaluate your work effectively. Additionally, a free embedded grader is available to streamline the self-assessment process.
Before you begin, ensure you have the following:
The Philosophy EE is assessed based on five criteria, totaling 34 marks. Below is a breakdown of each criterion, what it evaluates, and how to excel.
What It Tests: Your ability to formulate a clear research question and apply appropriate methods to address it.
High Performance: A sharply focused question with a well-justified methodology.
Medium Performance: A somewhat clear question with an adequate method.
Low Performance: An unclear question with an inappropriate or poorly explained method.
Common Mistakes:
Mark Band Descriptors:
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 5-6 | Excellent focus and method. | Clearly stated, focused research question; well-justified and appropriate methodology. |
| 3-4 | Good focus and method. | Research question is clear; methodology is appropriate but may lack full justification. |
| 1-2 | Basic focus and method. | Research question is present but lacks clarity; methodology is weak or not well-explained. |
| 0 | No focus or method. | Research question is absent or unclear; methodology is inappropriate or missing. |
What It Tests: Your grasp of the philosophical context and concepts relevant to your research question.
High Performance: Demonstrates deep understanding with accurate use of philosophical terminology.
Medium Performance: Shows general understanding with some inaccuracies in terminology.
Low Performance: Limited understanding with frequent inaccuracies.
Common Mistakes:
Mark Band Descriptors:
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 5-6 | Excellent knowledge and understanding. | Comprehensive understanding of the topic; accurate use of philosophical terminology. |
| 3-4 | Good knowledge and understanding. | General understanding with minor inaccuracies; mostly correct use of terminology. |
| 1-2 | Basic knowledge and understanding. | Limited understanding; frequent inaccuracies in terminology. |
| 0 | No knowledge or understanding. | Lack of understanding; incorrect or absent use of terminology. |
What It Tests: Your ability to analyze, evaluate, and construct a coherent argument.
High Performance: Presents a well-structured argument with critical analysis and evaluation.
Medium Performance: Offers a structured argument with some analysis but limited evaluation.
Low Performance: Provides a descriptive account with little analysis or evaluation.
Common Mistakes:
Mark Band Descriptors:
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 10-12 | Excellent critical thinking. | Coherent, well-structured argument; critical analysis and evaluation; consideration of counterarguments. |
| 7-9 | Good critical thinking. | Structured argument; some analysis and evaluation; limited consideration of counterarguments. |
| 4-6 | Basic critical thinking. | Descriptive account; minimal analysis; no evaluation or counterarguments. |
| 1-3 | Limited critical thinking. | Incoherent argument; lacks analysis and evaluation. |
| 0 | No critical thinking. |
What It Tests: The organization and formal presentation of your essay.
High Performance: Logically organized with consistent formatting and citation style.
Medium Performance: Generally organized with minor inconsistencies in formatting.
Low Performance: Poorly organized with frequent formatting errors.
Common Mistakes:
Mark Band Descriptors:
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Excellent presentation. | Logically organized; consistent formatting and citation style. |
| 3 | Good presentation. | Generally organized; minor inconsistencies in formatting. |
| 2 | Basic presentation. | Some organization; frequent formatting errors. |
| 1 | Limited presentation. | Poorly organized; numerous formatting errors. |
| 0 | No presentation. | Lacks organization; formatting is absent or incorrect. |
What It Tests: Your reflection on the research process and personal engagement with the topic.
High Performance: Insightful reflection demonstrating deep engagement.
Medium Performance: Some reflection showing moderate engagement.
Low Performance: Minimal reflection with little evidence of engagement.
Common Mistakes:
Mark Band Descriptors:
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 5-6 | Excellent engagement. | Insightful reflection; demonstrates deep engagement with the research process. |
| 3-4 | Good engagement. | Some reflection; shows moderate engagement. |
| 1-2 | Basic engagement. | Minimal reflection; little evidence of engagement. |
| 0 | No engagement. | No reflection or evidence of engagement. |
The embedded grader provides a score for each criterion, which you can sum to determine your overall mark out of 34. Here's how to interpret your total score:
If your score falls between bands or you're uncertain about a particular criterion, consider the following:
High-Band Excerpt:
*"In examining Descartes' cogito, one must consider the foundational role it plays
The help center covers plans, billing, marking and troubleshooting, and you can message us from there.
Visit the help center| No argument presented; purely descriptive. |
Get 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.
