This page is designed to help you understand the assessment criteria for the World Religions Extended Essay (EE) and to interpret your grades effectively. An embedded grading tool is available to assist you in self-evaluating your essay, making the grading process more efficient.
Before using the grading tool, ensure you have the following:
- Final Essay Draft: Complete version of your EE.
- Research Question: Clearly defined and focused.
- Bibliography: Comprehensive list of sources.
- Citations: Properly formatted in-text references.
- Reflection Notes: Insights on your research process.
- Word Count: Ensure it does not exceed 4,000 words.
The World Religions EE is assessed using five criteria, totaling 34 marks. Below is a breakdown of each criterion:
What it tests: Clarity and justification of your research question and methodology.
High Performance: A well-defined research question that is directly related to World Religions, with a clear explanation of the chosen methodology.
Common Mistakes: Vague research questions or methodologies that are not well-explained.
| Mark Band | What it means | Evidence you must show |
|---|
| 5–6 | Clear, focused research question with a justified methodology. | Explicitly state your research question and provide a rationale for your chosen methods. |
| 3–4 | Somewhat clear research question with partial justification of methodology. | State your research question and attempt to justify your methods. |
| 1–2 | Unclear research question with little to no justification of methodology. | Research question is vague or missing; methodology is not explained. |
| 0 | No research question or methodology presented. | Research question and methodology are absent. |
What it tests: Depth of knowledge and understanding of the topic within the context of World Religions.
High Performance: Demonstrates comprehensive knowledge with appropriate use of terminology.
Common Mistakes: Superficial understanding or misuse of terminology.
| Mark Band | What it means | Evidence you must show |
|---|
| 5–6 | Thorough understanding with correct use of terminology. | Accurate explanations and appropriate terminology throughout. |
| 3–4 | Adequate understanding with some correct terminology. | Basic explanations with occasional correct terminology. |
| 1–2 | Limited understanding with incorrect or no use of terminology. | Inaccurate explanations and misuse or absence of terminology. |
| 0 | No relevant knowledge or understanding demonstrated. | Content is irrelevant or incorrect. |
What it tests: Analysis, evaluation, and synthesis of information.
High Performance: Critical analysis with well-supported arguments and conclusions.
Common Mistakes: Descriptive rather than analytical content; unsupported conclusions.
| Mark Band | What it means | Evidence you must show |
|---|
| 10–12 | Insightful analysis with strong evidence and coherent arguments. | Consistent critical evaluation and synthesis of information. |
| 7–9 | Good analysis with relevant evidence and clear arguments. | Some critical evaluation and synthesis present. |
| 4–6 | Basic analysis with limited evidence and arguments. | Minimal critical evaluation; mostly descriptive. |
| 1–3 | Poor analysis with little to no evidence or arguments. | Lacks critical evaluation; predominantly descriptive. |
| 0 | No analysis or critical thinking demonstrated. |
What it tests: Structure, organization, and adherence to formal presentation requirements.
High Performance: Well-organized essay with all required elements (title page, table of contents, page numbers, etc.).
Common Mistakes: Missing elements or poor organization.
| Mark Band | What it means | Evidence you must show |
|---|
| 3–4 | Excellent presentation with all required elements. | Title page, table of contents, page numbers, consistent formatting. |
| 1–2 | Satisfactory presentation with some missing elements. | One or more required elements missing; inconsistent formatting. |
| 0 | Poor presentation with multiple missing elements. | Several required elements missing; disorganized structure. |
What it tests: Reflection on the research process and personal engagement.
High Performance: Thoughtful reflection demonstrating intellectual initiative.
Common Mistakes: Superficial or absent reflection.
| Mark Band | What it means | Evidence you must show |
|---|
| 5–6 | Deep reflection with clear evidence of personal engagement. | Detailed insights into the research process and learning outcomes. |
| 3–4 | Adequate reflection with some evidence of engagement. | General comments on the research process and learning outcomes. |
| 1–2 | Limited reflection with minimal evidence of engagement. | Brief or vague comments on the research process. |
| 0 | No reflection or evidence of engagement. | Reflection section is missing or lacks content. |
The embedded grading tool provides a mark for each criterion, which you can sum to determine your total score out of 34. This total corresponds to a grade as follows:
| Total Marks | Grade |
|---|
| 30–34 | A |
| 25–29 | B |
| 17–24 | C |
| 9–16 | D |
| 0–8 | E |
If you're between bands or uncertain:
- Review the descriptors: Compare your work against the criteria to identify areas for improvement.
- Seek feedback: Consult with your supervisor or peers for additional insights.
Improvement actions:
- Criterion A: Clarify your research question and justify your methodology.
- Criterion B: Deepen your understanding of the topic and use appropriate terminology.
- Criterion C: Enhance your analysis and support arguments with evidence.
- Criterion D: Ensure all formal elements are present and well-organized.
- Criterion E: Reflect thoughtfully on your research process and personal growth.
High-band excerpt:
"The analysis of the ritual practices within the community reveals a profound connection between their daily activities and spiritual beliefs, as evidenced by the integration of sacred symbols in routine tasks."
Why it scores high: Demonstrates deep analysis, connects practices to beliefs, and uses specific examples.
Mid/low-band excerpt:
"People in the community perform rituals every day, which shows their beliefs."
What's missing: Lacks depth, specific examples, and analytical connection between practices and beliefs.
Grade boundaries can vary by session. The latest confirmed figures are:
| Total Marks | Grade |
|---|
| 30–34 | A |
| 25–29 | B |
| 17–24 | C |
| 9–16 | D |
| 0–8 | E |
The EE contributes to the overall diploma score, with higher grades positively impacting your final result.
- Vague research question → Refine to a specific, focused question.
- Descriptive content → Incorporate analysis and critical evaluation.
