History Extended Essay Example: Catherine the Great Religious… | RevisionDojo

Loading document preview...

IB History SL Extended Essay Example

Catherine the Great’s Policies towards minority religions in 18th century Russia as they pertain to Enlightenment principles of religious tolerance: To what extent did Catherine the Great’s policies towards minority religions in 18th century Russia reflect Enlightenment principles of religious tolerance?SL

Official IB Result

28/34

General feedback

24/28

No overall summary is available for this report.

5.1·Strength

Page 1• Click to view

The submission includes a word count and remains within the maximum limit. That meets the formal requirement and shows the student has managed scope carefully.

5.2·Strength

Page 1• Click to view

The title is presented at the start of the document, which meets the expected formatting requirement for the investigation. This gives the essay a clear academic identity from the outset.

Criteria A: Focus and Method

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Topic communication and appropriateness

Excellent

A.2Research question clarity and focus

Excellent

A.3Methodology completeness and appropriateness

Good

Criteria Feedback

The student's topic is clearly focused and historically appropriate, with a well-defined link between Catherine II’s policies and Enlightenment ideas of toleration.
The student's research question is sharply phrased and keeps the investigation directed throughout.
The student uses a generally relevant mix of scholarship and a primary source to support the inquiry.

The student relies heavily on historians’ summaries rather than sustained direct analysis of original policy documents.
The method would be stronger if the student explained more clearly how different source types are being used.
Some conceptual definitions need more precision, especially when framing Enlightenment ideas.

1.1·Strength

Page 1• Click to view

This research question is sharply phrased and appropriately evaluative because “to what extent” invites judgement rather than description. It also gives the essay a clear line of enquiry that can be returned to in each case study.

1.2·Strength

Page 1• Click to view

The title communicates a historically appropriate and clearly bounded focus. By linking Catherine’s minority-religion policies to Enlightenment tolerance, the student shows a research problem that is specific enough for systematic investigation rather than a broad narrative survey.

1.3·Weakness

Page 4• Click to view

This key conceptual explanation is weakened by an imprecise reference to Voltaire and by the unexplained phrase “l'infame.” The student should define the term cleanly and ensure the thinker’s name and idea are accurate, because conceptual precision matters when using Enlightenment language to frame the essay.

1.4·Suggestion

Page 4• Click to view

The method is broadly appropriate, but the student should state more explicitly how each source type will be used. Explaining whether the essay is comparing historians, testing policy against primary decrees, or using correspondence to infer motive would make the investigation procedure more transparent and academically rigorous.

1.5·Weakness

Page 4• Click to view

The methodology claims primary evidence, but it relies heavily on historians’ summaries rather than sustained direct analysis of original policy texts. That weakens the investigation method because the question asks about Catherine’s policies themselves, so the student should engage more directly with decrees, correspondence, and administrative documents.

Criteria B: Knowledge and Understanding

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Application of source material

Excellent

B.2Subject knowledge and understanding

Excellent

B.3Use of terminology and concepts

Excellent

Criteria Feedback

The student chooses source material that is closely tied to the research question and applies it to the specific policy cases under discussion.
The student demonstrates clear knowledge of Catherine II’s reign, imperial expansion, and the different circumstances of Muslims, Jews, and Catholics.
The student uses historical terminology and concepts accurately and with confidence.

Some claims about motive and attitude are more certain than the evidence fully supports.
A few conceptual distinctions could be made even sharper, especially between toleration, supervision, and autonomy.
The work would benefit from more direct quotation and analysis of original policy texts.

2.1·Strength

Page 4• Click to view

The student shows secure understanding of Enlightenment ideas by connecting tolerance to wider intellectual priorities rather than treating it as an isolated slogan. This helps the later policy analysis by giving a usable conceptual framework for judging Catherine’s actions.

2.2·Strength

Page 5• Click to view

The student makes effective use of the Nakaz to connect Catherine’s self-presentation with Enlightenment vocabulary. This is strong source application because it distinguishes between tolerance as an ideal and tolerance as approval, which later becomes central to the argument.

2.3·Weakness

Page 6• Click to view

This statement is very sweeping and needs tighter historical support. The student should either qualify the claim or cite more specific evidence, because broad assertions about “past Russian rulers” can oversimplify a long and uneven policy history.

2.4·Suggestion

Page 8• Click to view

The explanation would be stronger if the student briefly contrasted supervision with genuine autonomy. Clarifying whether this body represented protection, control, or both would sharpen the historical understanding of Catherine’s policy toward Muslims.

2.5·Weakness

Page 9• Click to view

This claim is too confident for the evidence given and contains a factual imprecision in the phrasing. The student should avoid presenting motive as settled when the support is indirect, and should use more cautious language about Catherine’s personal attitude toward Jews.

Criteria C: Critical Thinking

10/12

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Research quality

Moderate

C.2Analysis depth

Moderate

C.3Discussion and evaluation

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

The student develops a coherent comparative argument rather than a purely descriptive account.
The student evaluates different interpretations, especially in the discussion of Jewish policy.
The student distinguishes between motive and outcome in a thoughtful way, which strengthens their reasoning.

Some arguments are asserted more strongly than they are demonstrated from the evidence.
The comparison between historians sometimes relies on preference rather than deeper evaluation of their methods or evidence.
The conclusion resolves the central debate a little too quickly and could engage the alternative reading more fully.

3.1·Strength

Page 7• Click to view

The student does more than describe policy here: the evidence is interpreted in relation to the research question and turned into a judgement. That movement from evidence to claim is exactly what strengthens analytical writing at this level.

3.2·Strength

Page 8• Click to view

This is a thoughtful analytical distinction, because it separates motive from effect. The student is showing awareness that pragmatic state-building can still produce outcomes that fit an Enlightenment idea of toleration.

3.3·Question

Page 8• Click to view

What specific comparison with other eighteenth-century rulers would make this claim more convincing? Naming a comparable ruler or policy would help the student show whether Catherine was truly exceptional or simply following a broader European trend.

3.4·Weakness

Page 10• Click to view

The judgement is asserted more strongly than it is demonstrated. The student should show why Pipes is more convincing by weighing the evidence of the Plakat itself, not only by endorsing one historian over another.

3.5·Weakness

Page 11• Click to view

This framing sets up the debate well, but the analysis does not fully test the alternative explanations. The student should examine the economic and administrative evidence more closely before concluding that the repressive interpretation is secondary.

3.6·Strength

Page 13• Click to view

The student handles historiography well here by showing that one policy can be explained through more than one motive. This layered reading is a strong feature of the essay’s critical thinking.

3.7·Weakness

Page 14• Click to view

The conclusion resolves the central debate too quickly. The student should revisit whether Enlightenment “reflection” depends on motive, effect, or both, because that conceptual distinction affects the final judgement.

Criteria D: Presentation

4/4

Criteria StrandsPro

D.1Structure appropriateness

Excellent

D.2Layout and formatting

Excellent

Criteria Feedback

The student's investigation is clearly structured, with a logical progression through introduction, conceptual framing, case studies, and conclusion.
The student's formatting is clean and professional overall, making the work easy to read.
The student includes the core required front matter and a works-cited section.

The student's bibliography is not fully consistent in style and contains some incomplete entries.
A few references are difficult to trace because the citation details are missing or run together.
The presentation would be improved by tighter consistency in formatting conventions across the source list.

4.1·Strength

Page 2• Click to view

The inclusion of a separate works-cited section shows that the student has provided the required core components of the investigation. That supports usability because readers can trace the scholarship behind the argument.

4.2·Strength

Page 2• Click to view

The essay’s overall structure is clear and appropriate, moving from introduction to conceptual framing, then to three organized case studies and a conclusion. This helps the reader follow the argument logically and shows awareness of the expected extended-essay format.

4.3·Weakness

Page 15• Click to view

This entry is incomplete and does not give enough publication information for reliable source tracing. The student should add the missing details in a consistent citation style, because incomplete references weaken the professionalism and verifiability of the final presentation.

4.4·Suggestion

Page 15• Click to view

The bibliography would be stronger if entries were made more consistent and complete. The student should standardize capitalization, italicization, and publication details so that sources are easier to identify and the presentation appears more polished.

4.5·Weakness

Page 16• Click to view

Two sources appear to be run together here, which makes the bibliography difficult to use and suggests inconsistent referencing practice. The student should separate each entry clearly and check that every source has a full, independent citation.

Loading scores...

Official IB Result

28/34

General feedback

24/28

No overall summary is available for this report.

5.1·Strength

Page 1• Click to view

The submission includes a word count and remains within the maximum limit. That meets the formal requirement and shows the student has managed scope carefully.

5.2·Strength

Page 1• Click to view

The title is presented at the start of the document, which meets the expected formatting requirement for the investigation. This gives the essay a clear academic identity from the outset.

Criteria A: Focus and Method

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

A.1Topic communication and appropriateness

Excellent

A.2Research question clarity and focus

Excellent

A.3Methodology completeness and appropriateness

Good

Criteria Feedback

The student's topic is clearly focused and historically appropriate, with a well-defined link between Catherine II’s policies and Enlightenment ideas of toleration.
The student's research question is sharply phrased and keeps the investigation directed throughout.
The student uses a generally relevant mix of scholarship and a primary source to support the inquiry.

The student relies heavily on historians’ summaries rather than sustained direct analysis of original policy documents.
The method would be stronger if the student explained more clearly how different source types are being used.
Some conceptual definitions need more precision, especially when framing Enlightenment ideas.

1.1·Strength

Page 1• Click to view

1.2·Strength

Page 1• Click to view

1.3·Weakness

Page 4• Click to view

1.4·Suggestion

Page 4• Click to view

1.5·Weakness

Page 4• Click to view

Criteria B: Knowledge and Understanding

5/6

Criteria StrandsPro

B.1Application of source material

Excellent

B.2Subject knowledge and understanding

Excellent

B.3Use of terminology and concepts

Excellent

Criteria Feedback

The student chooses source material that is closely tied to the research question and applies it to the specific policy cases under discussion.
The student demonstrates clear knowledge of Catherine II’s reign, imperial expansion, and the different circumstances of Muslims, Jews, and Catholics.
The student uses historical terminology and concepts accurately and with confidence.

Some claims about motive and attitude are more certain than the evidence fully supports.
A few conceptual distinctions could be made even sharper, especially between toleration, supervision, and autonomy.
The work would benefit from more direct quotation and analysis of original policy texts.

2.1·Strength

Page 4• Click to view

2.2·Strength

Page 5• Click to view

2.3·Weakness

Page 6• Click to view

2.4·Suggestion

Page 8• Click to view

2.5·Weakness

Page 9• Click to view

Criteria C: Critical Thinking

10/12

Criteria StrandsPro

C.1Research quality

Moderate

C.2Analysis depth

Moderate

C.3Discussion and evaluation

Moderate

Criteria Feedback

The student develops a coherent comparative argument rather than a purely descriptive account.
The student evaluates different interpretations, especially in the discussion of Jewish policy.
The student distinguishes between motive and outcome in a thoughtful way, which strengthens their reasoning.

Some arguments are asserted more strongly than they are demonstrated from the evidence.
The comparison between historians sometimes relies on preference rather than deeper evaluation of their methods or evidence.
The conclusion resolves the central debate a little too quickly and could engage the alternative reading more fully.

3.1·Strength

Page 7• Click to view

3.2·Strength

Page 8• Click to view

3.3·Question

Page 8• Click to view

3.4·Weakness

Page 10• Click to view

3.5·Weakness

Page 11• Click to view

3.6·Strength

Page 13• Click to view

The student handles historiography well here by showing that one policy can be explained through more than one motive. This layered reading is a strong feature of the essay’s critical thinking.

3.7·Weakness

Page 14• Click to view

Criteria D: Presentation

4/4

Criteria StrandsPro

D.1Structure appropriateness

Excellent

D.2Layout and formatting

Excellent

Criteria Feedback

The student's investigation is clearly structured, with a logical progression through introduction, conceptual framing, case studies, and conclusion.
The student's formatting is clean and professional overall, making the work easy to read.
The student includes the core required front matter and a works-cited section.

The student's bibliography is not fully consistent in style and contains some incomplete entries.
A few references are difficult to trace because the citation details are missing or run together.
The presentation would be improved by tighter consistency in formatting conventions across the source list.

4.1·Strength

Page 2• Click to view

4.2·Strength

Page 2• Click to view

4.3·Weakness

Page 15• Click to view

4.4·Suggestion

Page 15• Click to view

4.5·Weakness

Page 16• Click to view