October 16, 2025
Research Release
IB Moderation: What the Data Really Shows
IB moderation determines whether a student's coursework grade remains the same or is adjusted to align with global standards. The process is designed to ensure consistency across schools. Our analysis suggests that moderation outcomes often reflect natural differences between how teachers and examiners apply assessment criteria.
We analyzed thousands of anonymized Internal Assessments and Extended Essays submitted by students from schools worldwide. This study provides one of the first publicly available analyses of moderation patterns and their potential impact on final grades.
- We analyzed approximately 4,000 coursework samples collected over a two months in mid 2025.
- Of these, 2,459 samples included both the raw teacher-awarded mark and the final moderated mark, and our analysis is limited to this verified subset.
- Each sample's grades and transcripts were hand-verified by our team to ensure accuracy and data integrity.
- The dataset spans 75 countries and 240 schools, providing sufficient randomness and representativeness under the law of large numbers.
- Among the verified samples:
- 1,265 had the same mark after moderation,
- 1,087 were moderated down, and
- 107 were moderated up.
- The data covers Internal Assessments (IAs), Extended Essays (EEs), and Theory of Knowledge (TOK) essays across 33 subjects.
These figures are descriptive and do not imply causal relationships or policy conclusions.
of coursework gets moderated
What does this mean?
Every year, roughly half of coursework samples in our dataset were selected for external review, roughly equivalent to a coin flip.
While we cannot speak to IB's internal selection algorithms, the frequency observed suggests that moderation is a common part of the process.
The question isn't if moderation happens, but when it happens to you.
In our dataset, approximately 91% of moderated samples were adjusted downward
This pattern may indicate that internal marking, on average, is more lenient than the external moderation standard, a natural outcome of efforts to maintain global consistency.
On average, moderated work loses 17% of marks
When work is moderated down, it loses an average of 17%, which is enough to lower your coursework grade by 1-2 points.
This represents the average change observed across all moderated samples, not an official moderation formula.
Bottom Line
Based on these findings, students should focus on producing examiner-ready work before submission.
With moderation affecting nearly half of all coursework, and most adjustments being negative, every mark matters. Make sure your work is as close to examiner-ready as possible before it's submitted.
You can't control moderation.
You can only control how ready your work is before it gets there.
This analysis is provided for informational and educational purposes only. It is based on independently collected data and does not represent or imply any official position or judgment regarding the International Baccalaureate Organization or its assessment processes.
This report is an independent, data-driven study conducted by RevisionDojo in good faith and in the public interest to support educational research and discussion. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or approved by the International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO) or any of its affiliates. All references are used solely for identification and remain the property of their respective owners. The findings are derived from voluntarily submitted, anonymized student data. While RevisionDojo applies independent verification processes to enhance reliability, the results are inherently limited by the self-reported nature of the dataset and may not represent all IB schools, subjects, or examination sessions. All interpretations and conclusions are analytical observations, not statements of fact regarding IBO policy, intent, or internal operations. This publication is provided "as is" for general informational purposes only, without warranties of accuracy or completeness. RevisionDojo assumes no liability for any direct or consequential loss arising from its use. This publication is protected under applicable principles of academic freedom, fair comment, and public-interest research.
