IA & EE criteria, in plain English.

Internal Assessments and Extended Essays together can swing your final IB score by 8-10 points. Yet most students approach them with vague notions of "good research" instead of the specific criteria examiners use. This guide is the criterion-by-criterion breakdown — what each criterion actually rewards, what it does not, and the most common pitfalls per criterion.

Why IA and EE are the highest-leverage assessments

Most IB students treat IAs and the EE as obstacles to clear before the "real" exams. This is backwards. Here is the math:

• Each IA contributes 20-30% of your subject grade. Across 6 subjects, that is 6 separate opportunities for high-leverage marks.
• The EE awards bonus points (combined with TOK) — up to 3 additional points on your final 45.
• Unlike exams, IAs and the EE are written without time pressure, with feedback iterations, and with full access to your knowledge.

That last point is critical. The IA and EE are the only IB assessments where your knowledge translates directly to marks without the cognitive distortion of time pressure. If you understand the criteria, the marks are accessible. If you do not, you are guessing.

Internal Assessment (IA) — overview

The IA is your subject-specific independent project, marked first by your teacher, then sample-moderated by the IB. Format varies by subject (a Business commentary, a Biology investigation, an Economics commentary on a real-world article, etc.) but the criterion structure is similar across most subjects.

Key facts:

• Maximum: 40 marks total (across criteria A-E).
• Conversion to subject grade: 1-7 scale (your IA mark is combined with your exam papers).
• Word count varies: typically 1,500-2,200 words depending on subject.
• Criteria are the same across SL and HL, though the rigour expected at HL is higher.

IA Criteria A through E

Criterion A · Research Question and Context (typically 6 marks)

What it rewards: A specific, focused, manageable research question — and a clear explanation of why it matters in the real world.

What examiners want:

• A research question that is narrow enough to investigate in 1,500-2,200 words. "Should governments use fiscal policy?" is too broad. "How effective was Argentina's 2024 fiscal policy in reducing CPI inflation?" is investigable.
• Real-world context that is current — usually within the last 1-2 years for Business, Economics, and Geography.
• Justification for why this question is worth investigating. The reader should know "so what?" by the end of the introduction.

Common pitfall: Choosing a topic that has no measurable data available. If you cannot find primary or secondary data within the first week, change topics.

Criterion B · Methodology / Approach (typically 6-8 marks)

What it rewards: A clear, justified plan for how you investigated the question. Methods appropriate to the subject (qualitative for Business, quantitative for sciences, mixed for Economics).

What examiners want:

• Specific data sources, named explicitly (CSO statistics, IMF data, primary survey of N=200, etc.).
• Justification for each method choice. Why surveys instead of interviews? Why this time period?
• Acknowledgement of methodological limitations.

Common pitfall: Listing methods without justifying them. "I used a survey" earns less than "I used a survey because Likert-scale data on customer perception was needed for SWOT analysis."

Criterion C · Analysis (typically 6-8 marks)

What it rewards: Application of subject theory to your data. This is the criterion where most marks are won or lost.

What examiners want:

• Use of named subject frameworks (Porter's 5 Forces, Boston Matrix, AS/AD model, t-test, chi-squared, etc.).
• Direct connection between framework and data — frameworks must be applied, not just described.
• Quantitative analysis where possible, with calculations shown.

Common pitfall: Describing the framework in detail (this is theory, not analysis), then giving data, but never explicitly applying one to the other. The marks live in the application sentences: "This shows that [framework prediction], because [data evidence]."

Criterion D · Evaluation (typically 6 marks)

What it rewards: Critical reflection on findings — including limitations, alternative explanations, and significance.

What examiners want:

• Acknowledgement of what your evidence does NOT show, alongside what it does.
• Comparison to alternative interpretations of the same data.
• Evaluation of methodological limitations (sample size, time frame, source bias).
• Significance: what does this mean for the original real-world question?

Common pitfall: Confusing "limitations" with "things that went wrong." Limitations are inherent to the methodology — not personal mistakes. "I had limited time" is not a methodological limitation; "the 12-month time frame may not capture long-run effects" is.

Criterion E · Conclusion and Communication (typically 4-6 marks)

What it rewards: A focused conclusion that directly answers the research question, plus clear written communication throughout.

What examiners want:

• A conclusion that explicitly answers the research question — not a summary of the IA.
• Coherent structure with clear sections (introduction, methodology, analysis, evaluation, conclusion).
• Appropriate use of subject vocabulary, with command terms used precisely.
• Tables, figures, and citations formatted consistently.

IA Key Concepts requirement

Many IB subjects require explicit reference to Key Concepts on the IA title page. These are cross-cutting ideas central to the subject: in Business Management, the four are Change, Creativity, Ethics, and Sustainability.

Key Concepts are formally assessed in the IA only — not in exam papers. The single most natural fit for most IAs is Change, because most IA research questions investigate something that is changing or has changed.

How to declare Key Concepts on your IA:

• Title page must state which Key Concept(s) the IA addresses.
• The introduction should make the Key Concept connection explicit.
• The conclusion should return to it — how does the IA's findings illuminate the Key Concept?

Extended Essay (EE) — overview

The EE is your 4,000-word independent research essay, written in any subject (you choose). It is marked externally by IB examiners — your teacher provides guidance during the process but does not score the final document.

Key facts:

• Maximum: 34 marks total (across criteria A-E).
• Grade scale: A through E (not 1-7 like other IB scores).
• Combined with your TOK grade, awards 0-3 bonus points on your final 45.
• Word count: 4,000 words maximum, including footnotes that are not pure citations. Examiners stop reading at exactly 4,000 — anything after is unmarked.

EE Criteria A through E

Criterion A · Focus and Method (6 marks)

What it rewards: A clearly defined research question, appropriate to the subject, with a documented research approach.

What examiners want:

• The research question must be specific, focused, and answerable within 4,000 words. "What causes inflation?" is not focused. "How effective was the Bank of England's 2023 interest rate policy in reducing CPI inflation?" is.
• Methodology must be appropriate to the subject. Sciences need experimental method or data analysis. History needs source-based investigation. Languages need primary text engagement.
• Reflection on Researcher's Reflection Space (RRS) — three reflective sessions documented during the process.

Criterion B · Knowledge and Understanding (6 marks)

What it rewards: Demonstration that you understand the subject area deeply, using accurate terminology and engaging with current academic discussion.

What examiners want:

• Engagement with secondary sources beyond textbooks — academic journal articles, books by named scholars, primary data.
• Use of subject-specific vocabulary precisely. Misuse loses marks immediately.
• Recognition that your topic sits within an existing scholarly conversation.

Criterion C · Critical Thinking (12 marks)

What it rewards: The largest single criterion. Sustained, original analysis with evaluation throughout.

What examiners want:

• Analysis at every level: macro structure, individual sections, individual paragraphs.
• Evaluation of sources — recognising bias, limitations, alternative perspectives.
• An argument that develops across the essay rather than describing throughout.
• A conclusion that synthesises rather than summarises.

This criterion alone determines whether your EE is in the A range or the C range. Critical thinking is the difference between describing what scholars have said and engaging with whether they are right.

Criterion D · Presentation (4 marks)

What it rewards: Standard academic presentation — title page, table of contents, appropriate formatting, clean citations.

What examiners want:

• Title page with research question.
• Table of contents with page numbers.
• Consistent citation style (MLA, APA, or footnoted — pick one and stick to it).
• Well-structured paragraphs with topic sentences and evidence.
• Tables and figures numbered, captioned, and referenced in the text.

Criterion E · Engagement (6 marks)

What it rewards: Evidence from your three Researcher's Reflection Sessions (RRS) showing genuine intellectual engagement with the process.

What examiners want:

• Reflections on choices you made during the research — and why.
• Evidence of intellectual challenges you faced and how you responded.
• Personal voice. This is the only criterion where "I" is fully welcomed.

Common pitfall: Treating RRS as an afterthought to write the night before submission. Engagement marks are only awarded if reflection is documented contemporaneously across the process.

Word counts and citation

The word-count rules are strict and frequently misunderstood:

• EE: 4,000 words maximum. Examiners stop reading at exactly 4,000. Submit at 3,995 to be safe.
• What counts: Main text, sub-headings, citations within the body, captions of tables/figures.
• What does NOT count: Title page, table of contents, footnotes that are pure citation, bibliography, appendices.
• What is contested: Footnotes that contain commentary or argument. The IB rule is that any footnote with substantive content beyond pure source citation counts toward the 4,000.
• IA word counts vary by subject. Check the current subject guide. Going over by even 50 words is treated harshly by examiners.

Citation style: MLA, APA, Chicago, or Harvard are all accepted. The choice does not affect marks; consistency does. Switching styles within a single document is a Criterion D error.

Bilingual rubric phrases (EN/ES)

Common pitfalls per criterion

• Criterion A · Research question too broad. The single most common reason for low IA scores. If your RQ could fit a 60,000-word PhD thesis, narrow it.
• Criterion B · Methodology described, not justified. Examiners want to see why you chose each method — not just what you did.
• Criterion C · Theory described instead of applied. The marks live in application. State the framework briefly; spend the words applying it.
• Criterion D · "Limitations" as confessions. Methodological limitations are inherent to the design — not personal failures of execution.
• Criterion E · Conclusion as summary. The conclusion must directly answer the RQ — not paraphrase the entire IA.
• EE Word count overrun. Examiners stop at 4,000. Anything after is unread. Cut ruthlessly during the second-to-last draft.
• EE RRS as afterthought. Engagement marks (Criterion E) are only awarded if reflection is documented across the process — not crammed in at the end.

Frequently asked questions