1. Managebac Updates: Please ensure your Managebac classes are updated to reflect all recent student subject changes. Due by Aug 28^th  

2. SA Booking: All DP teachers must book their Summative Assessment (SA) for this week. Due by Aug 29^th  

3. Syllabus Upload: Revised syllabus must be uploaded to the designated folder. Please note the specific requirements for each cohort: Due by Sept 5^th  

4. May 2026 Cohort (DP2): Upload the updated syllabus. These will be cross-checked against your Managebac for accuracy. Link here. 

2. May 2027 Cohort (DP1): Upload the syllabus for the entire two-year programme. These will be cross-checked against your Managebac for accuracy. Link here. 

Important Note: When updating your syllabus, please ensure it incorporates necessary improvements and what content was covered on DP1 and what needs to be covered on DP2. Do not simply copy and paste from last year's document. 

Location Example: 

DP2:  

Diploma/IBDP 2025-2025/May 2026 Cohort/ Group 5: Mathematics/ Math AA/ DP2/ Syllabus 

DP1: 

Diploma/IBDP 2025-2026/ May2027 Cohort/ Group1: Chinese LL/ DP1 

This resource provides access to past papers for teaching and practice purposes only.

Important: Never use a full past paper for a summative assessment. Since students have access to these materials, it compromises academic integrity and will not generate accurate assessment data.

For all guidelines on creating valid and secure summative assessments, please visit the Assessment Procedures section of our faculty hub.

• undertake three mandatory reflection sessions with each student they are supervising

• initial and date each reflection summarized on the Managebac RPPF and provide comments at the end of the process

• encourage and support students throughout the research and writing of the extended essay

• discuss the choice of topic with each student and, in particular, help to formulate a well-focused research question which is suitable to the subject of registration and ensure that the chosen research question satisfies appropriate legal and ethical standards with regard to health and safety, confidentiality, human rights, animal welfare, and environmental issues

• is familiar with the regulations governing the extended essay and the assessment criteria, and gives copies of these to students

• monitor the progress of the extended essay to offer guidance and to ensure that the essay is the student’s own work (this may include presenting a section of the essay for supervisor comment)

• read and comment on one draft only of the extended essay (but do not edit the draft); this should take place after the interim reflection session, but before the final reflection session, the viva voce

• ensure that the final version of the essay is handed in before the final reflection session (viva voce) takes place, and that no changes are made to it subsequently

• read the final version and, in conjunction with the viva voce, confirm its authenticity.

Source: IBO.org

The viva voce is:

• an opportunity to ask the student a variety of open-ended questions to elicit holistic evidence of the student’s learning experience.

• an opportunity for the supervisor to confirm the authenticity of the student’s ideas and sources

• an opportunity to reflect on successes and difficulties encountered in the research process

• an aid to the supervisor’s comments on the Planning and Progress form.

The viva voce should last 20–30 minutes. This is included in the recommended amount of time a supervisor should spend with the student.

Source: IBO.org

Begin and end positively. This is the end of a long, sometimes tough, process.

Here are sample questions to help engage the student in rich dialogue about the learning process:

• What have been the high and low points of the research and writing processes?’

• What would you have done differently in the research process?

• What is the most important thing that you learned?

• What was your greatest challenge and how did you overcome it?

• What would you change in your research if you did another EE?

• How rewarding did you find the experience??

• What was the most valuable experience that you took away from the process?

• What was your greatest challenge and what did you do to overcome it?

• What advice would you give to the next year’s group?

• What IB learner profile attribute would you say helped you through the process (communicator, risk-taker, etc.)?

• Would you like to continue reading on this topic?

• What questions did this process raise?

• What conclusions have you drawn about the topic?

• What ATL skills did you develop the most through this process?

Also, use this reflection session as a way to check on the authenticity of the student's work

• Pick points out of the essay - ask specific questions, ask for clarifications

Source: IS-Manila EE Guide

• Reflections tab in Managebac

• Please DO NOT use the student's name (you can use 'the student' instead)

• Please use gender-neutral pronouns: they, them, their

• The comments are used as part of Criterion E- Engagement, NOT as an evaluation of the student's essay itself

• It does not need to be long- 1-3 paragraphs is pretty standard.

• Don't forget to add the hours you worked with the student in the appropriate box below the comments.  IB recommends 3-5 hours per student, but it may have been more or less than that depending on the student.

EXAMPLE COMMENTS:

#1

Early in the process, the candidate shared how their experiences growing up as a third culture person of Asian descent led to an interest in film representations of the issue. They explained that they were often confused about their own identity and in particular how social behaviours, language and physical appearance affected how others see them. They used this as a starting point to choose a topic that was both personally and intellectually interesting – though in the early stages, was mostly connected to their text choices and personal experiences as a cross-cultural Asian who lives in both North America and China.

However, as they worked through the feedback on their draft, they expressed concern about the analytical depth of the essay, especially related to the film Crazy Rich Asians. At this relatively late point in the process, they showed a willingness to challenge themself by examining new forms of critical theory and looked for ways to examine the film with more rigour. Interestingly, they commented on how they eventually questioned their choice of texts, given what they later learned about race theory. Far from problematic, it was great to see this discovery in the process. Indeed, they commented in their viva voce that they are now intending to refocus their university studies toward sociology rather than film alone, given what they learned about the subject and its relevance in contemporary communications.

The candidate used their time well early in the planning and investigation phase, which enabled them to create an effective research question. While this eventually led to a more critical evaluation of their texts, it is fair to say that they struggled to achieve a completely effective balance between the two films, especially in the area of cinematic analysis, which is a concern they voiced in their reflections. They were eager to recognise this and appreciate how this understanding will help them in the future to focus their research earlier and create a realistic plan to allow more time in the revision phase.

Overall, the candidate has positively engaged with the intention of the extended essay process and reflected constructively on areas for their growth as a student of film.

#2

Throughout the process of the extended essay, the student showed commitment and was diligent and productive. They were always punctual for meetings, replied promptly to messages, and showed great enthusiasm for the topic. They responded very well to feedback and acted upon all suggestions in a very mature manner. It is evident that the student dedicated a lot of time to collecting a great deal of secondary sources and has completed a good piece of writing. One of the high points for them was the research, they accessed a wide variety of authors, with a range of nationalities and views. They enjoyed this and felt that this has helped develop their skills as a historian. Their first language is Chinese and for someone to research and write about Italian history in their second language is an impressive effort. They are pleased with the development of their skills in writing and reading and have used some of the structures from books they have read in their own writing. They also demonstrated excellent evidence of their reflection process throughout. Their Viva Voce was indicative of their efforts and final product.

#3

This student was initially slow to get to experimentation and their research was initially weak. However, after a few meetings, this student renewed their focus and worked tirelessly through several setbacks during the process of developing their experimental design. They had great difficulty generating sufficient reliable data despite many attempts. They leaned on their Chemistry background, were receptive to teacher feedback and eventually hit upon the right mix of controls to get the data they needed. Their level of research improved as the project went on and they became adept at reading and processing challenging academic sources. They were determined to understand specific mechanisms and asked good questions at our meetings. They became a much more confident experimenter and is now an excellent problem-solver in practical situations. While they experienced a bit of lag in following a schedule for writing their final paper, with some teacher prompting, they rose to the challenge and completed their paper, amidst many competing assessment deadlines.

This mark will be used as your predicted grade that will be submitted to the IB.

For more details about assessment, look at the assessment tab above.

Five Criterion:

• A: Focus and method (6)

• B: Knowledge and understanding (6)

• C: Critical thinking (12)

• D: Presentation (4)

• E: Engagement (6)

Total: 34 points

• Understanding the assessment criteria

• Unpacking the assessment criteria

• Assessment grade descriptors

Grade Boundaries (2018)

• A 27-34

• B 21-26

• C 14-20

• D 7-13

• E 0-6

Assessment grade descriptors for the extended essay

Effective May 2018 from IBO.org

Grade descriptors

The extended essay is externally assessed, and as such, supervisors are not expected to mark the essays or arrive at a number to translate into a grade. Predicted grades for the extended essay should be based on the qualitative grade descriptors for the extended essay. These descriptors are what will be used by senior examiners to set the boundaries. While boundaries are subject to change, it is the grade descriptors that remain consistent. Please refer to the document Assessment principles and practices—Quality assessments in a digital age.

Grade A

Demonstrates effective research skills resulting in a well-focused and appropriate research question that can be explored within the scope of the chosen topic; effective engagement with relevant research areas, methods and sources; excellent knowledge and understanding of the topic in the wider context of the relevant discipline; the effective application of source material and correct use of subject-specific terminology and/or concepts further supporting this; consistent and relevant conclusions that are proficiently analysed; sustained reasoned argumentation supported effectively by evidence; critically evaluated research; excellent presentation of the essay, whereby coherence and consistency further supports the reading of the essay; and present and correctly applied structural and layout elements.

Engagement with the process is conceptual and personal, key decision-making during the research process is documented, and personal reflections are evidenced, including those that are forward-thinking.

Grade B

Demonstrates appropriate research skills resulting in a research question that can be explored within the scope of the chosen topic; reasonably effective engagement with relevant research areas, methods and sources; good knowledge and understanding of the topic in the wider context of the relevant discipline; a reasonably effective application of source material and use of subject-specific terminology and/or concepts; consistent conclusions that are accurately analysed; reasoned argumentation often supported by evidence; research that at times evidences critical evaluation; and a clear presentation of all structural and layout elements, which further supports the reading of the essay.

Engagement with the process is generally evidenced by the reflections and key decision-making during the research process is documented.

Grade C

Demonstrates evidence of research undertaken, which has led to a research question that is not necessarily expressed in a way that can be explored within the scope of the chosen topic; partially effective engagement with mostly appropriate research areas, methods and sources—however, there are some discrepancies in those processes, although these do not interfere with the planning and approach; some knowledge and understanding of the topic in the wider context of the discipline, which is mostly relevant; the attempted application of source material and appropriate terminology and/or concepts; an attempted synthesis of research results with partially relevant analysis; conclusions partly supported by the evidence; discussion that is descriptive rather than analytical; attempted evaluation; satisfactory presentation of the essay, with weaknesses that do not hinder the reading of the essay; and some structural and layout elements that are missing or are incorrectly applied.

Engagement with the process is evidenced but shows mostly factual information, with personal reflection mostly limited to procedural issues.

Grade D

Demonstrates a lack of research, resulting in unsatisfactory focus and a research question that is not answerable within the scope of the chosen topic; at times engagement with appropriate research, methods and sources, but discrepancies in those processes that occasionally interfere with the planning and approach; some relevant knowledge and understanding of the topic in the wider context of the discipline, which are at times irrelevant; the attempted application of source material, but with inaccuracies in the use of, or underuse of, terminology and/or concepts; irrelevant analysis and inconsistent conclusions as a result of a descriptive discussion; a lack of evaluation; presentation of the essay that at times is illogical and hinders the reading; and structural and layout elements that are missing.

Engagement with the process is evidenced but is superficial, with personal reflections that are solely narrative and concerned with procedural elements.

Grade E (failing condition)

Demonstrates an unclear nature of the essay; a generally unsystematic approach and resulting unfocused research question; limited engagement with limited research and sources; generally limited and only partially accurate knowledge and understanding of the topic in the wider context of the relevant discipline; ineffective connections in the application of source material and inaccuracies in the terminology and/or concepts used; a summarizing of results of research with inconsistent analysis; an attempted outline of an argument, but one that is generally descriptive in nature; and a layout that generally lacks or incorrectly applies several layout and structural elements.

Engagement with the process is limited, with limited factual or decision-making information and no personal reflection on the process.

The extended essay is an in-depth study of a focused topic resulting in a 4,000 word analytical essay. It promotes academic research and writing skills, providing students with an opportunity to engage in independent research on a topic of their choice under the guidance of their supervisor. By engaging with the theories, tools and techniques of their discipline, students gain valuable experience and further develop their ability to think critically.

• For Extended Essay please comment on their work throughout the process.

• For grade mark N/A.

The following supervision model involves three stages, outlined in table 1. The total time permitted for supervision is between three and five hours.

Meetings

The model includes six meetings. The supervisor uses each of the following to guide the student at key moments in the extended essay process.

• Three check-ins that involve both student and supervisor input. However, some students may require more check-ins.

• Three mandatory reflection sessions, with attendance recorded on the reflection and progress form (RPF).

Preparation

It is vital that the student and supervisor are well prepared for each session. For example, the student may need to send some materials to the supervisor in advance, such as parts of the essay or excerpts from the researcher’s reflection space (RRS).

At stage three of the mandatory reflection sessions, students must submit their full draft to the supervisor in good time for the supervisor to read the essay and provide feedback to the student.

Timing

In the model outlined in table 1 below, the first three sessions take place quite close together, possibly within one month, as they are important in establishing the preliminaries for the essay. This work is essential preparation for the first reflection session.

After this first reflection session, the student should clarify the research question to guide their inquiry in preparation for the interim reflection session.

At this point, there will likely be a period of several months during which the student is researching and writing the essay, culminating in a completed draft ready for the third check-in. IBO.org

• DP2: Extended Essay (EE) First Full Draft

  • Deadline: Thursday, September 18th.

  • Important Note: This deadline was set at the end of the last academic year, and all students are aware of this expectation.

  • Action Required: Please ensure you receive a first full draft from each of your EE supervisees by this date.

  • Submission Instructions: Specific guidance on how students should submit their drafts is available in the EE Column on this padlet and shared last academic year.

  • Managebac : everything is done through Managebac

• DP1 & DP2: First Progress Reports

  • Deadline: Thursday, October 17th.

  • Submission Requirements: For this reporting cycle, please submit only the predicted grades and effort marks for each student.

  • Action Required: Ensure all grades and effort marks are entered into the system by the end of the day on October 17th.

• BDO Teachers: Let's Dive into the New EE Guide!

  A quick heads-up to prepare for our upcoming collaboration:

  📚 Action: Please read the new Extended Essay Guide.
  🗓️ Timeline: Our meeting is set for the last week of September.
  💡 Goal: Come ready to share your key takeaways and questions.

  We'll share the exact meeting date and logistics a week in advance.

  This is a great chance for us to align and build a strong foundation for our students. Your insights are invaluable!

  Happy reading!

• Communication: Actively seek feedback and ask questions.

• Self-Management: Take ownership of your learning and schedule.

• Strategic Planning: Chunk large projects (EE, IAs) into smaller tasks.

• Guide as a Tool: Use the subject guide to understand how you will be assessed.

• Deadline Discipline: Use deadlines to pace your work, not as a last-minute panic.

For Teachers:

• Communication: Create an open-door policy and encourage dialogue.

• Scaffolding: Provide frameworks and tools to teach self-management skills.

• Transparent Planning: Clearly outline assessment timelines and expectations from day one.

• Guide Alignment: Ensure all teaching and assessments are explicitly linked to the subject guide.

• Deadline Support: Help students create interim deadlines and monitor their progress.

• Leverage Managebac: Keep it meticulously organized and updated. Use it for all grading, comments, and communications, as it is the central evidence trail and official report for the programme.

Please find attached the draft action plan template for your department. This document is intended to serve as a foundational framework to guide our strategic planning and collaborative efforts this year.

We encourage you to adapt and refine this template to best suit the specific needs and goals of your subject area. While the core structure provides the essential elements for an effective plan, please feel free to add sections or details that will enhance its usefulness for your team.

This version represents a model with the minimum required information to ensure clarity and focus. Your insights are highly valued; if you have any suggestions for improving the template itself, please do not hesitate to share them.

Thank you for your commitment to this important process.

Best regards,

Andréa

Please ensure all DP2 internal deadlines are clearly communicated to your students and rigorously enforced. These deadlines were set collaboratively to create a manageable and structured workflow for students across all subjects.

It is imperative that we hold students accountable to this schedule. Consistent enforcement across the department is crucial for student success and prevents last-minute crises.

However, if you identify a specific deadline within your control that now creates an unforeseen and significant conflict with another major assessment, you must bring it to my attention immediately. This is the window to make adjustments; once students are set on this path, changes will cause disruption.

My goal is to support you in maintaining high standards and a sustainable workload for our students. Please review the timeline—the only update is the official confirmation of Mock Exam dates.

I am counting on your professionalism to uphold these deadlines and your communication to address any genuine issues now.

Thank you for your cooperation,

Andréa

What does it mean to be good at this subject? What does good look like?

What are we trying to assess with each task (component)?

How well do the aims of the course match what we are assessing?

How do the assessment criteria and grade descriptors reflect what good looks like for each task?

Examples of evidence would be explanation and justification of assessment mode, and notes of discussions around the criteria and descriptions.

Evaluating the assessment model

How do we know the curriculum and assessment standards (not performance standards) are comparable with other IB courses?

How does the assessment model minimize bias?

How might we adjust the assessments to engage with students with particular requirements, for example, blind candidates or those unable to attempt a particular task?

What is the acceptable level of professional disagreement when marking?

Evidence would be gathered during curriculum review and subsequent subject reports.

Reflecting on the process of creating examinations (specimen and live papers)

How do the questions accurately reflect the curriculum?

Examples of evidence would be the setting grid, which describes how the questions relate to the curriculum and assessment objectives, and scrutineer reports,

Special arrangements

Did the assessment arrangements cater for a wide range of candidates without requiring special arrangements?

Where special arrangements were required, were there any particular issues that had not been identified during the design phase?

How do we know that the special arrangement organized maintained comparability of the standard?

Examples of evidence would include decisions that lead to the creation of modified papers or evaluation of performance on modified questions compared to others that have not been modified.

Manageability of taking the assessments

Were there any problems with schools or with candidates that were a result of the IB’s processes or the assessment design?

Evidence might include feedback from schools or candidates. No feedback may indicate that there are no issues.

Review of marking success

How reliable was the marking? Could the tolerances have been tighter?

Was the initial markscheme (produced with the examination) broadly correct or did it require significant amendments? Was this amendment reasonable or could the student responses have been foreseen at paper (and markscheme) authoring?

Examples of evidence include qualification and seed data and any replacement of definitively marked scripts.

Confidence and comparability in grading decisions

How confident was the CE in recommending grade boundaries?

Did all the evidence support the grade boundary decision or did different types of information suggest different conclusions?

How do we know that the grading was consistent with previous years and other subjects?

Evidence would include commentary in internal reports.

Evidence of fairness (bias)

How do we know that different groups of students were treated equally?

How confident are we that marking and grading was consistent between response languages and time zones?

Examples of evidence would include analysis of results data and teacher feedback. It would also include evidence from the Spanish and French examiners involved in the grade award, data on bilingual examiners on English response language seed scripts and review of candidate work from the other time zone in setting boundaries.

Impact of EURs

How confident are we that any EUR mark changes are reasonable?

How confident are we that the EURs demonstrate there was no systematic failure of marking or grading?

Examples of evidence would include analysis of any pattern in EUR changes and the evidence of an equal number of small mark changes up and down. The IB process of using seeding in EURs also supports this. Evidence of senior examiners engaging with these to support a consistent standard is also relevant.

Predictive validity

What evidence is there that the student’s outcome is a good indication of future success in this subject? What evidence is there it is a good indication of success in related subjects?

Examples of evidence could include qualitative feedback from students and staff as well as quantitative evidence from the IB Research team.

Evidence of culture of continual improvement

What did we learn from the last session to improve this session?

What are the key lessons we can take from this session to inform future sessions?

How do we evaluate our success in making these improvements?

Evidence would include examples of how notes from previous sessions influence design this session.

You can also add any other students you have concerns about. The final deadline for all students is Monday, September 30, at 1:00 AM. This information will help us advise parents on holiday work.

If you do not have any concerns, write: No concerns next to your subject and name.

There is a tab for each student for you to use.

Do NOT use the tab called 'Assess and Inclusion'.

Important: These reports will be shared with parents and the School Leadership Team (SLT). Please use professional and positive language.

Instructions for Writing in the Excel File

Please write your report directly in the Excel cells. Follow the three-part structure below.

1. Part 1: Concern

• Start with a positive point about the student's skills or understanding.

• Then, explain the problem clearly. Connect it to future success (e.g., exams).

2. Part 2: Action Taken

• Briefly explain what you have already done to help the student (e.g., given extra practice).

3. Part 3: Plan & Holiday Work

• Explain your next steps to support the student.

• Give a clear suggestion for what the student should do during the holiday.

  
  

• See Leo's example below.

Formatting Help for Excel

• Text Wrapping: All cells are programmed to keep your text inside the cell. If your text is not showing, simply click the 'Wrap Text' button on the Excel toolbar (see image below).

• 
  

Example Template

Here is a model to help you write. You can change the details for your student.

1. Concern:
"Leo has improved his analysis skills and understands the assessment criteria well. The main concern is that he cannot finish his exam papers within the time limit. This means his scores are lower than his knowledge level. Improving his speed is important for success in the final exams."

2. Action Taken:
"I have spoken with Leo and provided practice papers to build his speed."

3. Plan & Holiday Work:

"I plan to start one-to-one tutorials after the holiday. To help during the holiday, please encourage Leo to work consistently on his Extended Essay. This is Leo's priority, and he must follow Ms. Sunny's timeline.

Key Points to Remember:

• Be Positive: Start with a strength.

• Be Clear: Use simple words.

• Be Specific: Tell parents exactly what holiday work the student should do.

Thank you for your incredible work and dedication during this busy period. To ensure we continue to work together effectively and support our students, please review the following key updates and deadlines. As always, my door is open—please don’t hesitate to reach out if you need any assistance.

Topic 1: Internal Assessment & Extended Essay Deadlines ​(here)​

To provide clarity for our students, it is essential that all Internal Assessment (IA) and Extended Essay (EE) deadlines from the official calendar are posted as tasks on ManageBac. This will also help streamline the process for submitting work through Turnitin.

Key Actions:

• Please ensure all your IA and EE deadlines are created as tasks on ManageBac.

• All official feedback on final drafts should be recorded in ManageBac, aligned with the subject handbook criteria. (For example, while you might provide edits on a hard copy, the formal assessment feedback should be entered in the platform).

Important Guidelines:

• EE Deadline & Viva Voce: The final EE submission is scheduled for the fourth week of November. The specific date within that week can be set at the supervisor's discretion, followed by the viva voce.

• IA Drafts & Final Submission: The calendar that we made together indicates the first draft and final submission dates; some have more steps and deadlines than others. The planning and feedback between these dates should be organized by the supervisor/teacher with their students.

• Deadline Changes: Any requested changes to the published deadlines must be for a strong reason and require my prior approval.

Topic 2: Pre-Mocks Exam Schedule – Final Review

Today is the final day to review the ​S1 Pre-Mocks exam schedule.​

Please take 5 minutes to confirm:

1. Your subject exam papers are listed with the correct time allocations.

2. Your invigilation duties are accurately reflected.

This careful review now will prevent the need for changes after we share the final schedule with students and parents this Monday. Please notify me immediately if you notice any issues.

Topic 3: Upcoming Exam Paper Submission Deadlines

To ensure a smooth exam process, please adhere to the following deadlines for submitting your Pre-Mocks exam materials.

By Monday, November 13: (​here)​

Please submit your complete exam papers for departmental and HOD approval via the designated platform. The version you submit must be the final version you intend to print. Your submission must include:

• Exam Paper Cover Sheet (with total number of pages)

• A fully organized exam paper with numbered pages

• The complete Marking Scheme

By Monday, November 20:
Please submit the sealed envelope containing the printed exam papers. Each envelope must be clearly labeled with:

• A cover sheet listing student names, subject (HL/SL), and the number of copies inside (​Template Here).​

• One additional spare copy of the exam paper.

• You can find envelopes with Neo, and I also have some in my classroom

We are entering one of the busiest and most important stretches of the year, further amplified by having both cohorts together for our largest Session Assessment Week (SAW). Your organization and timeliness are deeply appreciated.

Most importantly, please remember to take care of your own well-being. We are a team, and we are here to support one another. If you are feeling overwhelmed or have any questions, please reach out.

Thank you for your partnership and commitment to our students.

Best regards,

Andréa Bozzetti

Good Afternoon,

please find attached a copy of the report comment partners.

Please submit your comments to your partner by December 5th

Please give the feedback on comments by December 10th

All comments and criteria should be on by December 12th for checking

Please follow this link for ​report writing guidelines​

Any questions, please reach out

Regards

Stuart Simpson

Date: December 11th, 2025

Goal: To have a research proposal approved via the Dragon's Den pitch event. 

For Students: Your Step-by-Step Guide 

Step 1: Prepare for Your Pitch 

• Action: Meet with teachers who could be your supervisor. 

• Action: Brainstorm your thesis idea and create a simple outline. Include your main research question and how you plan to answer it (your methodology). 

• Action: Prepare a strict 5-minute presentation to explain your proposal. 

Step 2: Pitch at the Dragon's Den 

• Action: Present your 5-minute pitch to the subject and department teachers. 

Step 3: Revise and Submit 

• Action: Using the teachers' feedback, write a new, improved proposal. 

• Action: Submit this new proposal on Managebac within one week of your Dragon's Den pitch. 

Step 4: Respond to the Decision 

• After submission, you will receive one of three decisions: Approve, Reject, or Revise. 

• If "Revise" or "Reject": Your subject teacher will meet with you to explain what you need to change. 

Step 5: Finalize Your Proposal 

• Action: Make all requested changes and communicate with your teacher only through the Managebac chat. 

• Deadline: Your final, approved proposal must be submitted on Managebac by December 18. 

For Teachers: Your Step-by-Step Guide 

Step 1: Prepare the Students 

• Action: In your lessons, discuss thesis development and research methods. 

• Action: Read the EE Guide so you can give expert advice. 

Step 2: Participate in Dragon's Den 

• Action: Attend the student pitches. 

• Action: Provide constructive, specific feedback to help them improve their proposals. 

Step 3: Review and Decide 

• Action: After students submit their revised proposals (within one week of pitching), review them with the Head of Department (HOD). 

• Action: Decide to: Approve, Reject, or Ask for Changes. 

• Action: Inform the EE Coordinator of the decision. 

Step 4: Communicate Feedback 

• Action: If a proposal is not approved, meet with the student to discuss the required changes. 

Step 5: Manage the Process on Managebac 

• Action: Use only the Managebac chat feature for all official communication with students about their proposals. 

• Action: Ensure the student's proposal is finalized and approved on Managebac by the December 18 deadline. 

NEW: EE 2027 Padlet will be used to share information about the EE and the May 2027 Cohort choices and documents.

• Extended Essay File submission 

• Upload here inside your subject folder: 

•  1. EE 

 2. Turnitin report- 

 3. RPPF  

 4. EE Supervisor’s Marking 

 5.  Academic integrity Form (template here) 

• Preparing the files for eCoursework submission. Instructions here  

• IA submissions here  

1.IA File(s) 

2. Turnitin Report 

3. Academic integrity Form (template here) 

4. teachers’ marking and comments (esch department should create their own template accordingly) 

• Name the files like this: 

session/candidates session code/subject/component 

E.g.: 

 May2025_lqz086_Biology_HL_EE 

May2025_lqz086_Biology_HL_EE-RPPF 

May2025_lqz086_Biology_HL_Marking  (This is also a PDF download from Managebac, tab ASSESSMENT, where you will input your mark and final comment) 

https://resources.ibo.org/dp/works/dp_11162-434317?

Calculators guidance for examinations booklet 2026:

https://resources.ibo.org/dp/works/edu_11162-432971?

Conduct of examinations booklet 2026

https://resources.ibo.org/dp/works/edu_11162-432973?

The following table indicates maximum permissible file sizes and file types.

Notes

It is recommended that videos are submitted in MP4 format. However, both MOV and M4V are acceptable because they will be converted into MP4 format by the IB.

• The maximum file size for a document is 50 MB, irrespective of whether the document contains images.

• If the maximum file size specified in the subject guide is different from the maximum stated above, the lower maximum file size applies.

• For ITGS and computer science, the only constraint is that the maximum size of the zip file is 750 MB.

• If coursework has already been completed and is not a permissible file type, please convert the file to one of the file types listed above. If necessary, contact IB Answers (support@ibo.org) for advice.

• Candidates should be advised not to embed live links into any of their coursework as these cannot be viewed by our examiners.

• Language ab initio source files must contain just the relevant pages studied as target language sources.

• A resolution of no more than 200 dpi is recommended.

• Work containing equations should be uploaded as a PDF.

• Verify that all contents of the document appear as expected and that all content is readable.

C3.8.3 Formatting guidance

The following formatting is required for written eCoursework (excluding visual arts). This ensures the work can be easily read on-screen by examiners, as well as ensuring there is consistency between the diploma subjects.

• Use of fonts such as Arial, minimum font size 11 (where the language/script supports it)

• Single (or greater) line spacing

• Numbered pages

• Portrait orientation (rather than landscape), except where it is necessary or appropriate. The use of landscape orientation may be to accommodate a specific item, such as a graph or illustration.

For components with page limits:

• it is not acceptable to “shrink to fit” an eCoursework assignment to remain within page limits by reducing white space on the page, reducing A3 to A4 so the font size becomes less than 11 point, or by choosing a non-standard font. Examiners are instructed not to award marks for work that has been “shrunk to fit” in this way.

To check how a document will be presented to an examiner for marking, the following options are available.

• View the document in a “Print Preview” mode.

• Print the document.

• Export the document as a PDF file.

C3.8.4 Compatible fonts

A table of IB-compatible non-Arial fonts to support additional languages is included here. These should be used to avoid delays in marking.

• Schools may use the candidate’s personal code (for example, abc123) as a means of identifying candidates’ work on coursework and forms submitted to the IB. However, this information is not a requirement.

• Candidates are asked to avoid using their name, session number or the name or number of their school in their work, whether on the title page, headers, footers or anywhere else on the document.

• Candidate names or session numbers can be used in the document filenames only.

Candidates will not be expected to remove identifying marks from their work if the work is already complete, but we would ask schools to ensure candidates submit anonymous work to the IB in future.

C3.8.6 Annotation

Teachers are encouraged to provide comments on all candidates’ work submitted for IA to indicate how marks have been allocated. These comments can be written on the work, or accompanying forms (where applicable) or entered into the teacher comments box on the “internal assessment mark entry and sample selection” screen.

If using in-built comment software, please take note of the following guidance, to ensure comments are displayed in full to the examiner.

When adding comments in Word:

• ensure comments are set to show all of the time—any functionality that hides a comment until the user chooses to view them may not be visible to the examiner

• ensure any highlighting does not obscure document content from view. Once the document is converted to be viewed in RM Assessor³ it is not possible to change or remove any highlighting.

When adding comments in PDF files:

• if using Adobe Reader, avoid the use of sticky notes as these will not be visible to the examiner. If using Adobe Pro, sticky notes can be used as long as the comments are configured to display these after each page (Tools > Comment > Create Comment Summary > Document and comments with sequence numbers on separate pages)

• the use of text boxes is a more reliable way of adding comments. The comments added using a text box are always visible to the examiner. When adding these text boxes, view the PDF using a zoom of 100% and make sure that they do not overlap any text before uploading the document.

Formative assessments are designed to support learning by allowing students to practice skills, receive feedback, and deepen their understanding before being formally evaluated. Summative assessments, however, must provide an authentic and unbiased measure of student achievement against IB criteria. Therefore, the same questions or tasks used in a formative assessment should not be repeated verbatim in a summative assessment. Reusing questions compromises the validity of the summative assessment, as it may reward recall rather than genuine understanding, and does not accurately reflect a student's ability to apply knowledge in new contexts. Please ensure that all summative tasks—including unit tests, mock exams, practice papers, and final assessments—are distinct from previously administered formative tasks across all IBDP subjects.