Upload your English B Extended Essay EE draft and get instant feedback aligned with official IB criteria.
Follow the same rubric-first flow students use to move from a raw draft to a submission-ready version.
Start by dropping in your coursework PDF. We built this flow to mirror how students prepare final submission drafts.
Drag and drop to upload
Limit 10 MB per file. Supported files: PDF
Sign in to start your first grading run.
Marksy maps your draft against the rubric so you can see where marks are gained or lost in each criterion.
Every important scoring decision is anchored to your writing so revision is evidence-based, not guesswork.
Get structured next actions so you can move from draft to stronger markband performance in the right order.
For class-wide workflows, the same logic extends to batch marking so feedback stays consistent across submissions.
Keep one grading system across IA, EE, TOK, and subject variants so your preparation process stays consistent.
This structure keeps your EE focused, evidence-rich, and aligned to all five criteria from first draft to viva reflection.
Recommended Length
3,500-4,000 words
Build Timeline
12 weeks: proposal, reading, drafting, supervision cycle
Anchor Question
Does each chapter move your research question forward with explicit analytical purpose?
Want a full playbook format? Read English Literature EE Guide.
Use each criterion as a checklist for revision. Strong drafts make the scoring evidence obvious, not implied.
Examiner focus: Topic, research question, and methodology
Top-band move: • Topic communicated accurately and effectively • Research question clearly stated and focused • Methodology complete with evidence of informed selection
Common penalty: • Topic communicated unclearly and incompletely • Research question stated but not clearly expressed or too broad • Methodology of the research is limited
Examiner focus: Subject area relevance and use of terminology/concepts
Top-band move: • Knowledge and understanding excellent • Use of terminology and concepts good and accurate
Common penalty: • Knowledge and understanding limited • Use of terminology and concepts unclear and limited
Examiner focus: Analysis and evaluation of research
Top-band move: • Research excellent • Analysis excellent • Discussion/evaluation excellent
Common penalty: • Research limited • Analysis limited • Discussion/evaluation limited
Examiner focus: Structure and layout
Top-band move: • Structure and layout adequate/good
Common penalty: • Structure and layout limited
Examiner focus: Process and research focus
Top-band move: • Engagement good/excellent
Common penalty: • Engagement limited
Match your draft to the descriptors below to identify the smallest edits that can move you into a higher band.
Points 0
The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors below.
Points 1-2
• Topic communicated unclearly and incompletely • Research question stated but not clearly expressed or too broad • Methodology of the research is limited
Points 3-4
• Topic communicated adequately • Research question clearly stated but only partially focused • Methodology mostly complete
Points 5-6
• Topic communicated accurately and effectively • Research question clearly stated and focused • Methodology complete with evidence of informed selection
Points 0
The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors below.
Points 1-2
• Knowledge and understanding limited • Use of terminology and concepts unclear and limited
Points 3-4
• Knowledge and understanding good • Use of terminology and concepts adequate
Points 5-6
• Knowledge and understanding excellent • Use of terminology and concepts good and accurate
Points 0
The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors below.
Points 1-3
• Research limited • Analysis limited • Discussion/evaluation limited
Points 4-6
• Research adequate • Analysis adequate • Discussion/evaluation adequate
Points 7-9
• Research good • Analysis good • Discussion/evaluation good
Points 10-12
• Research excellent • Analysis excellent • Discussion/evaluation excellent
Points 0
The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors below.
Points 1-2
• Structure and layout limited
Points 3-4
• Structure and layout adequate/good
Points 0
The work does not reach a standard outlined by the descriptors below.
Points 1-2
• Engagement limited
Points 3-4
• Engagement adequate
Points 5-6
• Engagement good/excellent
Step 1
Stress-test scope with one pilot paragraph before full drafting starts.
Step 2
Assign each section one analytical job and keep overlap intentionally low.
Step 3
Use quotation clusters that allow close reading rather than scattered references.
Step 4
Check interpretive depth in the essay and reflective depth in RPPF entries side by side.
Research question is visible and answered directly in the conclusion.
Counter-readings are acknowledged and evaluated.
Citation format is consistent across all sections.
RPPF reflections show decisions, not diary notes.
Write your conclusion before the final redraft to expose argument gaps.
Convert one descriptive paragraph into comparative analysis.
Add one sentence per section that links back to the research question.
The grader evaluates your submission against the active IB criteria for English B Extended Essay and returns criterion-level marks with actionable feedback.
Yes. Most students use draft grading to identify weak criteria, revise, and re-check before final submission.
Yes. Teachers can upload multiple files in one batch from the bulk grading route for faster class-wide feedback.
Absolutely. By default, nobody other than you can access your uploaded files, however you may make them shareable to others. Even then, you have full control to delete your files at any moment, and your files are not used to train AI models. More information here.
Upload a single submission and get criterion-by-criterion feedback aligned to IB descriptors.
Open Single GradingProcess up to 15 files in one run and keep feedback consistent across your class.
View Bulk Plan