Upload your Geography 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 the essay focused on the question, the evidence disciplined, and the evaluation explicit.
Recommended Length
3,500-4,000 words
Build Timeline
10-12 weeks: question, research, draft, revise, finalize
Anchor Question
Can the argument stay focused on the question while using geographical evidence well?
Want a full playbook format? Read Geography EE Guide.
Use each criterion as a checklist for revision. Strong drafts make the scoring evidence obvious, not implied.
Examiner focus: This criterion assesses the clarity of the topic, the focus of the research question, and the appropriateness of the methodology.
Top-band move: The topic is communicated accurately and effectively. The research question is clearly stated and focused, encouraging an analytical approach. The methodology is well-planned, clearly explained, and appropriate, with a balance between primary and secondary sources. The selection of reliable sources is relevant.
Common penalty: The topic is vaguely communicated, the research question is poorly focused, and the methodology is superficial or inappropriate.
Examiner focus: This criterion assesses the student's understanding of the geographical context, the effective use of sources, and the accurate application of terminology.
Top-band move: The geographical context is clearly established, demonstrating a strong understanding of the topic. Sources are used effectively and with understanding. Proper referencing and incorporation of source material are evident throughout the essay. Subject-specific terminology and concepts are accurate and consistently applied.
Common penalty: The geographical context is weakly established, sources are used ineffectively, and terminology is limited or inconsistently applied. Referencing is poor.
Examiner focus: This criterion assesses the student's research, analysis, discussion, and evaluation skills, including the application of methodology, data analysis, and reasoned argumentation.
Top-band move: Thorough research, analysis, discussion, and evaluation are evident throughout the essay. The application of the methodology is consistently relevant, and data analysis is appropriate and insightful. The argument is reasoned and logical, focusing on the research question. Different methods of graphical representation are appropriately labelled. Strengths and weaknesses of the approach are evaluated, with propositions for improvement. Irrelevant information is excluded.
Common penalty: Limited research, analysis, discussion, and evaluation are present. The application of the methodology is weak, and data analysis is superficial. The argument is unclear or illogical.
Examiner focus: This criterion assesses the structure, layout, referencing, and overall clarity of the essay.
Top-band move: The essay begins with a title page and a table of contents, adhering to standard formatting conventions. The structure of the essay follows the expected conventions for the topic, ensuring clarity and coherence. Sections and subsections have informative headings. Graphs, figures, or tables are appropriately labelled with numbers and brief descriptions and maintain good graphical quality.
Common penalty: The essay may be missing one or more key elements (title page, table of contents, bibliography). The structure is weak, and graphical elements are poorly labelled or of low quality.
Examiner focus: This criterion assesses the student's research focus, planning, and process, based on reflections documented in the RPPF (Reflections on Planning and Progress Form).
Top-band move: The RPPF showcases the individual's progress and active involvement in the writing process. The student outlines the skills acquired during the extended essay writing journey. Challenges faced during the process are described in detail, along with the strategies employed to address them. The document reflects the personal significance and relevance of the work undertaken.
Common penalty: The RPPF is present but provides limited insight into the student's decision-making process, skills acquired, or challenges faced.
Match your draft to the descriptors below to identify the smallest edits that can move you into a higher band.
Points 0
The topic is not communicated, the research question is missing or unclear, and the methodology is not explained.
Points 1-2
The topic is vaguely communicated, the research question is poorly focused, and the methodology is superficial or inappropriate.
Points 3-4
The topic is generally communicated, the research question is identifiable, and the methodology is partially explained and somewhat appropriate. There may be an imbalance between primary and secondary sources.
Points 5-6
The topic is communicated accurately and effectively. The research question is clearly stated and focused, encouraging an analytical approach. The methodology is well-planned, clearly explained, and appropriate, with a balance between primary and secondary sources. The selection of reliable sources is relevant.
Points 0
There is no geographical context established, sources are not used, and terminology is absent or inaccurate.
Points 1-2
The geographical context is weakly established, sources are used ineffectively, and terminology is limited or inconsistently applied. Referencing is poor.
Points 3-4
The geographical context is partially established, sources are used with some understanding, and terminology is generally accurate and consistent. Referencing is present but may have inconsistencies.
Points 5-6
The geographical context is clearly established, demonstrating a strong understanding of the topic. Sources are used effectively and with understanding. Proper referencing and incorporation of source material are evident throughout the essay. Subject-specific terminology and concepts are accurate and consistently applied.
Points 0
There is no evidence of research, analysis, discussion, or evaluation. The methodology is not applied, and no data is presented.
Points 1-4
Limited research, analysis, discussion, and evaluation are present. The application of the methodology is weak, and data analysis is superficial. The argument is unclear or illogical.
Points 5-8
Adequate research, analysis, discussion, and evaluation are present. The methodology is applied with some relevance, and data analysis is generally appropriate. The argument is reasonably logical but may have inconsistencies. Graphical representation may be limited or poorly labelled.
Points 9-12
Thorough research, analysis, discussion, and evaluation are evident throughout the essay. The application of the methodology is consistently relevant, and data analysis is appropriate and insightful. The argument is reasoned and logical, focusing on the research question. Different methods of graphical representation are appropriately labelled. Strengths and weaknesses of the approach are evaluated, with propositions for improvement. Irrelevant information is excluded.
Points 0
The essay lacks a title page, table of contents, or bibliography. The structure is unclear, and graphical elements are missing or poorly presented.
Points 1
The essay may be missing one or more key elements (title page, table of contents, bibliography). The structure is weak, and graphical elements are poorly labelled or of low quality.
Points 2-3
The essay generally includes the required elements (title page, table of contents, bibliography). The structure is reasonably clear, and graphical elements are appropriately labelled and of acceptable quality.
Points 4
The essay begins with a title page and a table of contents, adhering to standard formatting conventions. The structure of the essay follows the expected conventions for the topic, ensuring clarity and coherence. Sections and subsections have informative headings. Graphs, figures, or tables are appropriately labelled with numbers and brief descriptions and maintain good graphical quality.
Points 0
The RPPF is missing or provides no evidence of engagement with the research process.
Points 1-2
The RPPF is present but provides limited insight into the student's decision-making process, skills acquired, or challenges faced.
Points 3-4
The RPPF demonstrates some reflection on the student's decision-making process, skills acquired, and challenges faced, but the justification of decisions is weak.
Points 5-6
The RPPF showcases the individual's progress and active involvement in the writing process. The student outlines the skills acquired during the extended essay writing journey. Challenges faced during the process are described in detail, along with the strategies employed to address them. The document reflects the personal significance and relevance of the work undertaken.
Step 1
Make the topic specific enough to support fieldwork, case studies, or comparative analysis without drifting.
Step 2
Use sources that genuinely help you analyse the spatial issue rather than simply describing it.
Step 3
Tie every section back to place, scale, patterns, and the geographical concepts in play.
Step 4
Make sure the final judgement follows from the analysis and directly answers the research question.
The question is clear, focused, and appropriate for geography.
The terminology and concepts are accurate and consistently used.
Analysis and evaluation are sustained across the essay.
Presentation and engagement are both visible and purposeful.
Draft the conclusion early to expose weak evidence or a drifting scope.
Use a source log to track how each piece of evidence supports the question.
Add one linking sentence per section back to the geographic issue.
The grader evaluates your submission against the active IB criteria for Geography 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