Lesson 20: Mock Grading and Final Polish

The final stage of the essay is to look at it as an examiner would: dispassionately, with the assessment criteria in hand. This lesson guides you through a mock marking of a short extract, shows how to self-assess a full draft, and provides a polishing checklist. Always use the current IB criteria and your school's official materials, because marks and descriptors can change.

How the essay is marked

Essays are assessed holistically by IB examiners using a level-based scheme with a mark out of 10. Examiners consider the whole essay and decide which level best fits its overall quality. In broad terms the descriptors differentiate between essays that:

• address the title only partially, with description and limited examples (lower levels);
• address the title with some analysis, relevant examples and some awareness of different perspectives (middle levels);
• consistently focus on the title, develop a well-reasoned argument with specific, appropriate examples, consider alternative perspectives and evaluate (upper levels).

Use the official wording when you self-assess; the points above are a summary of the general pattern.

Mock marking exercise

Read this extract from an illustrative essay on the title "To what extent can we trust experts?" and decide what level of quality it shows.

*Extract A:* "Experts are people who know a lot. Scientists are experts and they do experiments. For example, scientists discovered that the Earth goes round the sun. Therefore we should trust experts. Some people do not trust experts but they are wrong."

*Extract B:* "The 2016 detection of gravitational waves illustrates why trust in experts can be rational. Two detectors in different US states recorded the same signal, and several independent teams analysed it before the claim was made. The structure of the checking, rather than the status of the scientists, is what justifies confidence. Yet the example is not typical of every field. In economics, forecasts about the 2008 financial crisis failed, partly because models assumed that housing prices across the country would not fall together. The contrast suggests that trust should be proportional to a field's ability to test and correct its claims."

Assess:

• Focus on the title: A is general and conclusion-driven; B is focused on conditions for trust.
• Examples: A uses a vague, unanalysed example; B uses specific cases and explains their significance.
• Analysis: A asserts; B explains why the examples matter.
• Perspectives and counterclaims: A dismisses others; B contrasts fields.
• Evaluation: B ends with a proportionate judgement.

A would sit in a low level; B shows upper-level qualities (though a full essay would need sustained development across all arguments).

Self-assessment of your draft

Print the draft and annotate it in the margins. 1. Title focus: In each paragraph, underline the sentence that links to the title. If you cannot find one, revise. 2. Thesis: Circle the thesis in the introduction and mark where each argument supports it. 3. Examples: For each example, mark whether it is specific, accurate and analysed. Highlight any example that is only described. 4. Counterclaims: Mark each counterclaim. Is it real, and does your evaluation respond to it? 5. Perspectives: Note where different perspectives appear. 6. Language and clarity: Mark vague words ("things", "society", "people") and replace them. 7. Word count: Check against the limit; do not rely on rounding.

Peer review protocol

Pair with a classmate. The reviewer:

• Summarises the thesis in one sentence from memory.
• Identifies the strongest and weakest paragraph and says why.
• Names one counterclaim that has not been considered.
• Marks any sentence that is unclear.

The author listens without defending, then responds in writing with planned changes. Peer feedback improves clarity but you remain responsible for your own work and for acknowledging help according to school policy.

Final polishing checklist

Content

• The thesis answers the title directly.
• Key terms are defined and used consistently.
• Each paragraph includes claim, example, counterclaim, evaluation, link.
• Examples are specific and verified.
• The conclusion answers the title and avoids new evidence.

Style

• Sentences are clear and concise; no filler.
• TOK vocabulary is used meaningfully.
• Transitions show logical progression.

Integrity and format

• Sources and quotations are acknowledged.
• The essay is within the word limit.
• The work is your own, following IB and school guidance on academic integrity and technology.
• You have kept drafts and notes in case your teacher asks to see the process.

Managing the last week

• Day 1: read the essay aloud and mark awkward sentences.
• Day 2: strengthen weak arguments or replace weak examples.
• Day 3: trim to the word limit, keeping evaluative sentences.
• Day 4: proofread.
• Day 5: final check against the official criteria and submission requirements.

Stop revising when changes become cosmetic. Rest, then submit.

Beyond the assessment

TOK is meant to change how you think. After the essay, keep asking "How do we know?" when you read a headline, study a theory, listen to a debate or make a personal decision. The habits of asking for evidence, imagining alternative perspectives, and weighing claims fairly will outlast the course.

Case file: a complete mock grade report

Imagine an essay on the title "To what extent can we trust experts?" with these features: the introduction defines "expert" and "trust" and gives a clear thesis; the first argument uses gravitational waves and replication; the second uses the 2008 financial crisis; the third uses conflict of interest in tobacco research; each has a counterclaim; the conclusion proposes proportionate trust. Weaknesses: the second argument spends 120 words describing the crisis before analysis; the third example is widely used and offers little original angle; the conclusion repeats the thesis rather than adding implications; one sentence claims that "all economists failed", which is an overgeneralisation. Mock feedback: "A clear, well-organised essay with a focused thesis and specific examples. Analysis is strongest in the first argument. Reduce description in the second argument and add your own example in the third. The conclusion should show what follows for ordinary knowers. Replace the sweeping claim about economists with evidence about specific forecasts. This is a solid upper-middle essay that could move higher with sharper evaluation and fresher examples." Practising this style of feedback on your own drafts builds the habit of seeing your work as a reader would.

Two sides of a question

"Should students use AI tools to improve drafts?"

• Potential benefits: feedback on clarity, prompts for counterarguments, language support.
• Risks: replacing your own thinking, introducing errors or invented sources, breaching rules on authorship. TOK is itself about thinking and justification, so work submitted must be your own, and you should follow the current IB and school policy on technology and acknowledgement.

Using a tool to find a flaw in your reasoning is different from having it write the argument; the former is closer to discussion with a peer, but check your policy before relying on it.

A weekly revision routine

Week 1: restructure (does the argument flow?). Week 2: strengthen examples (specific, accurate, analysed). Week 3: evaluation (add weighing sentences). Week 4: style and concision. Keep each version with a date so you can see the progress and so that your own work can be demonstrated if asked.

Glossary for this lesson

• Mock marking: applying criteria to a sample as a practice.
• Moderation: cross-checking of marks for consistency.
• Academic integrity: honesty in the use of ideas, sources and help.
• Proofreading: final checking for errors in language and format.
• Reflection: looking back on the process to learn from it.

Discussion questions with guidance

• *When should you stop revising?* When changes no longer improve the argument, evidence or clarity, and only alter wording. Time to proofread and rest matters too.
• *Is peer feedback always useful?* It is useful when specific. Ask peers to point to sentences and say what they understood, rather than asking whether it is "good".
• *What if your teacher and a peer disagree about your thesis?* Treat the disagreement as information. Decide which concern is better supported by the title and criteria, and make your own judgement.
• *How do you handle examples you can no longer verify?* Replace them with examples you can source, because accuracy is part of the quality of an essay.

Final reflection

Write a short note to yourself on the three most important things TOK has changed in how you approach claims in your other subjects. Keep it; revisit it after your exams and again later in life.

Key points to remember

• Mark your own work against the official criteria before submission.
• Use peer review to find blind spots, then decide for yourself what to change.
• Keep drafts, notes and sources to show the development of your own thinking.

Quick reflection

List the single change that most improved your essay during revision and the habit you will carry into other subjects. Then check that your word count, sources and acknowledgements are complete before you submit, and keep a dated copy of your final draft for your records.