Format and Rules of the HL Essay
The Higher Level (HL) essay is an externally assessed coursework component (written during the course, marked by IB examiners) worth 20% of your final HL grade, marked out of 20 marks. Unlike Paper 1 and Paper 2, you draft, revise and polish it over several weeks during the course, with access to your primary text and optional secondary sources.
| Feature | Official Requirement |
|---|---|
| Word count | 1,200–1,500 words. The subject guide sets only this limit; in usual IB practice, in-text citations, reference-only footnotes and the works-cited list are not counted (check your school’s guidance). |
| Text choice | One literary work or one non-literary body of work studied in class. |
| No-reuse rule | Cannot use the work or body of work used in your Individual Oral or any work you plan to use in Paper 2; once used here, a work cannot be used in Paper 2. |
| Scope | A broad investigation across the whole work or body of work (never a commentary on a single poem, short story or advertisement). |
| Required header | Must state your chosen line of inquiry (a question is allowed) and identify the text type and author/creator right at the start, plus the title when the work or body of work is one extended text (e.g., “Novel, Kazuo Ishiguro, Never Let Me Go”). |
| Teacher support | Guidance throughout (choosing, planning, timelines), then one round of comments on one complete draft; the teacher may not edit or rewrite it, and the next version you submit is final. |
The Four Criteria and Top-Band Targets
IB examiners mark the HL essay using best fit (for each criterion, they choose the level that best matches the essay as a whole) across four equal criteria of 5 marks each. To aim for a 7, target 16–18/20 (a Courselo estimate; grade boundaries change every session).
| Criterion | Marks | Band 3 (Satisfactory: 3/5) | Band 5 (Top Band: 5/5) |
|---|---|---|---|
| A: Knowledge, understanding and interpretation | 5 | Satisfactory knowledge of the text and some interpretation of its implications for the line of inquiry; references are generally relevant, though some points stay surface-level. | Excellent knowledge of the whole work/body of work, a persuasive interpretation that directly answers the line of inquiry, and well-chosen references. |
| B: Analysis and evaluation | 5 | Generally appropriate analysis of language, stylistic or broader choices, with some judgement of how they work, but rarely insightful. | Consistently insightful analysis and evaluation (judging how well choices work) of both micro-features and broader authorial choices. |
| C: Focus, organization and development | 5 | Adequately organized; the line of inquiry is developed only in part; examples are only sometimes woven into the sentences. | Effectively organized and cohesive; develops the line of inquiry fully, with quotations and references seamlessly woven into sentences. |
| D: Language | 5 | Clear and carefully chosen English, with some lapses in accuracy; register mostly appropriate. | Very clear, precise and accurate English in an effective academic register; literary/linguistic terms used only where they sharpen precision. |