Structural and Pathway Changes

<aside> 🔥

The 2027 assessment cycle introduces a choice between subject-focused and interdisciplinary pathways while streamlining the previous World Studies model.

</aside>

1. Pathway Selection: Students now choose between a Subject-focused pathway (traditional single-subject research) and an Interdisciplinary pathway.
2. Beyond Dual Perspectives: The interdisciplinary approach is not simply viewing a topic through two lenses: it requires elements to work together effectively to produce new and/or deeper understandings that would be impossible through research within one subject alone.
3. Organisational Frameworks: Every interdisciplinary essay must be registered under one of five frameworks: Power, equality, justice; Culture, identity, expression; Movement, time, space; Evidence, measurement, innovation; or Sustainability, development, change.

Revised Assessment Criteria

<aside> 🔥

The total marks for the extended essay have been reduced to 30 through a restructured set of five generic assessment criteria that apply across all subjects.

</aside>

1. Reduced Total Marks: The assessment is now marked out of 30 rather than 34.
2. Criterion Weights: The marks are distributed as A (6), B (6), C (6), D (8), and E (4).
3. Generic Application: These five criteria are applied to both Subject-focused and Interdisciplinary pathways, though the application is informed by the specific context of the essay.
   1. Criterion A: Framework for the essay (6 marks)
      1. This criterion assesses the focus and methodology of the research. It evaluates the clarity and appropriateness of the research question, the selection and application of research methods, and the overall formal structure of the essay.
   2. Criterion B: Knowledge and understanding (6 marks)
      1. This criterion focuses on the student's ability to demonstrate a clear understanding of the subject matter. It evaluates the effective use of subject-specific terminology, concepts, and theories relevant to the chosen topic or disciplines.
   3. Criterion C: Analysis and line of argument (6 marks)
      1. This criterion assesses the development of a logical and coherent argument. It evaluates how well the student analyses the research evidence and maintains a sustained line of reasoning throughout the work.
   4. Criterion D: Discussion and evaluation (8 marks)
      1. As the highest-weighted criterion, this focuses on the student's ability to provide a balanced discussion of their findings. It requires an evaluative conclusion that reflects on the strengths and limitations of the research and the evidence used.
   5. Criterion E: Reflection (4 marks)
      1. This criterion is assessed through the 500-word summative reflection on the Reflection and Progress Form. It evaluates the student’s ability to reflect on their personal growth as a researcher and the transfer of learning to other contexts.

The Reflection and Progress Form (RPF)

<aside> 🔥

Students must now complete a single 500-word summative reflection focusing on personal growth and the transfer of learning throughout the research process.

</aside>

1. Single Reflective Statement: The previous requirement for three separate reflection entries is replaced by a single 500-word statement written at the end of the process.
2. Focus on Skills Transfer: Reflection must evaluate personal growth and the student's ability to transfer learned skills to future studies or different contexts.
3. Removal of Supervisor Comments: Supervisors no longer write a summative comment on the RPF: your role is to initial and date the form to authenticate the three mandatory sessions.
   1. Students must participate in three formal reflection sessions with their supervisor: the initial session, the interim session, and the final viva voce interview.