1

 |  R u b r i c   w i t h   C h e m i s t r y   n o t e s  
 
 

EXTENDED  ESSAY  ASSESSMENT  CRITERIA  (CHEMISTRY)  

All  information  in  this  rubric  is  property  of  the  IBO.  This  rubric  was  compiled  from  the  general  “The  Assessment  Criteria”  and  
from  the  “Interpreting  the  EE  Assessment  Criteria”  section  within  the  guidelines  for  the  subject.  The  full  guide  details:  
International  Baccalaureate  Organisation,  ed.  "Guide."  Diploma  Programme:  Extended  Essay.  International  Baccalaureate  
Organisation,  Feb  2016.  Web.  13  Jan.  2017.  
https://ibpublishing.ibo.org/extendedessay/apps/dpapp/toc.html?doc=d_0_eeyyy_gui_1602_1_e  

A:  FOCUS  AND  METHOD  –  6  MARKS    

(STRANDS:  TOPIC,  RESEARCH  QUESTION,  METHODOLOGY)  

This  criterion  focuses  on  the  topic,  the  research  question  and  the  methodology.  It  assesses  the  explanation  of  the  focus  of  the  
research  (this  includes  the  topic  and  the  research  question),  how  the  research  will  be  undertaken,  and  how  the  focus  is  
maintained  throughout  the  essay.  

Level   Descriptor  
0   The  work  does  not  reach  a  standard  outlined  by  the  descriptors  below.    
The  topic  is  communicated  unclearly  and  incompletely.    
• Identification  and  explanation  of  the  topic  is  limited;  the  purpose  and  focus  of  the  research  is  
unclear,  or  does  not  lend  itself  to  a  systematic  investigation  in  the  subject  for  which  it  is  registered.    
The  research  question  is  stated  but  not  clearly  expressed  or  too  broad.    
• The  research  question  is  too  broad  in  scope  to  be  treated  effectively  within  the  word  limit  and  
requirements  of  the  task,  or  does  not  lend  itself  to  a  systematic  investigation  in  the  subject  for  
1–2   which  it  is  registered.    
• The  intent  of  the  research  question  is  understood  but  has  not  been  clearly  expressed  and/or  the  
discussion  of  the  essay  is  not  focused  on  the  research  question.    
Methodology  of  the  research  is  limited.    
• The  source(s)  and/or  method(s)  to  be  used  are  limited  in  range  given  the  topic  and  research  
question.  
There  is  limited  evidence  that  their  selection  was  informed.    
The  topic  is  communicated.    
• Identification  and  explanation  of  the  research  topic  is  communicated;  the  purpose  and  focus  of  the  
research  is  adequately  clear,  but  only  partially  appropriate.    
The  research  question  is  clearly  stated  but  only  partially  focused.    
• The  research  question  is  clear  but  the  discussion  in  the  essay  is  only  partially  focused  and  connected  
to  the  research  question.    
3–4  
Methodology  of  the  research  is  mostly  complete.    
• Source(s)  and/or  method(s)  to  be  used  are  generally  relevant  and  appropriate  given  the  topic  and  
research  question.    
• There  is  some  evidence  that  their  selection(s)  was  informed.    
If  the  topic  or  research  question  is  deemed  inappropriate  for  the  subject  in  which  the  essay  is  registered  no  
more  than  four  marks  can  be  awarded  for  this  criterion.    
The  topic  is  communicated  accurately  and  effectively.    
• Identification  and  explanation  of  the  research  topic  is  effectively  communicated;  the  purpose  and  
focus  of  the  research  is  clear  and  appropriate.    
The  research  question  is  clearly  stated  and  focused.    
• The  research  question  is  clear  and  addresses  an  issue  of  research  that  is  appropriately  connected  to  
5–6  
the  discussion  in  the  essay.    
Methodology  of  the  research  is  complete.    
• An  appropriate  range  of  relevant  source(s)  and/or  method(s)  have  been  applied  in  relation  to  the  
topic  and  research  question.    
• There  is  evidence  of  effective  and  informed  selection  of  sources  and/or  methods.  

Kelli  Powling,  EE  Coordinator,  ACS  Hillingdon  International  School  

 
2  |  R u b r i c   w i t h   C h e m i s t r y   n o t e s  
 
 
CHEMISTRY  SPECIFIC  NOTES:  

The  EE  in  chemistry  must  have  a  clear  chemical  emphasis  and  should  focus  on  the  chemistry  aspect  of  the  investigation.    

It  should  incorporate  chemical  principles  and  relate  to  the  study  of  matter  and  its  chemical  changes.    

The  topic  can  come  from:  

• the  core  
• the  AHL  topics  or  
• one  of  the  IB  Chemistry  options  of  the  syllabus.  
However,  the  emphasis  should  be  on  chemistry.  

The  research  question  must  be  formulated  as  an  actual  question,  such  as  “Can  the  spectator  ions  influence  the  rate  of  
oxidation-­‐reduction  reaction?”    

To  address  the  research  question  the  student  must  research  the  existing  literature  on  the  topic  and  choose  an  appropriate  
methodology  to  pursue  the  investigation  by:    

• undertaking  work  in  the  laboratory  or  

• basing  their  research  on  existing  data.  
If  practical  work  is  undertaken,  the  rationale  for  choosing  the  procedure  should  be  clearly  explained.    

If  the  investigation  is  undertaken  in  an  external  laboratory,  students  have  to  show  clearly  their  understanding  of  the  methods  
and  materials,  and  their  role  in  collecting  the  data.  

   

Kelli  Powling,  EE  Coordinator,  ACS  Hillingdon  International  School  

 
3  |  R u b r i c   w i t h   C h e m i s t r y   n o t e s  
 
 
B:  KNOWLEDGE  AND  UNDERSTANDING  –  6  MARKS    
(STRANDS:  CONTEXT,  SUBJECT-­‐SPECIFIC  TERMINOLOGY  AND  CONCEPTS)  

This  criterion  assesses  the  extent  to  which  the  research  relates  to  the  subject  area/discipline  used  to  explore  the  research  
question,  and  additionally  the  way  in  which  this  knowledge  and  understanding  is  demonstrated  through  the  use  of  appropriate  
terminology  and  concepts.  

Level   Descriptor  
0   The  work  does  not  reach  a  standard  outlined  by  the  descriptors  below.    
Knowledge  and  understanding  is  limited.    
• The  selection  of  source  material  has  limited  relevance  and  is  only  partially  appropriate  to  the  
research  question.    
1–2   • Knowledge  of  the  topic/discipline(s)/issue  is  anecdotal,  unstructured  and  mostly  descriptive  with  
sources  not  effectively  being  used.    
Use  of  terminology  and  concepts  is  unclear  and  limited.    
Subject-­‐specific  terminology  and/or  concepts  are  either  missing  or  inaccurate,  demonstrating  limited  
knowledge  and  understanding.    
Knowledge  and  understanding  is  good.    
• The  selection  of  source  material  is  mostly  relevant  and  appropriate  to  the  research  question.    
• Knowledge  of  the  topic/discipline(s)/issue  is  clear;  there  is  an  understanding  of  the  sources  used  but  
their  application  is  only  partially  effective.    
3–4   Use  of  terminology  and  concepts  is  adequate.    
• The  use  of  subject-­‐specific  terminology  and  concepts  is  mostly  accurate,  demonstrating  an  
appropriate  level  of  knowledge  and  understanding.    
If  the  topic  or  research  question  is  deemed  inappropriate  for  the  subject  in  which  the  essay  is  registered  no  
more  than  four  marks  can  be  awarded  for  this  criterion.    
Knowledge  and  understanding  is  excellent.    
• The  selection  of  source  materials  is  clearly  relevant  and  appropriate  to  the  research  question.    
• Knowledge  of  the  topic/discipline(s)/issue  is  clear  and  coherent  and  sources  are  used  effectively  and  
5–6   with  understanding.    
Use  of  terminology  and  concepts  is  good.    
• The  use  of  subject-­‐specific  terminology  and  concepts  is  accurate  and  consistent,  demonstrating  
effective  knowledge  and  understanding.    

 CHEMISTRY  SPECIFIC  NOTES:  

Students  are  expected  to  show  understanding  of  the  relevant  chemical  principles  and  ideas  and  to  apply  them  correctly.    
Students  must  demonstrate  clearly  the  underlying  chemistry  behind  the  research  question  and  the  techniques  and  apparatus  
chosen.    
The  source  materials  accessed  should  be:  
• clearly  relevant  and  appropriate  to  the  research  question  
• effectively  referenced  and  incorporated  into  the  main  body  of  the  essay  in  a  way  that  demonstrates  the  students’  
understanding.    
Literature  cited  should  predominantly  come  from  acknowledged  scientific  sources.  
Students  must  demonstrate  the  ability  to  apply  their  selected  sources  and  methods  effectively  in  support  of  their  argument.    
The  student  must  try  to  maintain  a  consistent  linguistic  style  throughout  the  essay.  
Chemical  nomenclature  and  terminology  should  be  used  consistently  and  effectively  throughout  the  essay.  Students  should  
also  use  appropriately  and  consistently:    
• relevant  chemical  and  structural  formulas  
• balanced  equations  with  state  symbols  
• mechanisms  of  reactions  
• significant  digits  
• SI  units.  

Kelli  Powling,  EE  Coordinator,  ACS  Hillingdon  International  School  

 
4  |  R u b r i c   w i t h   C h e m i s t r y   n o t e s  
 
 
C:  CRITICAL  THINKING  –  12  MARKS    
(STRANDS:  RESEARCH,  ANALYSIS,  AND  DISCUSSION  AND  EVALUATION)  

This  criterion  assesses  the  extent  to  which  critical-­‐thinking  skills  have  been  used  to  analyse  and  evaluate  the  research  
undertaken.  

Level   Descriptor  
0   The  work  does  not  reach  a  standard  outlined  by  the  descriptors  below.    
The  research  is  limited.    
• The  research  presented  is  limited  and  its  application  is  not  clearly  relevant  to  the  RQ.    
Analysis  is  limited.    
• There  is  limited  analysis.  
• Where  there  are  conclusions  to  individual  points  of  analysis  these  are  limited  and  not  consistent  
with  the  evidence.    
Discussion/evaluation  is  limited.    
1–3  
• An  argument  is  outlined  but  this  is  limited,  incomplete,  descriptive  or  narrative  in  nature.    
• The  construction  of  an  argument  is  unclear  and/or  incoherent  in  structure  hindering  understanding.    
• Where  there  is  a  final  conclusion,  it  is  limited  and  not  consistent  with  the  arguments/evidence  
presented.    
• There  is  an  attempt  to  evaluate  the  research,  but  this  is  superficial.    
If  the  topic  or  research  question  is  deemed  inappropriate  for  the  subject  in  which  the  essay  is  registered  no  
more  than  three  marks  can  be  awarded  for  this  criterion.    
The  research  is  adequate.    
• Some  research  presented  is  appropriate  and  its  application  is  partially  relevant  to  the  Research  
question.    
Analysis  is  adequate.    
• There  is  analysis  but  this  is  only  partially  relevant  to  the  research  question;  the  inclusion  of  
irrelevant  research  detracts  from  the  quality  of  the  argument.    
4–6   • Any  conclusions  to  individual  points  of  analysis  are  only  partially  supported  by  the  evidence.    
Discussion/evaluation  is  adequate.    
• An  argument  explains  the  research  but  the  reasoning  contains  inconsistencies.    
• The  argument  may  lack  clarity  and  coherence  but  this  does  not  significantly  hinder  understanding.    
• Where  there  is  a  final  or  summative  conclusion,  this  is  only  partially  consistent  with  the  
arguments/evidence  presented.    
• The  research  has  been  evaluated  but  not  critically.  
The  research  is  good.    
• The  majority  of  the  research  is  appropriate  and  its  application  is  clearly  relevant  to  the  research  
question.    
Analysis  is  good.    
• The  research  is  analysed  in  a  way  that  is  clearly  relevant  to  the  research  question;  the  inclusion  of  
less  relevant  research  rarely  detracts  from  the  quality  of  the  overall  analysis.    
• Conclusions  to  individual  points  of  analysis  are  supported  by  the  evidence  but  there  are  some  minor  
7–9  
inconsistencies.    
Discussion/evaluation  is  good.    
• An  effective  reasoned  argument  is  developed  from  the  research,  with  a  conclusion  supported  by  the  
evidence  presented.    
• This  reasoned  argument  is  clearly  structured  and  coherent  and  supported  by  a  final  or  summative  
conclusion;  minor  inconsistencies  may  hinder  the  strength  of  the  overall  argument.    
• The  research  has  been  evaluated,  and  this  is  partially  critical.  
The  research  is  excellent.    
• The  research  is  appropriate  to  the  research  question  and  its  application  is  consistently  relevant.    
10–12   Analysis  is  excellent.    
• The  research  is  analysed  effectively  and  clearly  focused  on  the  research  question;  the  inclusion  of  
less  relevant  research  does  not  significantly  detract  from  the  quality  of  the  overall  analysis.    

Kelli  Powling,  EE  Coordinator,  ACS  Hillingdon  International  School  

 
5  |  R u b r i c   w i t h   C h e m i s t r y   n o t e s  
 
 
• Conclusions  to  individual  points  of  analysis  are  effectively  supported  by  the  evidence.  
Discussion/evaluation  is  excellent.    
• An  effective  and  focused  reasoned  argument  is  developed  from  the  research  with  a  conclusion  
reflective  of  the  evidence  presented.    
• This  reasoned  argument  is  well  structured  and  coherent;  any  minor  inconsistencies  do  not  hinder  
the  strength  of  the  overall  argument  or  the  final  or  summative  conclusion.    
• The  research  has  been  critically  evaluated.  

 CHEMISTRY  SPECIFIC  NOTES:  

In  a  chemistry  EE,  the  “research”  refers  to  both  literature  sources  and  data  collected  by  the  students  themselves.  This  research  
must  be  consistently  relevant  to  the  research  question.    

The  student  is  expected  to  appropriately  present  and  analyse  the  data.  This  analysis  will  often  include:    

• mathematical  transformations  
• statistical  analysis  
• tables  of  processed  data  and  graphs.  
If  the  data  are  analysed  statistically,  the  student  must  clearly  show  understanding  of  why  that  particular  test  was  chosen  and  
what  the  results  mean.    

If  graphs  are  used,  they  must  be  correctly  selected  and  drawn  to  illustrate  key  elements  of  the  analysis.  They  should  only  be  
included  if  they  improve  communication.    

Students  must  analyse  and  present  their  data  in  such  a  way  that  they  support  and  clarify  the  argument  leading  to  the  
conclusion.    

Students  must  make  a  particular  effort  to  maintain  a  reasoned,  logical  argument  that  focuses  on  the  research  question.  Essays  
that  attempt  to  deal  with  a  large  number  of  variables  are  unlikely  to  be  focused  and  coherent.  A  clear  and  logical  argument  can  
be  achieved  by  making  repeated  reference  to  the  research  question.    

An  assessment  of  the  extent  to  which  the  question  is  answered,  either  by  the  data  or  by  information  accessed,  should  form  part  
of  the  argument.    

The  stated  conclusion(s)  must  be  based  on  and  be  consistent  with  the  research  presented  in  the  essay.    

The  original  research  question  need  not  be  fully  answered  by  the  investigation.  In  these  cases,  the  student  should  point  out  
unresolved  issues  and  make  suggestions  as  to  how  these  might  be  further  investigated.    

Inadequate  experimental  design  or  any  systematic  errors  should  be  exposed.  The  uncertainties  of  the  measurements  should  be  
evaluated  and  discussed.    

The  student  must  comment  on  the  quality,  balance  and  quantity  of  their  sources.  Students  are  expected  to  show  an  awareness  
of  any  limitations  or  uncertainties  inherent  in  their  approach.  In  particular,  they  should  critically  comment  on  the  validity  and  
reliability  of  their  data  relative  to  their  management  of  variables  within  the  investigation.  

   

Kelli  Powling,  EE  Coordinator,  ACS  Hillingdon  International  School  

 
6  |  R u b r i c   w i t h   C h e m i s t r y   n o t e s  
 
 
D:  PRESENTATION  –  4  MARKS  
(STRANDS:  STRUCTURE,  LAYOUT)  

This  criterion  assesses  the  extent  to  which  the  presentation  follows  the  standard  format  expected  for  academic  writing  and  the  
extent  to  which  this  aids  effective  communication.  

Level   Descriptor  
0   The  work  does  not  reach  a  standard  outlined  by  the  descriptors  below.    
Presentation  is  acceptable.    
• The  structure  of  the  essay  is  generally  appropriate  in  terms  of  the  expected  conventions  for  the  
topic,  argument  and  subject  in  which  the  essay  is  registered.    
1–2  
• Some  layout  considerations  may  be  missing  or  applied  incorrectly.  
• Weaknesses  in  the  structure  and/or  layout  do  not  significantly  impact  the  reading,  understanding  or  
evaluation  of  the  extended  essay.    
Presentation  is  good.    
• The  structure  of  the  essay  clearly  is  appropriate  in  terms  of  the  expected  conventions  for  the  topic,  
3–4   the  argument  and  subject  in  which  the  essay  is  registered.    
• Layout  considerations  are  present  and  applied  correctly.  
• The  structure  and  layout  support  the  reading,  understanding  and  evaluation  of  the  extended  essay.    

 CHEMISTRY  SPECIFIC  NOTES:  

This  criterion  relates  to  the  extent  to  which  the  essay  conforms  to  accepted  academic  standards  in  relation  to  how  research  
papers  should  be  presented.  It  also  relates  to  how  well  these  elements  support  the  reading,  understanding  and  evaluation  of  
the  essay.    

Students  may  use  numbered  and  headed  paragraphs  to  impose  a  clear  structure.  Subheadings  should  not  distract  from  the  
overall  structure  of  the  essay  or  argument  presented.    

Use  of  charts,  images  and  tables  

Any  charts,  images  or  tables  from  literature  sources  included  in  the  essay  must  be  carefully  selected  and  labelled.  They  should  
only  be  used  if  they  are  directly  relevant  to  the  research  question,  contribute  towards  the  understanding  of  the  argument  and  
are  of  a  good  graphic  quality.    

Large  tables  of  raw  data  collected  by  the  student  are  best  included  in  an  appendix,  where  they  should  be  carefully  labelled.  
Tables  of  processed  data  should  be  designed  to  clearly  display  the  information  in  the  most  appropriate  form.  Graphs  or  charts  
drawn  from  the  analysed  data  should  be  selected  to  highlight  only  the  most  pertinent  aspects  related  to  the  argument.  Too  
many  graphs,  charts  and  tables  will  distract  from  the  overall  quality  of  the  communication.    

Only  processed  data  that  is  central  to  the  argument  of  the  essay  should  be  included  in  the  body  of  the  essay,  as  close  as  
possible  to  its  first  reference.  Tables  should  enhance  a  written  explanation  but  not  themselves  include  significant  bodies  of  text.  
If  they  do,  then  these  words  must  be  included  in  the  word  count.    

If  an  experimental  method  is  long  and  complex,  students  may  place  the  raw  data  in  an  appendix  and  include  a  summary  of  the  
methods  in  the  body  of  the  essay.  Students  who  choose  this  option  must  be  careful  to  ensure  that  the  summary  contains  all  
elements  that  contribute  to  the  quality  of  the  investigation,  since  appendices  are  not  an  essential  section  of  the  EE  and  
examiners  are  not  required  to  read  them.    

In  other  words,  any  important  information  that  contributes  to  the  evaluation  of  the  method  must  be  in  the  body  of  the  essay  
and  not  the  appendix.  For  experiments  where  numerical  results  are  calculated  from  data  obtained  by  changing  one  of  the  

Kelli  Powling,  EE  Coordinator,  ACS  Hillingdon  International  School  

 
7  |  R u b r i c   w i t h   C h e m i s t r y   n o t e s  
 
 
variables,  it  is  generally  good  practice  to  show  one  example  of  the  calculation  in  the  main  body  of  the  essay.  The  remainder  can  
be  displayed  in  tabular  or  graphical  form.    

Any  material  that  is  not  original  must  be  carefully  acknowledged,  with  specific  attention  paid  to  the  acknowledgment  and  
referencing  of  quotes  and  ideas.  This  acknowledgment  and  referencing  is  applicable  to  audiovisual  material,  text,  graphs  and  
data  published  in  print  and  electronic  sources.  If  the  referencing  does  not  meet  the  minimum  standard  as  indicated  in  the  guide  
(name  of  author,  date  of  publication,  title  of  source  and  page  numbers  as  applicable),  and  is  not  consistently  applied,  work  will  
be  considered  as  a  case  of  possible  academic  misconduct.    

A  bibliography  is  essential  and  has  to  be  presented  in  a  standard  format.  Title  page,  table  of  contents,  page  numbers,  etc  must  
contribute  to  the  quality  of  presentation.    

The  essay  must  not  exceed  4,000  words  of  narrative.  Students  should  be  aware  that  examiners  will  not  read  beyond  the  4,000-­‐
word  limit,  nor  assess  any  material  presented  thereafter.  Graphs,  figures,  calculations,  diagrams,  formulas  and  equations  are  
not  included  in  the  word  count.  

   

Kelli  Powling,  EE  Coordinator,  ACS  Hillingdon  International  School  

 
8  |  R u b r i c   w i t h   C h e m i s t r y   n o t e s  
 
 
E:  ENGAGEMENT  –  6  MARKS  
(STRANDS:  PROCESS,  RESEARCH  FOCUS)  

This  criterion  assesses  the  student’s  engagement  with  their  research  focus  and  the  research  process.  It  will  be  applied  by  the  
examiner  at  the  end  of  the  assessment  of  the  essay,  and  is  based  solely  on  the  candidate’s  reflections  as  detailed  on  the  
Reflections  on  Planning  and  Progress  Form  (RPPF),  with  the  supervisory  comments  and  Extended  Essay  itself  as  context.  

Level   Descriptor  
0   The  work  does  not  reach  a  standard  outlined  by  the  descriptors  or  a  RPPF  has  not  been  submitted.    
Engagement  is  limited.    
• Reflections  on  decision-­‐making  and  planning  are  mostly  descriptive.  
1–2  
• These  reflections  communicate  a  limited  degree  of  personal  engagement  with  the  research  focus  
and/or  research  process.    
Engagement  is  good.    
• Reflections  on  decision-­‐making  and  planning  are  analytical  and  include  reference  to  conceptual  
3–4   understanding  and  skill  development.    
• These  reflections  communicate  a  moderate  degree  of  personal  engagement  with  the  research  focus  
and  process  of  research,  demonstrating  some  intellectual  initiative.    
Engagement  is  excellent.    
• Reflections  on  decision-­‐making  and  planning  are  evaluative  and  include  reference  to  the  student’s  
capacity  to  consider  actions  and  ideas  in  response  to  challenges  experienced  in  the  research  
5–6   process.    
• These  reflections  communicate  a  high  degree  of  intellectual  and  personal  engagement  with  the  
research  focus  and  process  of  research,  demonstrating  authenticity,  intellectual  initiative  and/or  
creative  approach  in  the  student  voice.    

 CHEMISTRY  SPECIFIC  NOTES:  

(CRITERION  E  NOTES  ARE  THE  SAME  FOR  ALL  SUBJECTS)  

This  criterion  assesses  the  student’s  engagement  with  their  research  focus  and  the  research  process.  It  will  be  applied  by  the  
examiner  at  the  end  of  the  assessment  of  the  essay,  and  is  based  solely  on  the  candidate’s  reflections  as  detailed  on  the  RPPF,  
with  the  supervisory  comments  and  extended  essay  itself  as  context.  

Students  are  expected  to  provide  reflections  on  the  decision-­‐making  and  planning  process  undertaken  in  completing  the  essay.  
Students  must  demonstrate  how  they  arrived  at  a  topic  as  well  as  the  methods  and  approach  used.  This  criterion  assesses  the  
extent  to  which  a  student  has  evidenced  the  rationale  for  decisions  made  throughout  the  planning  process  and  the  skills  and  
understandings  developed.    

For  example,  students  may  reflect  on:  

• the  approach  and  strategies  chosen,  and  their  relative  success  

• the  Approaches  to  learning  skills  they  have  acquired  and  how  they  have  developed  as  a  learner    
• how  their  conceptual  understandings  have  developed  or  changed  as  a  result  of  their  research    
• challenges  faced  in  their  research  and  how  they  overcame  these  
• questions  that  emerged  as  a  result  of  their  research  
• what  they  would  do  differently  if  they  were  to  undertake  the  research  again.  

Effective  reflection  highlights  the  journey  the  student  has  engaged  in  through  the  EE  process.  In  order  to  demonstrate  that  
engagement,  students  must  show  evidence  of  critical  and  reflective  thinking  that  goes  beyond  simply  describing  the  procedures  
that  have  been  followed.  Reflections  must  provide  the  examiner  with  an  insight  into  student  thinking,  creativity  and  originality  
within  the  research  process.  The  student  voice  must  be  clearly  present  and  demonstrate  the  learning  that  has  taken  place.  

Kelli  Powling,  EE  Coordinator,  ACS  Hillingdon  International  School