IB DP Academic Integrity: What Counts as “Your Own Work”
If you’re deep into an Internal Assessment, wrestling with your Extended Essay, or polishing a TOK piece, the question that quietly sits behind every decision is simple: what counts as my own work? That question is more than a rule to follow — it’s the backbone of a fair and meaningful assessment system that trusts students to think, create and argue for themselves. The IB expects student work to be genuine, authentic and clearly attributable to the student who submits it.
Why academic integrity matters (and why it’s not just about rules)
Academic integrity is about trust: trust between you, your teachers and the global IB community that the work you present reflects your reasoning, research and effort. When your work is honestly yours, grades measure learning. When work is not authentic, fairness and learning are undermined for everyone. Beyond marks, practicing integrity strengthens your voice as a thinker and prepares you for university-style research where being transparent about sources and influences is central.
Core idea: what “your own work” means in plain terms
At its heart, “your own work” means three things: (1) the ideas, structure and argument in the piece are products of your thinking and crafting; (2) any material that comes from others—words, data, images, ideas—are clearly acknowledged; and (3) collaboration or help is within the boundaries set by your teacher and the IB. You can build on other people’s research or get feedback, but you must show how you used those resources and where the original input came from.
How this plays out across DP assessments
Different DP components ask for different kinds of work, but the same authenticity rules apply. External assessments (like papers marked by IB examiners), and coursework that is externally assessed (for example, the EE and TOK essay), require clear evidence that the candidate did the thinking and the writing. Internal Assessments are prepared in school but must still reflect the student’s independent work; teachers authenticate and moderate. Know your task’s expectations early and use the authentication / declaration processes your school requires.
Internal Assessments (IAs): independent thinking inside school walls
IAs are often project- or task-based pieces completed in school time and under teacher supervision. They are an opportunity to apply methods and ideas from the course to a concrete question. What counts as your own work in an IA:
- You design the approach, interpret results and write up analysis in your own words.
- Notes, drafts and research logs that show progression from question to final product are strong evidence of authenticity.
- Teachers can instruct, give formative feedback and check understanding, but they must not produce sections of writing or core analysis for you.
Unauthorized collaboration (for example, submitting work substantially similar to another student’s) or allowing someone to write parts of your IA are examples of conduct that short-circuit the IA’s purpose and are treated as breaches of integrity.
Extended Essay (EE): an independent research story
The EE is one of the clearest moments where “your own work” is essential: it’s a sustained, independent research project that demonstrates your ability to pose a question, marshal evidence and present conclusions in your voice. Supervisors provide guidance and help with research skills, but they do not write parts of the essay or reorganize the argument for you. The Extended Essay process—drafts, supervisor comments and final reflection—serves as part of the authenticity record, so keep versions and notes that document how ideas developed.
Theory of Knowledge (TOK): making your thinking visible
TOK tasks, including the essay and exhibition, are philosophical and reflective; they rely on original connections between knowledge questions and real examples. Citing sources, acknowledging influences on your way of thinking, and making clear when you are leaning on classmates’ perspectives in discussion are all part of presenting your own work in TOK. While instructors can facilitate and give feedback, the final examples, reasoning and structure must be yours.
Exams and school-based assessments: fairness matters
Formal examinations and school-based assessments have strict rules to ensure fairness. Cheating, bringing unauthorized material into an exam, or manipulating assessment conditions to gain advantage are serious breaches. When in doubt, ask your teacher before the assessment; when you plan research or collaboration, clarify the boundary between permitted help and unacceptable assistance.
Clear examples: what counts and what doesn’t
Concrete examples help turn abstract rules into usable decisions. Below are common situations IB students face and how to think about them.
Examples that usually count as your own work
- Quoting a source and adding your analysis—quote marks, citation, and then your interpretation.
- Paraphrasing a concept from a paper while giving a proper citation and explaining how it connects to your argument.
- Using feedback to improve clarity while ensuring the argument and evidence remain your choices.
- Reporting your own experimental data or interview summaries, with raw notes stored and available if asked.
Examples that usually do not count as your own work
- Submitting text copied from another source without quotation marks and citation (plagiarism).
- Submitting material substantially similar to another student’s work (collusion), even if both parties claim the same idea.
- Having someone else write or heavily rewrite parts of your work—this includes paid ghostwriting or having another student do the drafting.
- Using AI-generated text as if it were your own thinking without clear attribution—treat AI outputs as you would any other source.
IB examples and categories of concern
The IB groups integrity concerns into academically dishonest acts (for example, plagiarism and collusion) and problems arising from maladministration. Examples listed by the IB include presenting another person’s work as your own, copying, and examination misconduct. Being familiar with these categories helps you proactively avoid behaviours that can be judged as a breach.
Quick-reference table: everyday situations
| Situation | Counts as your own work? | If not, what to do |
|---|---|---|
| Quoting a published article and responding to it | Yes, with correct citation | Use quotation marks, cite the source, then add your analysis |
| Paraphrasing without citation | No | Include an in-text citation and bibliography |
| Shared lab notes with identical write-ups | No | Rewrite in your own voice and reference any shared data sources |
| Substantial edits by a tutor or parent | Depends (if edits change argument or analysis, probably no) | Limit external edits to clarity; keep a record of feedback and versions |
| Using AI to brainstorm ideas but not crediting it | No | Either don’t use AI for core content or clearly acknowledge and reference it |
| Resubmitting the same essay for two different assessments | No (self-plagiarism / duplication) | Check with teachers; adapt and properly reference prior work if allowed |
How to demonstrate that your work is authentically yours
Making your process visible is the best defence against misunderstandings. Keep a research log or version history showing how your ideas and drafts developed. Save original data files, timestamps, or lab notebooks. When you receive feedback, keep copies of comments and your subsequent edits. These artifacts make it easy for a teacher or moderator to see where work genuinely evolved from your own thinking.
Practical habits that help
- Start early and save drafts often (a clear timeline demonstrates development).
- Record meetings with supervisors (with their consent) or keep notes of verbal guidance.
- Use consistent referencing—learn a style your school uses and stick to it for both citations and bibliography.
- Keep raw data and original copies (images, spreadsheets, audio), especially for IAs and the EE.
- When using tools or tutors, note exactly what they provided and how you used it—transparency matters.
A note on AI and new tools
Technology that generates text, images or data can be useful for brainstorming or checking grammar, but the IB requires transparency about its use. The IB’s guidance is clear that any AI-generated content should be treated like any other source: it must be credited and referenced. If AI contributes to the wording or structure of a piece, that must be made explicit because the IB does not consider AI-generated text to be the student’s own work.
Getting help the right way
Getting support is a sensible and recommended part of learning, as long as the help is formative and not substitutive. Tutors, peers and teachers can help you refine a question, improve methodology, or clarify expression; they should not write your analysis or produce essential parts of your submission.
For students who want structured, personalized support, Sparkl‘s personalized tutoring offers 1-on-1 guidance, tailored study plans, expert tutors and AI-driven insights to help you understand expectations and improve skills while keeping your work authentic. When you work with a tutor, make sure to document feedback and focus on learning outcomes that you can demonstrate in your drafts and final submissions.
What teachers will check
Teachers authenticate work and may moderate assessments. That means they check whether the submitted work seems to match the student’s demonstrated level of understanding, drafts, and classroom engagement. Teachers also sign declarations attesting to the authenticity of student submissions, which is why keeping a clear record of your process matters.
Common questions and myths
“I can copy a paragraph if I change a few words”
Minor changes to another person’s text without proper citation is still plagiarism. Paraphrase thoughtfully, acknowledge the original source, and explain how that idea fits into your argument.
“I’m allowed to get a friend to proofread”
Proofreading for grammar and clarity is normally okay; having a friend substantially rephrase or add content that changes the meaning is not. Keep a copy of the version before and after proofreading to show the nature of the edits.
“I used an AI tool—no one will notice”
Even if an AI-generated section slips past initial checks, it still violates expectations unless acknowledged and referenced. Be upfront about how you used AI and treat its contribution like any other source.
What happens when concerns arise—and how schools and the IB respond
If there’s a concern about academic integrity, schools start by investigating and following their academic integrity policy; coordinators and teachers are usually the first point of contact. Serious breaches that affect IB-marked work are reported to the IB for formal review. Consequences can be severe: the IB may refuse to accept the work for marking, with the result that a student might not receive a grade for that component or, in serious cases, the diploma may be affected. Schools will outline their procedures for appeals and clarifications so students have a process to follow if they need to explain their side of a situation.
Practical checklist before submission
- Have I cited every idea, figure or data point that is not mine?
- Do I have draft versions and supervisor feedback saved?
- Have I clearly acknowledged any help from tutors, peers, or technology?
- Is the argument written in my voice and reflecting my reasoning?
- Have I checked my school’s policies and the IB’s guidance for this assessment?
Final thought
Your IB work is most valuable when it honestly represents your intellectual journey: the questions you chose to ask, the evidence you weighed, and the conclusions you reached. Showing clearly where you encountered help, ideas and tools does not weaken your work—it strengthens it by making visible the thinking behind your conclusions. Academic integrity isn’t a set of fences; it’s the path that lets your own voice be heard, tested and trusted.
No Comments
Leave a comment Cancel