IB Diploma Programme · SL & HL
Assessment criteria decoded, plus frameworks for Paper 1 guided analysis, the Paper 2 comparative essay, the Individual Oral and the HL Essay.
Our reference sheets are free to download — save this one as PDF for offline revision.
Aligned with the latest 2026 syllabus and board specifications. This sheet is prepared to match your exam board’s official specifications for the 2026 exam series.
Every assessment in IB English A: Literature is marked against four named criteria, and examiners award marks strand by strand. Students who know what each criterion rewards write deliberately into it; students who don't produce good writing that misses whole strands. This reference sheet turns each criterion into a checklist, then gives you a structure for each of the four assessments.
The four assessment criteria in plain English
Paper 1 guided analysis framework
Paper 2 comparative essay structure
Individual Oral and HL Essay frameworks
Shared across the assessments with small variations. Treat each as a separate thing to earn.
Do you understand the text, and can you build an interpretation supported by well-chosen references?
Plot summary scores nothing here. An interpretation is a claim someone could disagree with.
Make an interpretative claim, not a description
Support every claim with a short, precise reference
Show awareness of implication and nuance, not just surface meaning
Can you analyse how the writer's choices shape meaning, and evaluate their effect?
This is the criterion most often under-served. 'The writer uses a metaphor' is identification; analysis explains why that metaphor and not another.
Name the technique, then explain what it does — never stop at naming
Analyse specific word choices, not whole quotations
Evaluate: how effective is the choice, and for what purpose?
Is the response focused on the task, coherently developed and balanced?
A clear line of argument stated early and sustained
Paragraphs that develop, not repeat
For Paper 2: balanced treatment of both works
Is the language clear, varied, accurate and appropriate in register?
Proofread the last five minutes. Criterion D marks are the easiest to recover and the easiest to throw away.
Use precise literary terminology correctly
Vary sentence structure; avoid formulaic repetition
Formal register — no contractions, no colloquialism
An unseen text with a guiding question. SL analyses one text; HL analyses two.
The guiding question is not optional and not a prompt to ignore. It frames what the examiner expects your line of argument to address.
Convert the guiding question into a thesis statement
Every paragraph should advance that thesis
Do not write a general appreciation of the text
Students who begin writing immediately produce chronological commentary. Ten minutes of annotation buys you a structure.
Identify text type — poem, prose extract, drama, non-literary form
Establish situation, speaker and addressee
Mark structural shifts — where does the text turn?
Circle three or four specific word choices worth a paragraph each
Draft the thesis in one sentence before writing anything else
Organise paragraphs around aspects of your argument, not around the order of the text.
Weak: stanza one… stanza two… stanza three…
Strong: the text constructs intimacy through…, then undermines it by…
Draw evidence from across the text within each paragraph
Claim that advances the thesis
Short embedded quotation
Analysis of specific diction — why this word
Effect on the reader
Link back to the guiding question
Two separate analyses, not a comparison. Do not compare unless a guiding question asks you to.
The commonest HL Paper 1 failure is a strong first analysis and a rushed second. Watch the clock, not the page count.
Split the time strictly down the middle
Write the stronger analysis second if you are prone to over-running
Each needs its own thesis responding to its own guiding question
A choice of general questions, answered on two works you have studied. You have no texts in front of you.
Spend five minutes. The right choice is the question where both your works genuinely offer something, not the one with the most familiar wording.
Test each question against both works before committing
Reject any question where one work is a weak fit
Pick works from different genres or contexts where possible — contrast gives you more to say
Discuss both works within each paragraph. Block structure — all of work A, then all of work B — limits Criterion C.
Comparative connectives are mark-bearing: 'whereas', 'by contrast', 'similarly', 'where X does…, Y instead…'.
Thesis addressing the question across both works
Paragraph 1: point of comparison, developed in both works
Paragraph 2: a second point, developed in both works
Paragraph 3: a point of significant divergence
Conclusion: what the comparison reveals that neither work shows alone
A precise unquoted reference is safe. A misquotation that you then analyse word by word is not.
Memorise 10–12 short quotations per work, tagged by theme
Three to four words each — enough to analyse a specific choice
Where a quotation is uncertain, reference the moment precisely instead
Context earns credit only where it illuminates a choice in the work.
Tie context to a technique: because of …, the writer's use of … reads as …
Avoid biographical narrative and historical background paragraphs
A global issue explored through one work in translation and one written originally in the language of study.
It must be genuinely global in significance and specific enough to analyse in the time available.
Too broad: 'inequality'
Workable: 'how economic precarity shapes family obligation'
It must be demonstrably present in both works
You bring one extract from each work. Choose extracts dense enough to sustain close analysis.
A plot-heavy extract will push you into summary, which is the main way marks are lost in the oral.
Each must clearly foreground the global issue
Rich in technique — not just rich in plot
Within the permitted length, and annotated only as the rules allow
Both levels — the extract and the whole work — are explicitly required. Omitting the whole-work level caps Criterion A.
Introduce the global issue and both works
Extract 1: close analysis, tied to the issue
Broaden to how the whole of work 1 treats the issue
Extract 2: close analysis, tied to the issue
Broaden to how the whole of work 2 treats the issue
Conclude on what the two works together reveal about the issue
Rehearse to time; running short is as costly as running over
Speak from brief notes, not a script
Prepare for follow-up questions on both works and the issue
HL only. A formal written essay on one work or text studied, developed from your own line of inquiry.
A narrow, arguable question about one technical or thematic aspect of a single work.
Too broad: 'How does the novel present women?'
Workable: 'How does the shifting narrative distance position the reader against the protagonist's self-justification?'
It must be answerable in the permitted word count with close textual analysis
Introduce the line of inquiry and state the argument
Three or four analytical sections, each advancing it
Close analysis throughout — this is not a research essay
Conclusion that answers the inquiry question directly
Breadth is the enemy here. The strongest essays are narrow and deep.
A genuine argument, not a survey of the work
Sustained focus on one aspect rather than broad coverage
Academic register, with accurate citation and a works-cited list
Evidence of development through the learner portfolio
Useful scaffolding for any assessment — these are the course's own analytical vocabulary.
Identity — how selves are constructed and contested
Culture — the values and practices a text assumes or questions
Creativity — invention, form, and the breaking of convention
Communication — how meaning passes between writer and reader
Perspective — whose view organises the text
Transformation — adaptation, change, reworking
Representation — how reality is mediated through form
Paper 2 questions frequently sit inside one of these areas. Recognising which one tells you what kind of answer is wanted.
Readers, writers and texts — how meaning is made in the encounter with a text
Time and space — how context shapes production and reception
Intertextuality: connecting texts — how works speak to one another
Not directly assessed, but it is where Paper 2 quotation banks, IO global issues and HL Essay inquiries actually come from.
One entry per work: themes, key quotations, techniques, context
Record comparison points between works as you go
Draft and refine global issues and lines of inquiry there
Boost your Cambridge exam confidence with these proven study strategies from our tutoring experts.
Give your own essay a mark for A, B, C and D separately. The strand you consistently score lowest on is your revision priority — for most students it is Criterion B.
Pick a single word from your quotation and explain why the writer chose it over a near-synonym. This is the move that lifts responses into the top bands of Criterion B.
Ten to twelve short quotations per work, tagged by theme, is what makes Paper 2 possible — you sit that paper without the texts.
Block structure caps Criterion C. Force both works into each paragraph using comparative connectives.
Set a halfway deadline and obey it. A rushed second analysis costs more marks than a slightly thinner first one.
Quick answers about this free PDF and how to use it for exam revision and active recall.
Yes. This Tutopiya formula sheet is free to use and you can download it as a PDF from this page for offline revision. There is no payment or account required for the PDF download.
This page groups key English A: Literature formulas in one place for revision. Reference sheet for IB Diploma English A: Literature (SL & HL). Assessment criteria decoded, Paper 1 guided analysis and Paper 2 comparative essay frameworks, Individual Oral structure, HL Essay guidance and the seven… Always cross-check with your official syllabus and past papers for your exam session.
No. In the exam you must follow only what your exam board allows in the hall—usually the official formula booklet or data sheet where provided. This page is a revision and teaching aid, not a replacement for board-issued materials.
It is written for students preparing for assessments at IB Diploma Programme in English A: Literature, including classroom revision, homework support, and independent study. Teachers and tutors can also share it as a quick reference.
Work through past paper questions, quote the correct formula before substituting values, and check units and notation every time. Pair this sheet with timed practice and mark schemes so you see how examiners expect working to be set out.
Explore Tutopiya’s study tools, past paper finder, and revision checklists linked from our tools hub, or book a trial lesson with a subject specialist for personalised support alongside this formula reference.
Work on Paper 1 unseen analysis, Paper 2 comparison and your Individual Oral or HL Essay with a specialist IB English tutor.
Next step
Most marks are lost to technique, not content — describing when the question says explain, missing the mark scheme trigger, or misreading the command word. The Exam Technique Cheat Sheet breaks down what each command word demands and what examiners actually reward, question type by question type.
Browse exam technique cheat sheets →Pair this reference sheet with past papers, revision checklists, and planners — all free on our study tools hub.
This reference sheet covers assessment technique for IB Diploma Programme English A: Literature at SL and HL. It is text-independent — the frameworks apply to whichever works your school has chosen from the prescribed reading list.
Assessment components, weightings, word counts and timings are set by the IB subject guide for your cohort. Always check the current guide and your teacher's guidance before relying on a structure or time allocation here.