Three essays. Three honest grades.
Most AI graders give everything a comfortable 6.5. We wrote three demo essays on the same TOK-style title at deliberately different quality levels and ran each through IBLens. The analyses are real, unedited grader output: the weak essay scored 3/10, the developing one 4/10, the strong one 7/10.
What a weak essay looks like — 3/10 (band 1-3)
How we wrote it: Opinion-based claims (“in my opinion”, “my teacher says”), anecdotes instead of examples, no genuine counterclaims, key terms never defined.
Excerpt: “Can we ever be certain about anything in science and math? This is a really interesting question that many people have thought about. In my opinion, certainty is possible in math but not really in science, and I will explain why I think this. First of all, mat”
- Understanding knowledge questions — 1/3: The student identifies the central knowledge question implied by the title — whether certainty is achievable in mathematics and natural sciences — but does not articulate it as a genuine knowledge question (e.g., 'What d…
- Quality of analysis of knowledge questions — 1/3: The analysis is superficial throughout. Arguments are asserted rather than developed — for example, '2+2=4 is always true' is stated without engaging with the foundational question of why mathematical truths hold (axioms…
- Quality of overall essay — 1/4: The essay has a recognizable five-paragraph structure (introduction, two body paragraphs, concession, conclusion), which is a basic strength. However, quality is undermined across multiple dimensions. Factual accuracy is…
What a developing essay looks like — 4/10 (band 4-6)
How we wrote it: Clear structure, terms defined, standard examples — but the analysis stays descriptive, counterclaims are thin, and examples don’t do real argumentative work.
Excerpt: “To what extent is certainty attainable in the natural sciences and mathematics? In this essay I will define certainty as knowledge that cannot be doubted, and I will look at mathematics first and then the natural sciences. In mathematics, knowledge comes from ”
- Understanding knowledge questions — 1/3: The student implicitly engages with the knowledge question embedded in the title — namely, whether certainty is attainable — but never explicitly articulates this as a knowledge question (KQ) in TOK terms. The essay does…
- Quality of analysis of knowledge questions — 1/3: The analysis is minimal and largely descriptive. The Popper example is correctly identified but not analyzed — the student states that theories can be falsified without exploring what this means epistemologically (e.g., …
- Quality of overall essay — 2/4: The essay has a clear and logical structure — introduction, body paragraphs organized by AOK, a counter-consideration section, and a conclusion. The writing is clear, grammatically correct, and easy to follow. These are …
What a strong essay looks like — 7/10 (band 7-8)
How we wrote it: Precise conditional claims, examples that carry the argument (Gödel, the four-colour theorem), a genuine counterclaim taken seriously, and synthesis — not summary — in the conclusion.
Excerpt: “To what extent is certainty attainable in the natural sciences and mathematics? This essay argues that certainty operates differently across these two areas of knowledge. In mathematics, certainty appears attainable through deductive proof. Once the Pythagorea”
- Understanding knowledge questions — 2/3: The student clearly identifies the central knowledge question — to what extent certainty is attainable in mathematics and the natural sciences — and maintains focus on it throughout. The distinction between conditional/i…
- Quality of analysis of knowledge questions — 2/3: The analysis is clear and makes good use of relevant examples: the Pythagorean theorem illustrates conditional mathematical certainty, Newtonian mechanics illustrates the revisability of scientific knowledge, and Gödel's…
- Quality of overall essay — 3/4: The essay is well-organized, clearly written, and logically sequenced. The thesis is stated early and the conclusion follows coherently from the argument, which is a genuine strength. The closing formulation — 'the knowe…
Why the spread matters
Feedback is only useful if the grade moves when quality moves. IBLens is calibrated to read like a strict examiner — if it says 7, we mean it.
Get this exact report for your own essay — first analysis free →