How DP History Is Assessed: Revision Notes

Condensed for quick recall of how the course is assessed. For the full subject overview, use the IB DP History subject overview. This covers the current course, first examined 2028. For a paper-by-paper exam-day plan see the exam preparation guide.

Four inquiry contexts as revision structure

Focused study, thematic study, regional study and historical investigation are not just labels for the four assessed components – they describe genuinely different ways of engaging with historical evidence (Paper 1’s close source analysis of one focused topic, Paper 2’s broad thematic comparison, HL Paper 3’s regional depth study, and the IA’s independent inquiry), so a revision plan built around “what skill does this paper actually test” is more effective than one built purely around memorised content for each period.

SL vs HL weightings

Component	SL	HL
Paper 1 (source-based, 1 focused-study option)	30%	20%
Paper 2 (concept question + short response and essay, 1 thematic-study option)	40%	25%
Paper 3 (HL only: two essays, 1 regional study)	—	35%
Historical investigation (internal)	30%	20%

Four inquiry contexts, four concepts

Contexts: focused study, thematic study, regional study, historical investigation. Concepts: cause and consequence, continuity and change, perspectives, significance.

These concepts run through all three papers and the IA — a question on “significance” might appear in Paper 1’s source analysis, Paper 2’s thematic essay, or Paper 3’s regional essay.

The historical investigation

• Student formulates their own inquiry question.
• Selects and evaluates sources.
• Externally moderated by the IB.

The historical investigation in more depth

The investigation is organised into three sections, and graded against criteria covering each: formulation of an appropriate inquiry question; analysis of the chosen sources, including their origin, purpose, value and limitation; and synthesis of evidence from those sources to produce a response to the inquiry question. There is no separate “reflection” section in the current course – that belonged to the previous course this one replaced. A common weakness is a source evaluation that describes a source’s origin and content without genuinely assessing its value and limitation for answering the specific inquiry question – examiners consistently reward evaluation tied directly back to the question being investigated, not a generic commentary on the source in isolation.

Command terms across the papers

Paper 1’s source-based questions are built around an overarching inquiry question and use three specific command terms, not the “compare and contrast” style of the previous course: explain how the content of two given sources can be used to answer the inquiry question, analyse how the context of a third source influences its use in answering the inquiry question, and examine how the perspectives across all the sources can be used to address the inquiry question. Paper 2 (a concept question in Section A, then a short response and an essay in Section B) and Paper 3 (essays) are always set in relation to a named period, region or theme, meaning a strong answer must be built from specific, dated evidence rather than general narrative description.

Why the four concepts recur across all three papers

Cause and consequence, continuity and change, perspectives, and significance are not confined to any single paper or unit – they are the analytical lens the specification expects applied to every historical scenario, whether that is a Paper 1 source extract, a Paper 2 thematic essay, or a Paper 3 regional-study essay. A strong Paper 1 answer, for instance, might use “perspectives” to explain why two sources disagree about a historical event, given their different origins; a strong Paper 2 essay might use “continuity and change” to structure a comparison across a defined time period. Revising the four concepts as transferable analytical tools, rather than as abstract theory to define once, is what makes them useful across all three papers.

How SL and HL differ beyond the headline weightings

Beyond the shift in Paper 1 (30% SL, 20% HL) and Paper 2 (40% SL, 25% HL) weightings, HL students sit an entirely additional paper (Paper 3, worth 35%) built around a regional depth study not examined at SL at all – this is new content layered on top of the shared SL core, not merely a longer or harder version of Papers 1-2. HL students should treat Paper 3’s regional study as requiring genuinely separate revision time proportionate to its 35% weighting, rather than assuming strong Paper 1/2 preparation will transfer automatically.

Exam traps

• Revising only “content” for a period without practising the four concepts (cause/consequence, continuity/change, perspectives, significance) that actually structure how questions are asked.
• Confusing focused study (Paper 1), thematic study (Paper 2) and regional study (Paper 3, HL only) — know which options your course covers for each.
• Underweighting source-evaluation skill for Paper 1, which is source-based rather than pure essay-writing.

Self-test

1. Name the four historical concepts that run through the whole course.
2. What is Paper 3, and who sits it?
3. What must the historical investigation include, beyond the write-up itself?
4. What are Paper 1 and Paper 2 weighted at, at SL?
5. Name one criterion the historical investigation is graded against, beyond the research question itself.
6. What distinguishes HL Paper 3 from Papers 1 and 2 in terms of content?

Answers: 1. Cause and consequence, continuity and change, perspectives, significance. 2. Two essays on a chosen regional study, sat only by HL students, worth 35%. 3. A student-formulated inquiry question and the selection and evaluation of sources. 4. Paper 1: 30%, Paper 2: 40%. 5. Any of the investigation’s three sections: formulation of an appropriate inquiry question, analysis of the chosen sources (origin, purpose, value, limitation), or synthesis of evidence from those sources into a response – there is no separate “reflection” criterion in the current course. 6. Paper 3 is built around an entirely additional regional depth study not examined at SL at all, rather than a harder version of the SL-shared content in Papers 1-2.

Official syllabus

International Baccalaureate Organization, Diploma Programme Subject Brief – Individuals and Societies: History, first assessment 2028, published 2025 – the same source cited by the full syllabus guide and the subject overview.