Nature of the reflective project

The reflective project (RP) is an in-depth body of work focused on an ethical dilemma in a career-related area. It is developed and reflected upon over an extended period; as a product of the students’ own initiative, it provides a thoughtful representation of their cumulative personal experiences and skills gained over the course of the Career-related Programme (CP). Students have the option to develop their RP using a variety of format options, which include written, verbal, visual, and audio-visual modes of communication.

The RP provides students with the opportunity to think like a future career practitioner. It promotes in-depth and critical research, reflection, and reflexivity, as well as professional communication skills, intellectual discovery, and creativity through the exploration of a career-related dilemma, considering the impact on and perspectives of others within current, historical, local, and global contexts. Students practise self- and critical-reflexivity to arrive at a personal position on the dilemma.

Key features

• The RP is an extended independent piece of work focused on an ethical dilemma in a career-related area chosen by the student in consultation with a designated RP supervisor in the school.

• The RP can be submitted in a choice of formats containing no more than 4,000 words, which is inclusive of a reflective statement of no more than 1,000 words provided on the Reflective project—Final reflection form (RP/FRF).

• Supervisors support students for a minimum of three hours and a maximum of six hours during the RP learning journey; this includes a viva voce, which is a concluding interview with the RP supervisor.

• All RPs will be submitted to the International Baccalaureate (IB) for assessment.

• Through the RP process, students develop skills that prepare them for both tertiary education and employment.

Aims

The aims of the reflective project are for students to:

• engage in personal inquiry

• develop critical thinking and research skills to explore an ethical dilemma

• seek and appreciate local and/or global perspectives

• appraise the reliability and bias of resources found during the research process

• develop effective communication skills by creating a structured, coherent, and balanced argument

• develop self-management skills to support the research, writing, and product-creation process

• engage in ongoing reflective practice.

The reflective project (RP) learning journey is structured to reflect the processes of problem-based learning and represents the main activities in which students should engage. While the RP is ultimately an individual product, a guided pathway has been provided to scaffold the learner experience by ensuring multiple opportunities for timely support, guidance, feedback, and reflection. Several feedback loops and reflection points have been included. Students and teachers can also initiate additional opportunities whenever appropriate.

Students will keep a learning journal throughout the RP journey to record their ideas, notes, experiences, feedback, and reflections. This practice promotes authentic and sustained reflective practice. The RP learning journey includes the following activities.

Preparation and planning phase

• Preparation and building of background knowledge: Students should develop research and self-management skills; establish foundational knowledge for applied ethics and intercultural understanding; learn how to give, receive, and respond to feedback; explore and practise different types of reflection and reflexivity; and confirm understanding of the requirements and criteria for the RP.

• Identification of an ethical dilemma: Students might begin by researching issues related to a career field to identify an ethical dilemma of interest. Through their research, they begin to identify which groups are impacted by the dilemma, and how they are impacted, and then consider the various contexts and perspectives that might inform further research for their project.

• Peer discussions: Discussions with peers and RP supervisors are critical for giving and receiving feedback early in the RP learning journey. Topics for discussion might include how to move beyond researching an issue to identify an ethical dilemma; how to construct a research question; different approaches to the learning journal; how to use technology effectively and ethically; format options; clarification of requirements; sharing of research plans, as well as current progress and thinking.

• Research plan and project proposal: Students should consider and articulate their approach to the RP through the creation of a research plan and submission of a proposal to the RP supervisor. This allows students to refine their dilemma/research question, determine a research approach and potential resources, and decide on a project format.

• Peer/RP supervisor feedback: The feedback points identified throughout the RP journey are the minimum expectation; however, additional opportunities may be added. Once students have done some initial planning and research, they should have peer and/or supervisor conversations on relevant topics. This allows for feedback, reflection, and progress towards successful completion of the project. Topics for discussion and feedback at this point might include the project proposals, planning, research methodology, contexts and perspectives relevant to identified dilemmas, and format choices.

• Reflection point: Reflective practice should be ongoing and continuous. When peer and/or RP supervisor feedback is given, students should reflect on the feedback and determine what, if any, action is appropriate. Reflections and any actions are recorded in the learning journal.

Research and analysis phase

• Conduct research: Using the research methodology determined with their RP supervisor, students conduct research and record notes in their learning journal for use in creating their project.

• Reflection point: As the research is being analysed, students should reflect on their understanding of the information found in the research to develop a personal and critical position on the ethical dilemma. Reflections are recorded in the learning journal.

• Supervisor feedback: Once students have completed their research, RP supervisors should meet with them to explore their current thinking and progress, and to provide guidance and feedback.

• Reflection point: Students should reflect on the RP supervisor's feedback and determine whether any action is appropriate. Reflections and any actions taken should be recorded in the learning journal.

Development phase

• The initial project draft: When creating their initial project draft, students should organize their research and ideas and include all required elements.

Presentation of findings

• Presentation: The presentation gives students an opportunity to share the findings and ideas from their research and initial draft, not only with their supervisor but also with peers and/or other appropriate school or community members. The presentation allows students to practise oral communication skills and receive feedback. Topics for feedback might include the clarity and coherence of their argument, the quality of the research, the inclusion of required elements and the effectiveness of the organization, and the communication of ideas. This presentation happens early enough for students to make additional changes based on feedback or further thinking.

• Reflection point: After the presentation, students should reflect on the status of their current draft and the feedback provided, then determine how to finalize their project. Reflections and any actions taken should be recorded in the learning journal.

Completion and submission

• Revision and final project: Based on their reflections and any further actions taken, students should revise and finalize their project, and ensure that all required elements are included. Assessment criteria can be used to self-evaluate the projects. Students develop their written reflection for the Reflective project—Final reflection form (RP/FRF) to be submitted with their project.

• Viva voce: Once students have completed and submitted their final project, RP supervisors will interview with students to discuss and reflect on the process, the final project, the learning journey, any new understandings, personal growth, and impact. While the supervisor plays a guiding role by asking questions to prompt conversation, the viva voce is a dialogue and can be student-led, with excerpts from the learning journal serving as launching points for discussion.

• Project submission: Upon completion of the viva voce, RP supervisors will provide predicted grades and confirm student authenticity upon upload of the projects to the International Baccalaureate (IB).

Requirements

• The RP is a compulsory component of the Career-related Programme (CP).

• The RP must focus on an ethical dilemma in a career-related area.

• The RP can be submitted in a choice of formats and a total of 4,000 words, which is inclusive of a reflective statement (maximum 1,000 words, provided on the RP/FRF).

• Students are expected to spend a minimum of 50 hours of independent work to complete the RP.

• Supervisors provide between three and six hours of support for students.

• Students present their research findings for feedback before finalizing the RP.

• After the RP, students participate in a viva voce, which is a concluding interview with the RP supervisor.

• All RPs must be submitted to the IB for assessment.

• The RP is assessed using five assessment criteria that align with the assessment objectives (AOs).

• A student must achieve a D grade or higher for the RP to be awarded the IB Career-related Programme Certificate.

Each RP must include the following:

• An ethical dilemma: Students must explore and examine an ethical dilemma associated with an issue related to a specific career field. This is the primary focus of the RP.

• Contexts and perspectives: Consideration should be given to how the ethical dilemma has an impact on different groups and how it might be viewed in different contexts. Students must examine different perspectives on the dilemma in a balanced manner.

• Research: All RPs must be research-based. Students must analyse and synthesize research using a variety of resources that consider differing viewpoints on the ethical dilemma.

• A personal position: Students must critically examine not only the perspectives of others but their prior assumptions and viewpoints to arrive at, and articulate, a personal position on the ethical dilemma based on reasoned argument. Students must justify this position while also considering what impact or implications their position might have on themselves, others, or the career field in general.

• Clear communication: While students may submit their project in a variety of formats, ideas must be coherently organized in all RPs. Students should attempt to use appropriate terminology, structural conventions (e.g. headings or labels, where appropriate; introduction/body/conclusion; paragraphing; epistolary conventions for a formal letter; structured dialogue for an interview; introduction and outro (concluding section) for podcasts) and common stylistic conventions (e.g. imagery, sound, visual effects, word choice, tone, formatting, gestures or body language in a presentation or film) to communicate their ideas effectively.

• A written reflection: The written reflection should include evidence of metacognitive and critical reflection, as well as critical- and self-reflexivity. Subjects of the written reflection should include the research, planning, and development process, an evaluation of the project, and the impact of the learning on the student’s thinking, actions, and personal growth. Students will have recorded their reflections in a learning journal to ensure that authentic reflection is captured throughout the learning journey; excerpts from the learning journal can serve as a launching point for the written reflection, which students will submit using the RP/FRF.

• References, citations, and a bibliography: The RP is an academic piece of work and should be presented as such. References, citations, and a bibliography ensure intellectual and academic integrity and allow the readers to access the evidence themselves. Students should choose and apply a consistent style of referencing throughout the RP; the IB does not require a specific style. Appendices, footnotes, and endnotes are not necessary, but if used, they should be appropriately written.

*Please note that when submitting an audio, visual, or audio-visual recording, a transcript must also be provided as an appendix. The transcript will not be marked by examiners or included in the word limit, but serves to support the recording in case of technology difficulties.*

Format options for the reflective project

A variety of format options allows students to demonstrate their understanding using different modes of communication. All format options provide students with the opportunity to demonstrate their exploration and understanding of the ethical dilemma and to share their position and reflections. The ability to communicate ideas using a variety of modalities not only increases student agency and engagement but also allows students to practise communication skills that may be useful in their future academic or career pathways. Format options include written, visual, audio, and audio-visual modalities.

Students may choose any of the format options, but the format chosen should:

• represent a communication mode that the student is familiar with and/or has an interest in, or a preference for

• have a connection to a typical product that might be expected in the student’s future career field and/or be relevant in some way to the nature of the ethical dilemma being explored.

Regardless of format, students should ensure that appropriate terminology, structural elements and conventions of style are used, and that the ethical dilemma is thoroughly explored. To ensure that all aspects of the criteria have been achieved, the visual, audio and audio-visual submissions are accompanied by annotations and/or additional written text not to exceed the equivalent maximum word limit.

Word limits

All RPs are limited to a maximum total of 4,000 words (or word/time equivalence for audio/visual/audio-visual formats). This word limit includes a separate required written reflection that has a maximum limit of 1,000 words. 

Note: The 4,000-word limit for audio, visual, or audio-visual formats includes any combination of product, written support, and reflection.

The IB sets an upper word limit to give a framework to students. Examiners will not assess beyond the upper word limit. Minimum word restrictions are not given; however, students should note that extremely brief projects or projects significantly below the indicated word limit can reduce their ability to explore and reflect on an ethical dilemma to the depth expected for the RP as established in the assessment criteria. All students must provide a bibliography as an appendix; students submitting an audio or audio-visual project must also provide a transcript as an appendix. Neither the bibliography nor the transcript counts as part of the word limit; they may be viewed by examiners but not marked. The transcript serves to support the recording in case of technological difficulties.

Additional requirements for the reflective project

The following activities, although not assessed, are required for all students undertaking the RP:

Learning journal - Students will maintain a learning journal throughout their RP journey. While the learning journal is not formally assessed, it serves to provide:

• an ongoing record of students’ reflective practice

• a scaffold and support for students’ RP development process

• evidence to support the authenticity of the work submitted for assessment

• a foundation for dialogue and reflection during the viva voce.

As they maintain their learning journal, students can use a variety of tools and technologies or combine a variety of media, depending on their preferences. While several specific reflection points are identified along the RP journey, maintaining the learning journal should be considered an ongoing activity.

The learning journal can scaffold and support the development of the project itself by using recorded ideas, outlines, notes, or excerpts to create initial drafts, particularly for the additional written component for audio, visual, or audio-visual formats, and/or as part of the final written reflection. Students might also select excerpts from their learning journal to document authenticity or to develop additional written portions that evidence research, critical thinking, self-management, communication, and transversal skills, as well as to demonstrate and reflect on the process of investigating, planning, and decision-making, if these aspects are not already clearly evidenced in the project.

Presentation

Once students have completed an initial draft of their RP, they will give an oral presentation to peers, RP supervisors, and, if appropriate, mentors or other school or community members. During the presentation, students should share their findings and current thinking based on their research and initial draft, followed by an opportunity to address questions. No specific format is required for the presentation. Students are free to use presentation software or employ appropriate visual aids, although it is not mandatory. The presentation should be no longer than 10 minutes.

The focus of the presentation should include:

• the ethical dilemma and how it relates to a career field

• the contexts and perspectives explored

• what research has been undertaken

• what research findings have been gathered

• how their ideas or understanding changed through analysing the research

• their personal position on the dilemma, how they arrived at it, and how it might have an impact on themselves or others

• how their learning/new understanding might have an impact on their future career/education.

The presentation is mandatory. Its purpose is rather to provide an opportunity for students to articulate their thinking and receive feedback in a timely manner so that they can make revisions or strengthen their argument before finalizing their project. While feedback from RP supervisors and peers can be valuable in helping students to clarify and confirm their thinking, it must be emphasized that the final RP must represent the student’s work.

Written reflection - Each RP includes a final written reflection of no more than 1,000 words, which is written at the end of the RP process on a separate RP/FRF and is submitted along with the RP.

The RP/FRF is uploaded as a mandatory separate file to the RP. The written reflection will be assessed using criterion E, which centres on reflective and reflexive practice. Blank RP/FRFs will be awarded a mark of 0 for criterion E. 

Examiners will consider:

• how effectively the student has demonstrated reflective practice

• whether the student has reflected on their learning process and final project

• whether the student reflects on their thinking and actions, including why and how they may have changed

• whether the student has critically examined their own and others’ thinking, actions, or decisions concerning the ethical dilemma.

Viva voce

Following the submission of their final project, students will participate in an interview with their RP supervisor. The viva voce is not formally assessed by the IB but serves as a final dialogue about students’ learning over the entire RP journey. The viva voce may also serve as an opportunity to confirm the authenticity of the work submitted for assessment.

RP supervisors will use question prompts to guide the discussion, or students can lead the discussion by using excerpts from their learning journal to inform the focus of the discussion. Topics to address in the conversation include, but are not limited to, the process of researching and developing the project; reasoning for the format option chosen; research or reasoning that may have influenced their personal position; how the student responded to feedback throughout the process; students’ self-evaluation of the final project; and the impact of the students’ new learning or understanding.

Supervisor Support

The level of support given must be appropriate: too little support and the RP might be a weaker piece of work than it could be; too much guidance and the RP will not be the work of an independent learner. For this reason, supervisors are limited to commenting on only one completed draft of the RP. However, the RP supervisor must at no point edit or heavily annotate the draft.

In providing guidance, RP supervisors must not:

• correct spelling or punctuation errors

• correct information, data or statistics

• rewrite, reorder or reproduce any content of the student’s draft

• edit or heavily annotate the student’s draft

• correct bibliographies or citations.

After this feedback on the completed draft, the RP supervisor does not read it again until the student submits the final project. After the submission of the final project, RP supervisors conduct the viva voce as a culminating reflection opportunity with students.

At the end of the viva voce, the RP supervisor will initial and date the RP/FRF. The RP supervisor will then use the grade descriptors to make a judgement for a predicted grade, and then liaise with the CP coordinator to submit and upload the required documentation to the eCoursework system.

Authenticating work submitted for assessment

All RPs submitted to the IB for assessment must be authenticated by the student and RP supervisor; they must not include any known instances of suspected or confirmed academic misconduct. All students and RP supervisors must confirm the authenticity of the work that is to be uploaded to the eCoursework system. Once the authenticity of the work submitted for assessment has been determined, it is ready to be uploaded to the eCoursework system for assessment. At this point, the RP supervisor must not allow any retraction of the project by the student for modification purposes unless there has been an administrative oversight. 

If the RP supervisor is unable to confirm the authenticity of the work, this must be brought to the attention of the IB CP coordinator. No piece of work submitted for assessment should be uploaded/submitted to the eCoursework system if its authenticity is in doubt. It should be noted that work submitted for assessment that does not comply with the expectations and requirements outlined will be treated as a case of academic misconduct.

If authenticity is in doubt at any stage during the RP process, the RP supervisor’s first step should be to discuss this with the student. In addition, one or more of the following actions will be employed:

• Compare the style of writing with work known to be that of the student.

• Compare the final submission with the first draft of the written work.

• Check the references cited by the student and the sources.

• Interview the student in the presence of a third party.

• Use software that detects and prevents plagiarism.

As the RP is an independent task and a formal assessment component, students must not receive assistance with any aspect of the research, writing, or proofreading of the project beyond that which is permitted through their RP supervisor. If an RP supervisor suspects that the work submitted for assessment by a student could not have been completed without assistance, they are required to bring this to the attention of the RP coordinator, who, in turn, must inform the IB. This may then be investigated as a possible case of academic misconduct.

Student responsibilities

Students are required to:

• understand and use all the relevant information and guidance available in the Reflective project guide and TSM; students can refer to the RP supervisor for details and access

• identify an ethical dilemma and clearly indicate the career-related link at the start of the RP

• submit a project proposal to their RP supervisor before embarking on extended research

• consult with their RP supervisor regularly for feedback and guidance

• maintain a learning journal throughout the RP process to reflect upon their progress and inform conversations with their RP supervisor

• meet both internal and external assessment deadlines

• fully address all requirements and assessment objectives (AOs) within the final product

• acknowledge all sources of information and ideas in references, citations and the bibliography

• ensure that their RP conforms with policies and expectations regarding academic integrity and ethics

• inform their RP supervisor of details of any external assistance received

• participate in the viva voce with their RP supervisor to reflect on their RP process and product.

Students are strongly recommended to:

• develop a structured research plan

• develop a timeline for researching and producing the RP, allowing time for delays and unforeseen problems

• record sources as the research is conducted

• become familiar with style conventions of the chosen format option

• carefully check and proofread the final version of the RP

• seek and reflect on feedback regularly.

Reflective project supervisor (PPS Teacher)

Any RP submitted for assessment must be the students’ own work. However, the RP supervisor plays a crucial role in supporting the students while they are undertaking the RP.

The RP supervisor is required to:

• be familiar with the regulations governing the RP and the assessment criteria

• hold formal and informal meetings with the students to provide feedback and guidance, and to discuss students’ progress and reflections

• dedicate between three hours and six hours to each student they supervise

• be available for regular check-ins with students

• discuss the choice of formats, ethical dilemma, contexts, perspectives, and the design of a suitable, focused and manageable research question

• encourage and support students throughout the research and production of the RP

• ensure that each student satisfies appropriate legal and ethical standards with regard to health and safety, confidentiality, human rights, animal welfare, and environmental issues

• ensure that students have direct access to all the materials they need from the Reflective project guide (including the assessment criteria) and TSM, and that they are familiar with the regulations governing the RP

• monitor the progress of each student’s project to offer guidance and to ensure that the project is the student’s own work (this may include viewing/reviewing and discussing drafts or sections of the project)

• read and comment on one draft only of the RP (note that no direct editing is permitted); this should take place after the student’s presentation, but before the viva voce

• ensure that the final version of the project is submitted before the viva voce takes place, and that no changes are made to it subsequently

• conduct the viva voce with each student upon completion of the final project

• confirm the authenticity of the finished RP

• sign and date the RP/FRF

• make the predicted grade judgment for the final project

• support the CP coordinator with the submission of the project via the IB eCoursework system.

If a student is unable to complete the RP without substantial help from the RP supervisor or any other teacher, the RP supervisor should record this on the appropriate form from the Career-related Programme Assessment procedures.

If malpractice is suspected in the final project, the RP supervisor must write a report and submit it to the CP coordinator. If a student has received substantial support from an RP supervisor or other person, but has not reported it, then this must also be recorded.

Assessment Markbands

Criterion A: Focus on the ethical dilemma

This criterion assesses the extent to which the work submitted for assessment identifies and explores a career-related ethical dilemma by focusing on differing perspectives and varied contexts.

Criterion B: Knowledge and understanding through research

This criterion assesses how effectively the work submitted for assessment uses research to develop and demonstrate understanding of issues related to the ethical dilemma and their impact.

Criterion C: Critical thinking

This criterion assesses how effectively the work submitted for assessment analyses the ethical dilemma and synthesizes research to propose and justify a personal position, taking into consideration the impact on, and implications for, various contexts and groups.

Criterion D: Communication of ideas

This criterion assesses how effectively the work submitted for assessment uses appropriate organization, terminology and structural elements to support the clear, cohesive and effective communication of ideas.

Criterion E: Reflective practice

This criterion assesses how effectively the work submitted for assessment demonstrates planning, research and implementation of reflective practice during the project completion process.

Alignment with assessment objectives