The assessment rule summarized above is based on the IB: Global Politics curriculum updates, first assessment 2026 ↗. Check the official version for your assessment session.
Stop revising for the old two filmed presentations
The IB's curriculum update explicitly says the previous HL oral extension assessment was removed for the new course first assessed May 2026. You still study global political challenges using case studies, but you now use that research in an external Paper 3. The engagement project remains the internal assessment. An old page describing two ten-minute presentation recordings is describing the previous assessment design, not your current Paper 3 task.
| Assessment | Old HL route | First assessment May 2026 |
|---|---|---|
| HL extension | Two filmed case-study oral presentations | External written Paper 3 |
| Current format | Historical route, no longer the new syllabus assessment | 1 hour 30 minutes, 28 marks, 30% of HL assessment |
| Case studies | Basis of recorded analysis | Evidence for Paper 3 questions and synthesis |
All 28 marks: match evidence to the question
The 2026 examiner instructions allocate 3 + 4 + 6 + 15 marks. These are distinct thinking jobs, not four identical mini-essays. Use the following study map to decide what to retrieve from your case-study notes.
Question 1
3 marks
Analyse the stimulus and connect it to a relevant global political challenge.
Know your challenge's central concepts; distinguish what the provided stimulus actually shows from what you know independently.
Question 2(a)
4 marks
Explain and analyse the identified political issue using contextual knowledge.
Name actors, interests and a specific political mechanism in a researched case. Avoid general claims about a whole region.
Question 2(b)
6 marks
Propose and support a feasible course of action for the issue.
Identify the actor able to act, mechanism, one enabling condition and a real limitation or counterargument.
Question 3
15 marks
Synthesize and evaluate the broader challenges through your researched case studies.
Compare what several cases reveal about a guiding inquiry, explain why contexts matter and weigh what the comparison cannot establish.
Worked example: turn a case study into a 6-mark recommendation
Illustrative scenario only: Imagine a fictional border community where two administrations disagree over access to a shared water supply. These are not real findings, and a real Paper 3 answer must use your verified case-study evidence. The purpose is to show how a recommendation can go beyond “leaders should cooperate.”
Decision-maker
A joint water commission with representatives of both administrations
Who has legal and practical authority to implement the action?
Action
Publish jointly audited weekly water-allocation and quality readings
What specific change is being proposed, not simply what outcome is desired?
Reason
Both sides would have one evidence record for contested allocation claims
Which identified political tension does the action actually address?
Constraint
Each administration might reject independent auditing or distrust the commission
What limitation would make the recommendation fail even if it sounds fair?
Evaluation
Judge success by whether disputes fall and reporting is independently verifiable
What observable result could support or challenge your claim?
Now replace this fictional case with actual dates, actors, documents and competing perspectives from a contemporary case you researched. If you cannot substantiate the authority or the proposed mechanism, revise the recommendation. A solution's feasibility matters as much as its intention.
Build a useful case-study file before your exam
- Identify the challenge and the current political issue, with dated source evidence.
- Map named actors, institutions, interests and contrasting interpretations.
- Explain how the case reflects a guiding inquiry from the HL extension.
- Prepare one policy recommendation with a feasible mechanism and limitations.
- Connect the case with another researched challenge and evaluate both contexts for Question 3.
This is a study and evidence organization aid, not an official Paper 3 markscheme or a mark predictor. Check the 2026 guide and your registered assessment session before planning coursework or revision.
Sources and verification
Primary-source references for this article, checked 12 October 2026. Rules and admission policies can change; confirm the current version for your assessment session or university course.
- IB: Global Politics curriculum updates, first assessment 2026 ↗
Confirms removal of the old HL oral extension and introduction of HL Paper 3.
- IB: Global Politics guide for first assessment 2026 ↗
HL Paper 3 duration, weighting, mark total and continued case-study research.
- IB: Examiner instructions 2026, Global Politics ↗
Paper 3 itemized mark distribution and evidence expectations for stimulus, recommendations and synthesis.
Independent student guidance, not an official IB publication. Ask your school coordinator to confirm policies relevant to your circumstances.