- 1Spark
- 2Frame
- 3Narrow
- 4Commit
From blank page to research question
Find an EE topic that's really yours
Choosing a topic is the most important decision in your EE — it drives everything else. This free wizard takes you from your interests to a focused research question in four visual stops, built solely on the Extended Essay guide (first assessment 2027) — so everything it recommends is valid for the 2027 cycle and every year after.
start with what you actually care about — the rest follows.
Sign in with your Google account or your own email (top right) to generate ideas and save your plan — it's free. Email sign-in sends a verification code, no password. We'll show your chosen subjects' 2027 source rules at each step too.
How the wizard works — from blank page to research question
Every stop pairs a decision you make with a focused step the wizard does for you. It never writes your essay — it structures your thinking, drafts options and checks every suggestion against the 2027 guide's rules, so what you take away is a topic you can defend to your supervisor.
Your choices drive everything · AI drafts, you verify · What you leave with
Spark — map your curiosity (Step 1 · ≈2 min)
You: tap any interest chips that fit and — more importantly — type a few sentences in your own words about what you actually enjoy reading, watching or arguing about. Specific beats impressive: "why my football team's ticket prices keep rising" is worth more than "economics".
Wizard: keeps exactly your words and feeds them, with the guide's subject pairings, into every later step — nothing you write here is ever reused elsewhere.
You leave with: a curiosity map that makes every later suggestion yours.
Frame — pick your route through the guide (Steps 2–3 · ≈2 min)
You: choose subject-focused (one DP subject, ideally one you study) or interdisciplinary (two subjects integrated inside one of five frameworks), then pick your subject(s) and essay language.
Wizard: enforces the 2027 rules before anything is generated — for example, Environmental systems & societies and Literature & performance can't be combined in the interdisciplinary pathway, interdisciplinary essays must be written in English, French or Spanish, and subjects with source restrictions (like Psychology: secondary sources only) are flagged with the verbatim guide rule on screen.
You leave with: a setup that's guaranteed legal under the 2027 guide — invalid combinations are blocked, not just discouraged.
Five candidate ideas — real, specific, researchable (Step 4 · ≈30 s generation)
Wizard: drafts five concrete topic ideas, each from a different angle of your interests — every one names its actual focus (a specific policy, text, place or dataset, never a vague area), why it could work for you, the analytical move it invites, the source types to look for and 2–3 first steps you could take this week.
You: read, compare, and pick the one that genuinely hooks you — or regenerate for five more.
You leave with: a chosen idea with a built-in reality check (sources it needs, first steps to verify it exists).
Narrow — take your idea for a walk (Step 5 · ≈3 min)
Wizard: asks the two narrowing questions that will squeeze your idea hardest (which specific work / place / event / dataset?), each with a model answer so you can see what "specific enough" looks like.
You: answer in rough notes — you're not being graded. The wizard then recommends a narrowed topic, an analysis angle, why it's analytical rather than descriptive, whether sources are feasible, and three concrete next steps.
You leave with: one sharp topic instead of a broad area — the difference between "social media" and "one platform's 2018 algorithm change". ⚡ Fast Track skips the questions and recommends a direction straight away.
Commit 1 — build the research question (Step 6 · ≈2 min)
Wizard: drafts three candidate research questions from your narrowed topic and scores each against the research-question strand of Criterion A — Framework for the essay (1–6 marks), quoting the exact markband text, listing which quality rules each question passes or fails, and giving a concrete edit that would raise a weaker one.
You: pick the question you'd actually enjoy answering for 4,000 words.
You leave with: a research question with its mark-band justification — exactly what your supervisor will ask about in your first reflection session.
Commit 2 — the health check (Step 7 · ≈1 min)
Wizard: stress-tests the whole plan: eight dimensions (focus, interest, argument line, 4,000-word feasibility, subject fit, ethics…) plus the companion's ten-item feasibility worksheet — sources available? accessible in your location? permissions needed? research can start now? IB ethical guidelines? — and finishes with a verdict: ready, refine or rethink, plus the single most important improvement.
You leave with: an honest to-do list, before you've sunk weeks into a topic that was never going to work.
Save & brief — walk into your first supervisor meeting prepared (any time)
You: save the plan (it appears under My plans, top right — you can reopen, continue or delete it any time) and download the Topic Brief: a one-page PDF of your pathway, subjects, research question, health check, questions to ask your supervisor, and what happens next with reflections.
Wizard: stamps it with a fixed AI-assistance disclosure for your researcher's reflection space (RRS) — the brief is a starting point to verify, never a citable source.
You leave with: a resumable plan and a printable brief that makes your first reflection session concrete.