Does the IB Check for AI? What the Policy Actually Says

By Michael Thompson · Former IB Diploma Programme coordinator; 10 years at Bromsgrove School · Published 4 September 2026

Does the IB check for AI? There is no single central AI detector run by the International Baccalaureate Organisation - instead, schools are responsible for verifying the authenticity of student work, using tools such as Turnitin alongside teacher judgement. The IB's academic integrity policy is clear, though: any AI-generated text, image, or idea included in your work must be cited, and submitting AI-generated content as your own is academic misconduct. What that means in practice - for your Extended Essay, Internal Assessments, TOK essay, and CAS reflections - is worth understanding before you submit anything.

Key Takeaways

In This Article

  1. How the IB actually checks for AI use
  2. What the IB academic integrity policy says about AI
  3. Which components are checked - EE, IA, TOK, and CAS
  4. What happens if AI misuse is flagged
  5. How to protect yourself: drafts, citations, and supervisor meetings
  6. What to do this week

1. How the IB actually checks for AI use

The short answer to does IB check for AI is: not centrally, and not with a single tool. The International Baccalaureate Organisation does not run a centralised AI detection system that scans every submitted essay. Instead, the IB has stated that no AI detection tool should be treated as conclusive, and that teacher knowledge of a student's writing style is treated as meaningful evidence in any integrity investigation.

In practice, schools bear primary responsibility for verifying the authenticity of student work before it reaches examiners. Many use Turnitin (which has an AI writing detection layer) alongside supervisor judgement. The counter-intuitive catch: a teacher who has read your drafts all year is often a more reliable signal than any software flag.

The IB's AI in learning, teaching, and assessment page confirms the organisation is exploring AI as a quality-control check on examiner marking, not as a tool to catch students. That is a meaningful distinction worth understanding before you submit anything.

2. What the IB academic integrity policy says about AI

The IB's position, set out in its statement on ChatGPT and artificial intelligence (last updated February 2026), is that it will not ban AI tools. It will, however, require their use to comply with the academic integrity policy.

The core rule is straightforward. Any AI-generated text, image, or graph included in student work must be credited in the body of the text and referenced in the bibliography, exactly as a direct quotation from a book would be. The IB's AI in learning and assessment page confirms the Academic Integrity policy has been updated with a dedicated appendix, "Guidance on the use of artificial intelligence tools", on page 53 of the published PDF.

The IB is explicit that it does not regard work produced even only in part by AI tools as the student's own work. The practical consequence is less obvious than it first appears: an essay composed predominantly of AI-generated content will score poorly not because an examiner has flagged it as misconduct, but because IB mark schemes reward the student's own analysis. As the IB's statement puts it, an essay full of quotes earns few, if any, marks under those schemes. AI content is treated identically. A student who pastes in polished AI prose may produce something that reads well and still fails on assessment criteria.

3. Which components are checked - EE, IA, TOK, and CAS

The IB academic integrity policy applies to all submitted work, and that means every major component is in scope.

The non-obvious point: the EE and IA are most exposed precisely because of the draft process, not despite it.

4. What happens if AI misuse is flagged

If a concern is raised, the school investigates first. In practice, this means a student is typically asked to explain their work, walk through their reasoning, or account for sections that look inconsistent with their known ability. This viva-style conversation is where most cases are resolved, one way or another.

Confirmed cases are referred to the IB as malpractice. The IB academic integrity policy makes clear that work produced even partially by an AI tool is not considered the student's own, so the threshold for a referral is lower than some students assume.

Consequences can include score cancellation in the affected component or, in serious cases, broader penalties across the diploma. One non-obvious point: malpractice identified after a submission has already been marked can still be acted on. Submitting and waiting is not a safe strategy.

5. How to protect yourself: drafts, citations, and supervisor meetings

Dated version history is your strongest defence. Save a new named file every time you make substantial edits to your Extended Essay or IA, and keep those files. A folder showing "EEdraft103Oct.docx" through to "EEfinal12Jan.docx" is hard evidence of a writing process that AI generation cannot easily replicate.

When it comes to citation, the IB is explicit: any AI tool used in preparation must be credited in the body of the text and referenced in the bibliography, exactly as you would cite a journal article. Failing to do this is where preparation tips over into misuse.

Supervisor meetings matter for a less obvious reason: they create a contemporaneous record of your thinking that exists outside your submitted document. If your work is flagged, a supervisor who recalls discussing your argument structure in October is useful corroboration.

Acceptable uses (check your school's guidelines agree and disclose each one):

Off-limits regardless of disclosure: submitting arguments, analysis, or paragraphs generated by an AI tool as your own. The IB does not consider any work produced even partly by such tools to be the student's own work.

6. What to do this week

The most useful thing you can do right now costs ten minutes. Go to the IB's AI in education page and download the Academic Integrity policy PDF, then turn to page 53, where the AI appendix sits. Read it once with your current assessment in front of you.

One non-obvious gotcha: your school's internal AI rules may be stricter than the IB baseline, and it is the school's version that your coordinator will apply first. The IB sets a floor, not a ceiling.

Download the policy this week. Then email your IB coordinator and ask directly whether your school has a supplementary AI guidance document in place.

FAQ

Does the IB check for AI?

The IB does not run a central AI detector; schools are responsible for checking work authenticity using tools like Turnitin and teacher judgement, in line with the IB academic integrity policy.

Does the IB check for AI in the Extended Essay?

Yes - the Extended Essay is subject to the IB academic integrity policy, and supervisors who review multiple drafts are well-placed to notice writing that does not match a student's established voice or development.

Does the IB check for AI in Internal Assessments?

Internal Assessments fall under the same academic integrity policy; teachers who have supervised a student's work can flag inconsistencies, and schools may use detection software as an additional check.

Does the IB check for AI in CAS reflections?

CAS reflections are managed at school level, so checks depend on the school's own approach, but the IB's academic integrity rules still apply and presenting AI-generated reflections as your own would be misconduct.

Does the IB check for AI in the TOK essay?

The TOK essay is assessed externally and is covered by the academic integrity policy; schools submit work they have authenticated, and any AI-generated content must be cited or it constitutes misconduct.

What does the IB do if AI misuse is found?

The school investigates first; confirmed cases are referred to the IB as malpractice, with consequences ranging from score cancellation in the affected component to broader penalties in serious cases.

References