IB Global Politics HL study plan
IB Global Politics HL · Give each week a clear focus.
8 weeks · About 6 hours per week
Power, sovereignty and international relations
Define and distinguish the four core concepts of power, sovereignty, legitimacy and interdependence, and write one-paragraph definitions in your own words
Map the levels of analysis (individual, state, international, global) onto two contrasting real-world cases you choose yourself
Explain how realism, liberalism and constructivism each account for state behaviour under anarchy
Build a one-page glossary of 15 key terms from Domain 1 with a concrete example for each
Your checkpoint
A 600-word concept map plus 15-term glossary covering power, sovereignty and international relations, with each theory applied to at least one self-chosen case
Power, sovereignty and international relations
Analyse how sovereignty is contested in practice, using cases such as secession, intervention, pooled sovereignty in regional organisations, and contested territory
Evaluate the roles of the UN, NATO, the WTO and regional bodies in shaping state behaviour
Compare hard, soft and smart power and apply each to a specific state's foreign policy
Practise writing a thesis statement that takes a clear position on whether sovereignty is eroding
Your checkpoint
One 700-word essay plan with a defensible thesis, three evidence-backed arguments and a counter-argument on whether state sovereignty is being eroded
Power, sovereignty and international relations & Peace and conflict
Distinguish the causes, types and dynamics of conflict: interstate, intrastate, asymmetric and 'new wars'
Explain how the security dilemma, alliances and deterrence can both prevent and escalate conflict
Identify the main instruments of peace and conflict resolution, including mediation, peacekeeping, peacebuilding and sanctions
Apply one conflict case study of your choice to at least three theoretical frameworks
Your checkpoint
A comparative case table covering two conflicts, listing actors, causes, interventions and outcomes, plus a 400-word analytical commentary
Power, sovereignty and international relations & Peace and conflict
Evaluate the effectiveness and limits of UN peacekeeping and collective security with reference to at least two operations
Assess how just war thinking and international humanitarian law constrain the conduct of war
Analyse the role of non-state armed groups and how they challenge state-centric models of conflict
Draft and time a full essay under exam conditions
Your checkpoint
A timed 60-minute practice essay on peace and conflict, self-marked against a criterion checklist with three specific improvement targets
Human rights
Trace the development of the international human rights regime from the UDHR to the core treaties and monitoring bodies
Distinguish civil and political rights from economic, social and cultural rights, and explain the debates between them
Analyse tensions between human rights norms and state sovereignty, including non-interference and cultural relativism critiques
Evaluate the effectiveness of mechanisms such as treaty bodies, the Human Rights Council and international courts
Your checkpoint
A 500-word evaluation of whether international human rights mechanisms meaningfully constrain states, supported by at least three specific institutional examples
Development
Compare competing measures and meanings of development, including GDP, HDI, Gini and multidimensional poverty indices
Explain how colonialism, dependency and global trade rules shape development outcomes
Evaluate the roles of the World Bank, IMF, WTO, NGOs and emerging donors in development
Assess how at least two Sustainable Development Goals interact and where progress has stalled
Your checkpoint
A 500-word briefing note comparing two countries' development trajectories using at least three different development indicators
Political engagement and the engagement project (HL internal assessment) & Human rights
Define your engagement project question and justify its link to a course concept such as power, legitimacy or human rights
Select a method of political engagement, such as advocacy, campaigning, consultation or direct action, and justify the choice
Draft the written report structure, including rationale, evidence, reflection and evaluation of the engagement
Rehearse the oral presentation and prepare responses to likely examiner questions
Your checkpoint
A complete engagement project report draft with a rationale section, an evidence section and a reflection section, plus a rehearsed 10-minute presentation outline
Political engagement and the engagement project (HL internal assessment) & Power, sovereignty and international relations & Peace and conflict
Revise and finalise the engagement project report and presentation materials
Synthesise the four examined domains into a single revision sheet of core concepts and case studies
Complete two timed mixed-domain practice essays and mark them against assessment criteria
Identify and patch the three weakest areas revealed by practice marking
Your checkpoint
A finalised engagement project submission and two self-marked timed essays with a written remediation plan for the identified weak areas
Milestones
Week 2: You can explain, in writing and without notes, how sovereignty and power interact in at least two contrasting cases, and you can state a defensible thesis on whether sovereignty is eroding
Week 4: You have completed one timed essay on peace and conflict, self-marked it, and listed three concrete improvement targets; you can also compare two conflicts using at least three theoretical frameworks
Week 6: You can compare at least three development indicators and evaluate at least three international institutions' development roles, and you can explain two tensions between human rights and sovereignty
Week 7: Your engagement project draft is complete with rationale, evidence and reflection sections, and you have rehearsed the oral presentation at least once
Week 8: The engagement project is finalised and submitted, and two mixed-domain timed essays have been self-marked with a written remediation plan