Individual Research-Based Essay (PT2) and EOC Exam: every key term you need (+ practice quiz)

More AP Seminar guides

• Evaluating Evidence, Sources, and Perspectives
• Argumentation and Line of Reasoning
• Team Project and Presentation (PT1)

Performance Task 2 (PT2)

The Individual Research-Based Essay and Presentation, worth 35% of the AP Seminar score. It is completed individually from the College Board stimulus materials released in early January.

Stimulus Materials

A packet of four to seven cross-disciplinary sources released annually by the College Board. Students must draw their own research question from a theme they identify across these sources.

Individual Written Argument (IWA)

A 2,000-word evidence-based argument responding to a student-generated research question inspired by the stimulus materials. It is worth 70% of the PT2 score.

Individual Multimedia Presentation (IMP)

A 6-to-8-minute individual presentation of the argument, supported by purposeful media. It is worth 20% of the PT2 score.

Oral Defense

Two teacher-posed questions answered after the IMP, worth 10% of PT2. Questions probe research process, reasoning, and how the student would extend the work.

Student-Generated Research Question

For PT2 the question must be the student's own, connected to a theme in the stimulus packet but not simply restating a source's topic.

Theme Identification

The first PT2 move: reading all stimulus sources to find a shared idea or tension, such as ownership, scarcity, memory, or risk, that can anchor an original inquiry.

Required Stimulus Citation

At least one stimulus source must be used in the IWA. Students then add outside scholarly sources they research independently.

Word Count Limit

The IWA has a 2,000-word maximum excluding the bibliography and footnotes; going substantially over signals poor selection and control of material.

IWA Row 1: Understand and Analyze

Scores how well the essay contextualizes the issue and identifies the student's own research question and its significance.

IWA Row 2: Understand and Analyze Argument

Scores the accuracy and depth of the student's interpretation, comparison, and evaluation of the perspectives in the sources used.

IWA Row 3: Evaluate Multiple Perspectives

Scores the identification and evaluation of at least two credible alternate or opposing perspectives, not just a token mention.

IWA Row 4: Commentary and Reasoning

Scores whether commentary connects each piece of evidence to the claim, so the line of reasoning is explicit rather than assumed.

IWA Row 5: Argumentation

Scores the overall thesis, organization, and conclusion, including whether the conclusion states implications or limitations.

IWA Row 6: Selection and Use of Evidence

Scores whether sources are relevant, credible, and sufficient, and whether the student explains why each source is trustworthy.

IWA Row 7: Conventions

Scores grammar, style, and consistent citation in a single documented style such as MLA, APA, or Chicago.

Implications and Limitations

A high-scoring PT2 conclusion states what follows from the argument for policy, practice, or further research, and what the argument cannot establish.

Annotated Bibliography

A working list of sources with short notes on credibility and usefulness. Not scored directly, but it is the standard scaffold teachers require before drafting the IWA.

Purposeful Media

IMP visuals must carry argumentative work, such as a data chart or a contrasting image, rather than decorate slides with stock photos and bullet lists.

IMP Design Rules

Text on slides should be minimal and readable; the speaker supplies the reasoning while media supplies evidence the audience can see quickly.

Defense Question Types

Typical prompts ask why a source was chosen, how the student handled conflicting evidence, or what the next step in the research would be.

End-of-Course Exam

A two-hour written exam worth 35% of the AP Seminar score, taken in May. It has two parts and is entirely free-response with no multiple choice.

Part A: Three Short-Answer Questions

Thirty minutes on one provided source. Students identify the author's argument, explain reasoning, and evaluate the evidence used.

Part A Question 1

Asks for the author's main argument or thesis, which must be stated in the student's own words rather than quoted wholesale.

Part A Question 2

Asks how the author develops the line of reasoning, requiring identification of claims and the evidence supporting them.

Part A Question 3

Asks the student to evaluate the effectiveness or validity of the evidence, naming a specific strength or weakness with justification.

Part B: Argumentative Essay

Ninety minutes to build an original evidence-based argument on a common theme using at least two of the four provided sources.

Part B Source Set

Four short cross-disciplinary sources sharing a theme. Students must synthesize them rather than summarize each in turn.

Part B Thesis Requirement

The essay needs a defensible thesis that takes a position on the theme, not a neutral report of what the sources say.

Part B Citation

In-exam citation can be brief, such as naming the author or source number, but every borrowed idea must still be attributed.

Exam Time Budget

A practical split for Part B is about 15 minutes reading and planning, 65 minutes drafting, and 10 minutes revising.

Score Weighting

AP Seminar's final score combines Performance Task 1 at 30%, Performance Task 2 at 35%, and the end-of-course exam at 35%.

Performance Task Deadline

Final PT1 and PT2 components must be submitted to the AP Digital Portfolio by the College Board deadline in late April; late work receives no score.

Digital Portfolio

The online system where students upload written components and where teachers score presentations and defenses.

Plagiarism Consequence

A performance task with uncited borrowed work receives a score of zero on that task, and the student cannot resubmit.

Falsified Evidence

Inventing data or misrepresenting a source is treated like plagiarism and results in a zero for the task.

Common PT2 Pitfall

Writing a research report that summarizes what sources say instead of advancing a thesis the student defends against opposing views.

Reflection on Process

Strong defense answers narrate specific revisions, such as narrowing a question after finding conflicting data, rather than saying the process went well.