Math: Analysis & Approaches Internal Assessment: what criteria are configured?
The table below is the 5-criterion, 20-mark model currently configured in iBacalao. Treat it as a reference until the subject-specific evidence pack has been reviewed.
| Criterion | Name | Marks |
|---|---|---|
| Presentation | Presentation | 4 |
| Mathematical Communication | Mathematical Communication | 4 |
| Personal Engagement | Personal Engagement | 3 |
| Reflection | Reflection | 3 |
| Use of Mathematics | Use of Mathematics | 6 |
| Total | 20 | |
How do Math: Analysis & Approaches IA criteria work?
Each criterion describes a different part of the assessment, and its mark-band descriptors explain what evidence and reasoning earn credit.
Presentation
Presentation
What this criterion assesses
The exploration is coherent, well organized, concise and complete. A coherent exploration is logically developed, easy to follow and links to its aim. A concise exploration does not include irrelevant material.
Mark band descriptors
Criterion A: Presentation (0–4): - 0: The exploration does not reach the standard described by the descriptors below. - 1: The exploration has some coherence or some organization. - 2: The exploration has some coherence and shows some organization. - 3: The exploration is coherent and well organized. - 4: The exploration is coherent, well organized, concise and complete. Note: "Coherent" = logically developed and easy to follow. "Well organized" = has an introduction, body and conclusion, with the aim included. "Concise" = focused, no irrelevant material. "Complete" = all stages are fully explained.
Common mistakes
- Exploration rambles or includes irrelevant material
- No clear introduction, body and conclusion
- Aim not stated or not linked to the work
- Steps left unexplained or hard to follow
Mathematical Communication
Mathematical Communication
What this criterion assesses
Relevant, appropriate and consistent mathematical communication: correct notation, symbols and terminology; key terms defined; appropriate use of multiple forms of representation (formulae, diagrams, tables, charts, graphs, models).
Mark band descriptors
Criterion B: Mathematical communication (0–4): - 0: The exploration does not reach the standard described by the descriptors below. - 1: There is some relevant mathematical communication which is partially appropriate. - 2: The mathematical communication is relevant, appropriate and is mostly consistent. - 3: The mathematical communication is relevant, appropriate and consistent throughout. - 4: The mathematical communication is relevant, appropriate and consistent throughout. Furthermore, the mathematical communication is effective. Note: "Appropriate" communication = defining key terms where required; using appropriate notation, symbols and terminology; using multiple forms of mathematical representation (formulae, diagrams, tables, charts, graphs and models) where relevant. "Effective" = aids the reader's understanding and the variables/parameters are clear.
Common mistakes
- Inconsistent or incorrect notation and symbols
- Key terms or variables left undefined
- Over-reliance on a single form of representation
- Calculator or command notation instead of proper math
Personal Engagement
Personal Engagement
What this criterion assesses
Evidence of the student engaging with the exploration and making it their own: thinking independently or creatively, presenting ideas in their own way, exploring the topic from a personal perspective, asking and addressing their own questions.
Mark band descriptors
Criterion C: Personal engagement (0–3): - 0: The exploration does not reach the standard described by the descriptors below. - 1: There is evidence of some personal engagement. - 2: There is evidence of significant personal engagement. - 3: There is evidence of outstanding personal engagement. Note: Personal engagement may be recognised in: thinking independently and/or creatively; addressing personal interest; presenting mathematical ideas in their own way. It is not the same as effort or enthusiasm stated explicitly.
Common mistakes
- Topic feels generic or copied from a textbook
- No independent or creative thinking shown
- Ideas not presented in the student's own way
- Confusing effort or enthusiasm with engagement
Reflection
Reflection
What this criterion assesses
Critical reflection on the mathematics and the process: reviewing, analysing and evaluating; considering the significance of results; discussing limitations and/or extensions; linking reflections back to the aim of the exploration.
Mark band descriptors
Criterion D: Reflection (0–3): - 0: The exploration does not reach the standard described by the descriptors below. - 1: There is evidence of limited reflection. - 2: There is evidence of meaningful reflection. - 3: There is substantial evidence of critical reflection. Note: Reflection is "meaningful" if it links to the aim, develops the exploration, or considers limitations/extensions. "Critical" reflection drives the exploration forward, discusses implications of results, and evaluates the approach.
Common mistakes
- Reflection is superficial or just descriptive
- No discussion of limitations or extensions
- Results stated but their significance not considered
- Reflection not linked back to the aim
Use of Mathematics
Use of Mathematics
What this criterion assesses
Relevant mathematics commensurate with the level of the SL course, explored correctly, demonstrating thorough knowledge and understanding. Mathematics below the level of the course caps this criterion at 2 marks.
Mark band descriptors
Criterion E: Use of mathematics — SL (0–6): - 0: The exploration does not reach the standard described by the descriptors below. - 1: Some relevant mathematics is used. - 2: Some relevant mathematics is used. Limited understanding is demonstrated. - 3: Relevant mathematics commensurate with the level of the course is used. Limited understanding is demonstrated. - 4: Relevant mathematics commensurate with the level of the course is used. The mathematics explored is partially correct. Some knowledge and understanding are demonstrated. - 5: Relevant mathematics commensurate with the level of the course is used. The mathematics explored is mostly correct. Good knowledge and understanding are demonstrated. - 6: Relevant mathematics commensurate with the level of the course is used. The mathematics explored is correct. Thorough knowledge and understanding are demonstrated. Note: If the level of mathematics is NOT commensurate with the level of the course, a maximum of 2 marks can be awarded. The mathematics can be that listed in the syllabus, at a similar level, or beyond. It should not be wholly based on prior-learning mathematics.
Common mistakes
- Mathematics stays below the level of the course (caps at 2 marks)
- Errors in the mathematics or steps left unjustified
- Mostly prior-learning math rather than course-level
- Results stated without demonstrating understanding
Sources & verification
Primary-source references used to verify key assessment facts on this page. Last source check: September 22, 2026.
The exact subject guide for Math: Analysis & Approaches is the authority for the task, criteria and limits. Some IB subject guides do not have a stable public URL, so this page names the configured assessment session and links the official IB update hubs instead of fabricating a direct source link.
- IB - Diploma Programme assessment and examsOfficial overview of criterion-related assessment and internal assessment in the Diploma Programme.
- IB - current curriculum updatesOfficial update hub for subject and first-assessment changes. Use it to confirm that your exam session matches the criteria shown here.
Ready to review your Math: Analysis & Approaches Mathematics Exploration (IA)?
Use the dedicated review workflow to check your draft against the configured Math: Analysis & Approaches criteria for this assessment session.
Review Math: Analysis & Approaches draft →