Mathematics Analysis and Approaches (AA) IA Exemplar: Comparing the… | RevisionDojo
Loading document preview...
IB Mathematics Analysis and Approaches (AA) HL Internal Assessment Example
Comparing the Rule of 72 with Taylor Series Approximations
for Doubling Time Across Varying Interest RatesHL
Loading scores...
7
Official IB Result
IB Grade: 7
Criteria A: Presentation
4/4
0
2
4
Criteria StrandsPro
A.1Coherence and logical development
Good
A.2Organization and structure
Excellent
A.3Conciseness and relevance
Moderate
Criteria Feedback
Your exploration is very clearly structured, with a strong introduction, logically ordered sections, and a conclusion that is easy to follow.
Your visuals, numbering, and appendices make the document professionally presented and help the reader navigate the work.
Most of the content stays focused on the central question and the main mathematical development is easy to track.
Some sections are longer than necessary and repeat general explanation more than they need to.
A few tangential elements reduce conciseness and do not add much mathematical value.
Some conclusions would be stronger if they stayed more tightly within the tested interval and evidence.
Criteria B: Mathematical Communication
3/4
0
2
4
Criteria StrandsPro
B.1Mathematical language and notation
Good
B.2Multiple representations
Good
B.3Logical structure and clarity
Good
Criteria Feedback
You use mathematical notation, terminology, and function language appropriately for most of the exploration.
You include several different representations, such as algebraic derivations, graphs, tables, and error comparisons, which helps communicate the mathematics effectively.
Your explanation is usually logically sequenced, so the reader can follow how each calculation leads to the next stage.
There are a few notation and sign inconsistencies that weaken precision.
Some graphs and tables could be labelled more clearly so the meaning of each value is immediately unambiguous.
At times the explanation becomes verbose, which slightly reduces clarity.
Criteria C: Personal Engagement
2/3
0
2
3
Criteria StrandsPro
C.1Independent thinking
Good
C.2Personal approach
Good
C.3Creativity and initiative
Good
Criteria Feedback
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Criteria D: Reflection
2/3
0
2
3
Criteria StrandsPro
D.1Depth of reflection
Good
D.2Critical analysis
Good
D.3Evaluation of outcomes
Good
Criteria Feedback
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Criteria F: Use of Mathematics (HL)
6/6
0
3
6
Criteria StrandsPro
F.1Relevance and level
Excellent
F.2Accuracy and correctness
Poor
F.3Knowledge and understanding
Good
Criteria Feedback
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.
Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.