Teaching IB and A level since 2005

MATH IA – FINAL IA PRE SUBMISSION FEEDBACK

MATH IA FEEDBACK- HOW TO SCORE BETTER- CRITERIA WISE ANALYSIS
TH
MATH HL DATE: 09 MARCH 2018

TOPIC: To what extent a logarithmic model more accurate than Linear function modeling?

NO OF PAGES SUBMITTED: 16 criteria-wise feedback

1. Criteria – A
There is No Research Question required for Math IA. It does not suit the Exploration

2. Criteria – A
The content of Rationale is inappropriate. Rationale should always describe why this model and not the
linear model precisely. Going to history of Economics in Rationale deviates from the purpose

3. Criteria – A
TOC not required. Dragged the page with too many starters –
TOC / Aim/Rationale / Introduction

4. Criteria – A
TOC not required. Dragged the page with too many starters –
TOC / Aim/Rationale / Introduction

5. Criteria – B
Page 4 diagram graph 1 is very ineffective – No image citation done
pasted graphs do not give marks. Use of GDC or Desmos tool shows the evidence of thinking and use of
technology
For eg :

Technology: Casio fx cg 50

HOW TO SCORE BETTER IN MATH IA PROF IYER ibwithiyer@gmail.com Page 1

 6. Criteria – E
Very poor sophistication of Math. No key terms explained
C(Y) = (MPC Y) +a
Inadequate background provided to explain MPC Observed data – show the lab evidence to improve .Very
elementary Math on the example and Non-cohesive explanation on page 4. Not acceptable for a Math
student

7. Criteria – E
Marginal Propensity – Suddenly emerging with no math background. Describing more of Economic theory
with some elementary Math. Seriously the content is crying for some serious Math iterations. Being a HL
exploration, needs to take a serious look at complexity and depth of Math. Again the MPC examples are
very arithmetical and elementary. No evidence of use of Math from the level of math attained in Higher
Level Math program

8. Criteria – A
– No idea on introducing this symbol- “Inconsistent use of symbols”

9. Criteria – B
Table source not cited properly

10. Criteria – A
2 2
In Table 2, the last two column labels are wrong. Correction: x and y

11. Criteria – E
Modeling linear functions shows very poor about the depth of Math for a HL level Math
Data points are hardly seen on graph 2 pages 8.

12. Criteria –B
Graph 3 and 4 – Axis not mentioned. Graph shows negative on x variable which is not possible in the
context

13. Criteria – E
Use of chi square distribution is very normal for HL student. Lacks research based on inferring from Chi
square. Needs more sophistication and depth

14. Criteria – D
No proper analysis shown in Linear and logarithmic modeling. Jumped to Chi square abruptly
No inference drawn properly

15. Criteria –E
The penultimate paragraph on Page 11 – has nothing to do with relevant Math considering the context of
the exploration. This explanation is a general commercial math and not enough complex.

16. Criteria – D
Conculsion was too theoretical. There were no limitations and mathematical constraints discussed.
Conclusion should have a strong mathematical interpretation

HOW TO SCORE BETTER IN MATH IA PROF IYER ibwithiyer@gmail.com Page 2

 17. Criteria – C
The topic selection comes with a risk on getting full score on criteria C- Personal Engagement
The only criteria where we can score full 3 out of 3
The student has made no attempt to show evidences of his research
As sourcing data from Web is not counted as personal engagement the candidate has to look at the
following methods
 Survey ( with evidence)
 Reading books from a public library ( Attaching a note from Librarian in annexure)
 Visiting a research institute for data collection and discussion – backed up by a recommendation
note from the Research fellow to support as evidence of his interest to understand the subject

Overall

 No key terms and definitions explained

 Lacks sophistication and depth
 Moderate use of mathematics
 A strong use of Calculus is missing- an opportunity missed
 No Personal engagement evidence creation docs ( in the annexure )
 Needs to reduce the page count to 12 pages from the current 16 pages.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Evaluation

 Criteria A - 2/4
 Criteria B – 2/3
 Criteria C- 1/ 4
 Criteria D- 2/3
 Criteria E – 3/6

___________________________________________________________________________________________

My recommended score: 10
Grade estimated 5

Teacher: Prof.iyer ibwithiyer@gmail.com 09th March 2018

Author IB Math Higher Level text Book
Consultant /Expert teacher – Core, Options, IA and EE- IB Math

HOW TO SCORE BETTER IN MATH IA PROF IYER ibwithiyer@gmail.com Page 3