IB Maths IA After Feedback: How to Fix Your Exploration Before the Final Draft

The rule is short and it shapes everything that follows. The IB Mathematics: analysis and approaches guide says: "teachers should read and give advice to students on one draft of the work. The teacher should provide oral or written advice on how the work could be improved, but not edit the draft. The next version handed to the teacher must be the final version for submission."

Three consequences follow.

1. You get one round of feedback on a draft. There is no second draft check. Whatever you hand in next is the version your teacher marks and the IB may moderate. 2. Feedback will be general, not line edits. The guide adds that teachers "are responsible for indicating to students the existence of errors but should not explicitly correct these errors." A margin note saying "notation?" or "is this justified?" is all the written help you will get on that line.

3. You can still ask questions. The guide also says students should be encouraged to start discussions with the teacher and must not be penalised for seeking guidance. Use that: ask what a comment means, but do not expect the teacher to rewrite the paragraph.

Schools set their own dates for the topic, the draft and the final submission, as the guide asks them to. This article quotes the AA guide; if you take Applications and Interpretation, check the internal assessment section of your own guide, which your teacher can show you. For the overall shape of the exploration and topic ideas, see my guide to Maths IA topics and assessment criteria. This article starts where that one ends: you have the draft back, now what?

Before you change a single word, turn the comments into a list. Go through the draft and copy every comment, mark or question into a table with three columns: what the comment says, which criterion it affects, and what you will do. If a comment is unclear, write down your question for the teacher instead of guessing.

Then put the list in order of value. The exploration is marked out of 20, as the table shows.

Criterion E carries the most marks, but it is also the slowest to improve, because more or better mathematics takes time. Criteria A, B and D are about how you present and discuss work you have already done, so they often move fastest. In the AA HL sessions from May 2024 to May 2025 a 7 on the exploration needed 17 out of 20, so a draft sitting at 14 or 15 is usually two or three criterion levels away, not a complete rewrite. The full component boundaries for each session are on the Maths AA HL grade boundaries page.

Remember that the guide uses best-fit marking against level descriptors. Your teacher does not count errors; they judge which description fits the work best.

Work through the criteria in this order, because each one makes the next easier to judge.

A Presentation (4 marks).

The guide wants a coherent, well organised and concise exploration: an introduction with an aim, a body that develops it and a conclusion. Read only your introduction and conclusion. Does the conclusion answer the aim, in those words? Then check that relevant graphs and tables sit next to the text that uses them; the guide says they should not be pushed into appendices, which are for large data sets and extra material. Cut repeated calculations: show one in full and summarise the rest in a table.

B Mathematical communication (4 marks).

Define every variable the first time it appears. Label axes and give units. Replace calculator notation such as `x^2` or `2E-3` with proper notation; the guide accepts calculator or computer notation only when it is software generated, such as a screenshot. Level 4 needs communication that is relevant, appropriate and consistent throughout, so one section written in a different style can cost a mark.

C Personal engagement (3 marks).

Engagement is judged on your own thinking and choices, not on effort. Engagement shows when you think independently, make and test predictions or present ideas in your own way. If your draft explains a method you found online, add the moment where you made a choice: why this model, why this data, what you expected before you calculated. Textbook-style explorations, the guide says, are unlikely to reach the higher levels.

D Reflection (3 marks).

"Simply describing results represents limited reflection." After each main result, add a sentence or two answering: what does this tell me, does it make sense, what are its limits, what would I try next? The guide says critical reflection is likely to be present throughout to reach level 3, and if it only appears at the end it must be of high quality and show how it developed the exploration.

E Use of mathematics (6 marks).

If the teacher has flagged an error, find it and correct it, then check whether it affected later results. At HL the top levels ask for mathematics that shows sophistication and rigour, and level 6 also asks for it to be precise. The guide also notes that a correct answer alone does not demonstrate understanding, so show the reasoning behind each step. More mathematics is not automatically better: the guide says it is better to do a few things well.

Feedback weeks go wrong in predictable ways.

• Rewriting from scratch. A new topic after the draft deadline throws away the one round of feedback you were entitled to, and your teacher can check authenticity by comparing the final version with the draft. Improve the work you have.
• Making it longer. The guide suggests approximately 12 to 20 pages with double line spacing, including diagrams and graphs and excluding the bibliography, and stresses that quality matters, not length. If your draft is already near 20 pages, every addition should replace something.
• Fixing only the flagged lines. A comment on one graph usually applies to all of them. Treat each comment as a pattern and search the whole draft for it.
• Getting someone else to fix it. The work must be entirely your own, and you will confirm that it is. A tutor or parent can explain a concept or what a criterion means; they cannot correct your exploration for you.

Plan the time backwards from your school's final deadline: one session to build the comment list, then one session per criterion, then a final read-through for consistency. For the planning and structure of an IA in any subject, see my step-by-step guide to the IB internal assessment.

Criterion D rewards exactly the habit that exam questions test with an R1 mark: checking whether a model's answer makes sense. Try this original question in the style of a Paper 2 question.

Question

(calculator allowed) [9 marks]

A cup of tea is left to cool in a room. Its temperature, $T$ °C, $t$ minutes after it is poured is modelled by $T(t) = 20 + 60e^{-kt}$, where $k > 0$.

(a) Given that $T(5) = 50$, show that $k = \frac{\ln 2}{5}$. [3]

(b) Find the time at which the temperature of the tea reaches 30 °C. [3]

(c) After 60 minutes the temperature of the tea is measured as 22.0 °C. Use the model to find $T(60)$ and comment on the validity of the model. [3]

Markscheme

(a) $50 = 20 + 60e^{-5k}$ M1

$e^{-5k} = \frac{1}{2}$ A1

$-5k = \ln\frac{1}{2} = -\ln 2$, so $k = \frac{\ln 2}{5}$ A1 AG

(b) $20 + 60e^{-kt} = 30$, so $e^{-kt} = \frac{1}{6}$ M1

$t = \frac{\ln 6}{k} = \frac{5\ln 6}{\ln 2}$ A1

$t = 12.9$ minutes (12.9248...) A1

(c) $T(60) = 20 + 60e^{-12\ln 2} = 20.0$ °C (20.0146...) A1

The model predicts a temperature very close to 20 °C, which is lower than the measured 22.0 °C. R1

For example: the room temperature may be higher than 20 °C, or may have changed, so the constant 20 in the model is not accurate for large $t$. R1

Accept any reasonable comment that compares the prediction with the measurement and identifies a limitation of the model.

Why this matters for your IA.

Part (c) is a small version of meaningful reflection: compare, explain, identify a limitation. In your exploration, every model you fit deserves the same treatment.

For parents, the feedback stage is the moment when support helps most and when the rules matter most.

The IB expects the work to be entirely the student's own, and each student confirms that it is. Helping your child plan the time, find a quiet place to work and keep to the school's deadline is entirely appropriate. Reading the draft and rewriting sentences is not, and neither is paying someone to do it.

Useful questions to ask your child: "What did your teacher say, and which criteria do the comments affect?", "Which comment are you least sure about, and have you asked your teacher about it?" and "When is the final deadline, and what will you do each week until then?" If the answers are vague, the comment list described above is the best place to start.

My IB Maths and Physics IA timeline for parents explains each stage from topic to submission and where outside help is and is not appropriate.