Professional Documents
Culture Documents
HOW To SCORE BETTER in MATH IA-criteria Wise Analysis of Your Feedback
HOW To SCORE BETTER in MATH IA-criteria Wise Analysis of Your Feedback
HOW To SCORE BETTER in MATH IA-criteria Wise Analysis of Your Feedback
TOPIC: To what extent a logarithmic model more accurate than Linear function modeling?
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
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
Overall
__________________________________________________________________________________________
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