How much is the IB Math IA worth?

The individual mathematical exploration contributes 20% of the final Mathematics grade at both SL and HL in the current course. The first-assessment-2029 update keeps a 20-mark exploration but changes the criteria, so percentage weighting and criteria version should be checked separately.

Is the IB Math IA 12–20 pages?

The current first-assessment-2021 guides recommend approximately 12–20 double-spaced pages including diagrams and graphs but excluding the bibliography. This is guidance rather than a target to fill; the guides explicitly prioritise the quality of mathematical writing over length. Follow the rules for the applicable session.

Are Math AA and Math AI IA criteria the same?

For the current course, AA and AI use the same five criterion categories. Criteria A–D are the same at SL and HL, while Criterion E has different SL and HL descriptors. The mathematics and context should still fit the student's registered route and level.

Does a Math IA need advanced university mathematics?

No. The current guide expects relevant mathematics commensurate with the course level and says mathematics beyond the syllabus is not required for the highest levels. A student must demonstrate understanding; unnecessary complexity can be less relevant than well-chosen mathematics used correctly and purposefully.

What are the new IB Math IA criteria for first assessment 2029?

The 2029 AA and AI updates list four shared SL/HL criteria: Problem specification (4), Abstraction (6), Computation (4) and Interpretation (6), totalling 20 marks. Students in earlier sessions should not replace the current five criteria with this future model.

IB Math IA Criteria: AA, AI & 2029 Changes

Q: What are the current IB Math IA criteria?

For Mathematics AA and AI assessment sessions before the redesigned first-assessment-2029 course, the five criteria are Presentation (4), Mathematical communication (4), Personal engagement (3), Reflection (3) and Use of mathematics (6), for 20 marks total. Confirm the student's session before using them.

Quick answer: First confirm the examination session. For Mathematics AA and AI sessions before first assessment 2029, the mathematical exploration is worth 20 marks across five criteria: Presentation (4), Mathematical communication (4), Personal engagement (3), Reflection (3) and Use of mathematics (6). The redesigned course first assessed in 2029 keeps a 20-mark exploration but replaces these with four different criteria.

Choose the criteria by assessment session

Feature	Current course, assessed before 2029	Redesigned course, first assessed 2029
Task	Individual mathematical exploration	Mathematical exploration
Total marks	20	20
Criteria	Five: A–E	Four: A–D
SL/HL distinction	Criterion E descriptors differ	Same criteria for SL and HL
AA/AI	Same criterion categories; course context differs	Both updates list the same four criteria

Do not combine descriptors from both models. A student assessed in 2027 or 2028 should not use the 2029 criteria simply because the newer page appears in a search result.

Current Math IA facts

For the current Mathematics: analysis and approaches and Mathematics: applications and interpretation courses:

the exploration is compulsory at SL and HL;
it contributes 20% of the final grade;
it is marked by the teacher and externally moderated by the IB;
the maximum is 20 marks;
approximately 10–15 hours of teaching time is recommended;
approximately 12–20 double-spaced pages are recommended, including diagrams and graphs but excluding the bibliography;
quality of mathematical writing matters more than length;
the teacher may give advice on one draft but must not edit it;
the final work must be the student's own and all sources must be acknowledged.

The page recommendation is not a reason to expand a concise investigation with repetitive calculations or screenshots.

Current five criteria before first assessment 2029

Criterion A: Presentation — 4 marks

This criterion concerns coherence, organisation and concision. The aim, mathematical development and conclusion should form one connected investigation. Relevant graphs, tables and diagrams belong near the discussion they support; unnecessary repetition works against concise presentation.

Do not treat presentation as decoration. A polished cover page cannot compensate for an investigation whose mathematical decisions are difficult to follow.

Criterion B: Mathematical communication — 4 marks

Use notation, symbols and terminology appropriately and consistently. Define variables where needed, label representations and communicate proofs or deductive reasoning logically when relevant.

Calculator or software output needs mathematical interpretation. A screenshot does not automatically show what was calculated, why the method was chosen or what the result means.

Criterion C: Personal engagement — 3 marks

Personal engagement is not a measure of effort, enthusiasm, hours worked or how emotional the introduction sounds. It is demonstrated in the exploration through independent or creative mathematical thinking, choices, predictions, testing and the student's own way of developing ideas.

A personal hobby can provide a context, but context alone does not earn the criterion. The mathematical decisions must move the exploration forward.

Criterion D: Reflection — 3 marks

Reflection reviews, analyses and evaluates the exploration. It can appear throughout rather than being saved for one final paragraph.

Useful reflection may:

connect a result back to the aim;
test whether an assumption was reasonable;
compare mathematical approaches;
discuss strengths, limitations or implications;
explain what should be refined or investigated next.

Simply restating the calculated result is not critical reflection.

Criterion E: Use of mathematics — 6 marks

Use mathematics that is relevant to the aim, appropriate for the course level and understood by the student. Correct output alone is not enough; reasoning or evidence must demonstrate understanding.

For SL, a high level can come from doing a small amount of relevant, course-level mathematics well. For HL, the descriptors place additional emphasis on sophistication and rigour at the highest levels, but the guide explicitly says mathematics beyond the syllabus is not required. Overly complicated mathematics is not relevant when a simpler method answers the aim more effectively.

AA, AI, SL and HL are not interchangeable labels

The task and criterion names are shared across current AA and AI, but the investigation should fit the student's course:

AA often foregrounds analytical reasoning, generalisation, structure, proof or abstract and applied mathematical relationships.
AI often foregrounds modelling, statistics, practical contexts, interpretation and appropriate technology.
SL and HL must demonstrate mathematics commensurate with the registered level; current Criterion E uses different descriptors for the two levels.

These are tendencies, not topic restrictions. Confirm the planned mathematics with the teacher rather than changing the route label on a generic template.

A criterion-led workflow

1. Specify a focused mathematical aim

State what will be investigated and what a useful result would show. Check that the project creates mathematical decisions, not merely data collection or a summary of known formulae.

2. Map the mathematics before collecting material

List the definitions, assumptions, techniques, representations, technology and validation steps needed. Remove any method that does not help answer the aim.

3. Keep the reasoning visible

Explain why a technique is suitable, show representative working and interpret outputs. If technology performs a process, show enough mathematical understanding for the reader to follow and evaluate it.

4. Reflect while the investigation develops

Record decisions caused by results: a model revised, an assumption challenged, a method compared or a limitation quantified. This is stronger than adding generic “more data would improve reliability” sentences at the end.

5. Audit all five criteria separately

One sophisticated calculation does not automatically satisfy presentation, communication, engagement or reflection. Use the exact descriptors for the applicable level and session, then identify evidence in the report for each criterion.

6. Complete an authorship and source check

The student must be able to explain every stage. Cite data, formulae, diagrams, code and ideas that are not original. If data are collected, follow the current guide's individual-data and group-measurement rules and the school's ethical requirements.

New criteria first assessed in 2029

The official AA and AI curriculum updates reorganise the 20 marks around a mathematical inquiry process:

Criterion	Marks	Published strands
A: Problem specification	4	Problem in context; desired outcomes
B: Abstraction	6	Assumptions; selected techniques and tools; mathematical form
C: Computation	4	Calculations; mathematical communication
D: Interpretation	6	Interpretation of results; evaluation of desired outcomes; refinement

The update also states that SL and HL use the same IA criteria. This future structure should be used only when it applies to the student's examination session and with the complete school-provided guidance.

Common mistakes to remove

Treating 12–20 pages as a hard target instead of an approximate recommendation.
Claiming personal engagement is worth 8 marks; it is 3 marks in the current five-criterion model.
Adding advanced mathematics the student cannot explain.
Pasting software output without mathematical communication or interpretation.
Writing all reflection after the conclusion instead of responding to findings during the exploration.
Using the new 2029 four-criterion table for a student assessed under the current five criteria.
Assuming a high IA mark guarantees a particular 1–7 subject grade.

Continue with the correct course

StudyIB is independent and is not affiliated with or endorsed by the International Baccalaureate Organization. The applicable official guide and teacher instructions control.