IB Maths: The Maths Exploration (IA) — FAQ

The Maths Exploration is the internal assessment for both IB Maths AA and AI, a written investigation into a mathematical topic you choose yourself. It counts for 20% of your final grade at SL and HL alike, and it's the only piece of DP Maths assessment where you set your own question.

Most marks disappear on Criterion E, Use of Mathematics — students pick an interesting topic then never go beyond GCSE-level algebra, so there's nothing sophisticated enough to reward. The second biggest loss is Criterion C, Personal Engagement, when the write-up reads like a textbook summary rather than a genuine investigation.

The IB doesn't enforce a strict page limit, but the official subject guide recommends around 12-20 pages including diagrams and appendices. Length isn't marked directly — a tight, mathematically rich 12-page exploration will always beat a rambling 20-page one padded with screenshots and repeated working.

The best topics connect a genuine interest to maths a level above what's taught in class — modelling a sport you play, analysing pricing in a family business, or extending a proof from a topic that caught your attention in class. Avoid subjects with one well-known "right answer", like the golden ratio in nature or the Fibonacci sequence; examiners have marked hundreds of those.

Markers use five criteria: A Presentation (4 marks), B Mathematical Communication (4), C Personal Engagement (3), D Reflection (3), and E Use of Mathematics (6) — 20 marks total. According to the IB's Mathematics guide, first assessed in 2021, this same mark scheme applies identically across AA and AI, at both SL and HL.

The criteria and mark scheme are identical across AA and AI — what differs is which maths is expected. AI explorations tend toward statistical modelling, technology-driven methods and real-world data; AA rewards explorations built on calculus, proof or more abstract pure maths.

Yes — a simple topic executed with genuine depth beats an ambitious topic you can't actually carry out. I've seen SL students score 18/20 exploring board-game probability using careful conditional probability, while HL students tackling "the maths of black holes" score 10/20 because the maths in the write-up is theirs in name only.

Start with something you already care about, then check it lets you use maths genuinely beyond your syllabus — a real question, not just "explain X". A topic that survives this test is one you can still narrow down after a week of research, not one that only sounds impressive as a title.

Criterion E rewards maths "commensurate with the level of the course" — for SL that usually means going one clear step beyond what's taught, for HL it means genuinely extending past the syllabus. Calculating a Pearson's correlation coefficient on its own won't score above 2 in E; deriving why it works or testing where it breaks down will.

Criterion C rewards evidence the maths is genuinely yours — asking your own follow-up questions, testing a model against data you collected, or explaining why a result surprised you. It's assessed across the whole piece, not in one paragraph, so scattering real reflection throughout scores higher than a single closing line.

Your school sets the internal deadline, but samples for IB moderation are typically due to the IB in spring of the final DP year, around March for a May exam session. Most schools set an earlier internal deadline, often late in Year 1 or early Year 2, to leave time for feedback and a redraft.

The Exploration is worth 20% of the final Maths grade at both SL and HL, in AA and AI alike — the same weighting as internal assessment across most DP Maths routes. That 20% is fixed by the IB and doesn't vary by school, making a strong Exploration one of the most reliable ways to lift a borderline grade.

You can help with structure, deadlines and proofreading for clarity, but the mathematics and analysis need to be your child's own work — Criterion C specifically rewards personal engagement, and an exploration that reads as too polished can trigger an academic honesty conversation with the school.