IB Maths Command Terms and Mark Schemes: What Do They Actually Mean?

Command terms are the exact verbs examiners use to signal how much justification a question needs — "write down" wants no working, "show that" wants a full algebraic proof. Marks come from M (method), A (accuracy) and R (reasoning) codes on the mark scheme, not simply from reaching the right final answer.

"Write down" means no working is required — quote your GDC result directly. "Find" expects a clear method shown, even briefly. "Hence" forces you to use the result from the previous part; using a different, unconnected method can score zero even if your final answer happens to be correct.

"Hence or otherwise" gives you a genuine choice: use the previous part's result, or solve the question from scratch with any valid method. Unlike plain "hence", examiners award full marks here for a correct alternative approach, provided it's mathematically sound and properly justified throughout.

Paper 3 is the HL-only problem-solving paper — one hour, 25 marks, first examined under the current AA/AI guides in 2021. It leans on higher-order command terms like "conjecture", "justify" and "prove", so marks reward sustained reasoning across one extended context rather than several short, separate calculations.

M marks reward a valid method, even with a later arithmetic slip. A marks reward accurate values that follow correctly from that method. R marks reward mathematical reasoning or justification with no calculation involved — you'll often see a mark scheme coded "M1A1" for a two-step working or "R1" for a written justification.

Yes. If your working shows a correct, recognisable method for the question asked, you'll get the M mark even if a later arithmetic slip makes your final answer wrong. Accuracy marks are awarded separately, so one small error rarely costs you every mark on a question.

You'll usually score badly even with a correct final number. Mark schemes are method-driven: an approach that skips the specific reasoning a question demands earns few or no marks, because the M and A marks are tied to demonstrating that particular method, not to the number you land on.

It depends on the command term. For "write down" or straightforward GDC questions, no working is needed — mark schemes use an N-code to award full marks for a correct answer alone. For "find", "show that" or "hence", missing working typically costs every method mark, often half the marks on that part.

Usually because the command term demanded justification you didn't give. "Show that" needs every algebraic step written out, not just confirmation the stated result is true. Examiners can't award reasoning marks for a right answer that appears without the specific working the question asked for.

Enough that an examiner can follow your method line by line without guessing. If a mark scheme allocates three M marks to a question, you need three visible, distinct steps — one clear line of working per mark, not a single leap from the question straight to your final answer.

An accuracy mark (A) needs your specific numerical value to be correct given your method. A follow-through (FT) mark rewards a correct calculation based on an earlier wrong answer, so one slip in part (a) doesn't sink parts (b) and (c) as long as your later method stays consistent.

No — both courses share the same command-term glossary and the same M/A/R mark-scheme structure, set out in the Mathematics: analysis and approaches and Mathematics: applications and interpretation guides. What differs is content emphasis and calculator use, not how marks are awarded or what a term like "show that" requires.

Yes — SL and HL draw on the identical command-term glossary and marking codes (M, A, R, AG, FT, N). The difference is depth and frequency: HL papers use higher-order terms like "prove" and "justify" more often, and Paper 3's extended reasoning exists only at HL, not SL.

Past papers and their official mark schemes are the gold standard, but by the time you're using them they're often several exam sessions old. On RevisionPrep, topical worksheets pair fresh questions with mark-scheme-style solutions annotated by command term, so you can see exactly which M, A or R mark each line of working earns.

Practise reading command terms before you practise the maths itself. Cover the working on a past paper, predict how many marks each command term implies, then check your prediction against the actual mark scheme. Do this consistently for a few weeks and you'll stop losing easy, avoidable method marks.