~

~ -...

Mathematics: applications and

interpretation SL
Timezone 2
To protect the integrity of the assessments, increasing use is being made of examination variants. By using variants of the
same examination, students in one part of the world will not always be responding to the same examination content as
students in other parts of the world. A rigorous process is applied to ensure that the content across all variants is
comparable in terms of difficulty and syllabus coverage. In addition, measures are taken during the standardization and
grade awarding processes to ensure that the final grade awarded to students is comparable.

International Baccalaureate"
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
Baccalaureat lnterrliltlonilll International Baccalaureate® | Baccalauréat International® | Bachillerato Internacional®
Bach1llerato lnternacion•I
November 2023 subject report Mathematics: applications and interpretation SL TZ2

Contents

Grade boundaries 3
Standard level internal assessment 4
Standard level paper one 8
Standard level paper two 11

Page 2 / 14
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
November 2023 subject report Mathematics: applications and interpretation SL TZ2

Grade boundaries
Standard level overall
Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0 11 12 20 21 33 34 47 48 63 64 77 78 100

Standard level internal assessment

Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0 2 3 5 6 8 9 11 12 14 15 17 18 20

Standard level paper one

Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0 9 10 15 16 25 26 35 36 48 49 59 60 80

Standard level paper two

Grade: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Mark range: 0 10 11 16 17 26 27 38 39 51 52 61 62 80

Page 3 / 14
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
November 2023 subject report Mathematics: applications and interpretation SL TZ2

Standard level internal assessment

The range and suitability of the work submitted
A variety of topics were seen this session, but many of the explorations were still focused on statistics or
modelling. The statistics-based explorations mostly used correlation, 𝜒 2 tests and/or two sample t-tests.
The most common modelling explorations centered around modelling functions to fit data using
exponential, quadratic, and polynomial functions. Other topics included probability, Voronoi diagrams,
calculus (volumes of revolution) and some trigonometry modelling. There were less explorations seen
where students attempted mathematics outside/above the SL syllabus.

mathematical reasoning when choosing the processes to apply.

Top scoring statistical explorations demonstrated evidence that the students considered the type of data
collected, the source and validity of the data, the sampling process, the most appropriate processes to
apply in the context of the aim, and the assumptions of the statistical processes intended for use. Students
should be reminded to consider the assumptions required for the statistical tests/processes they intend
to use as well as whether these tests/processes are applicable to the context and aim. In less successful
explorations students seemed to select and apply as many statistical processes as possible without any
justification or consideration of the context and aim. It is important that students be made aware that
correlation does not imply causation/impact/effect and thus should not conclude with statements such

causality.
In modelling-based explorations the stronger students considered the type of data and the properties of
the phenomenon to be modelled in context of the properties of the proposed model functions, giving
sound justification for the choice of model.
There was evidence in this session that students from some schools were working to a template which
limited the scope for personal engagement as well as reflection.

Student performance against each criterion

Criterion A
This criterion showed an overall improvement where most explorations stated a clear aim, included only
processes relevant to the aim, placed large raw data tables in the appendix, clearly introduced new
processes, provided explanations and/or discussions for calculations and placed graphs where
appropriate and required. Students who achieved the higher levels in this criterion are those that had a
clear aim at the start, stayed focussed on the aim throughout the exploration and achieved the aim.
Few students managed to provide a concise exploration. Issues which can prevent an exploration from
being concise would be providing a lengthy introduction which includes unnecessary background
information, overly detailed descriptions and explanations of mathematics from the syllabus, showing
very basic calculations such as finding the mean, quartiles, IQR and/or repeated calculations. If the same
mathematics process is to be repeated than one example calculation in the body of the exploration
accompanied by a concise table of results for the rest would be sufficient.

Page 4 / 14
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
November 2023 subject report Mathematics: applications and interpretation SL TZ2

Students who choose topics outside the syllabus, on the other hand, should ensure that these are
explained in sufficient detail for a peer who is familiar with only the Applications and Interpretation SL
syllabus to understand. This does not however imply that the student should blindly reproduce
information from a textbook or any other source.

These are not required and often affected conciseness as well as coherence. The processes and methods
used should be explained as the exploration develops. However, there is nothing wrong with having a
personal plan, but this should not be included in the final exploration.
Students should ensure that processes used are relevant to the stated aim. For example, if the aim is
correlation only then applying any one of the 𝜒 2 tests and/or two sample t-tests would be irrelevant to
the aim and affect the overall coherence. Also, if the student mentions mathematics processes in the
introduction but does not complete these in the body of the work then this would affect the coherence as
well as the organization.

Criterion B
A marked improvement was noticed in this criterion. Graph axes were labelled and have appropriate scales
in context, variables were defined, the relevance and implication of chosen levels of accuracy explained,
the correct symbol for 𝜒 was used, statistical tests were set out using the prescribed format, calculator
notation was avoided, and an equation editor used.
However, students should be aware that some equation editors allow equations to run over two lines or
automatically change words to italic script. This should be checked and corrected.
Some persistent issues which affect the awarding of higher levels here are the inconsistent use of: upper-
and lower-case letters for the same variables; levels of accuracy; italics; function notation (𝑓(𝑥)) used
interchangeably with 𝑦.
When a student uses diagrams from the internet, the source must be cited and should not include
variables and values not referenced to be considered as relevant and appropriate.
Students should also take care when providing graphs that the domain and range seen are appropriate
for the context.
There is no need to provide calculator and/or spreadsheet instructions. Screenshots of the graphic display
calculator (GDC) are mostly inappropriate as these would include values and results not required and
would also be superfluous if the student then proceeded to write the results in the body of the exploration.

Criterion C
This criterion primarily assesses how engaged the student is in the mathematics of the exploration rather
than how interested the student is in the topic of the exploration. Of course, it is helpful if the student is
genuinely interested and has a personal reason for being so.
Students who were awarded higher levels here used this interest to design appropriate experiments
and/or surveys that yielded relevant data or measurements. These students justified the design of the
questions as well as the relevant sampling process in context of the aim. This was followed by appropriate
and creative mathematical analysis. Less successful students in this instance followed the primary data
gathering with basic mathematical processes which showed little to no originality.
It was noted that more students were able to show significant engagement by exploring different, relevant
perspectives and approaches to achieve the aim. Successful students who completed modelling-based

Page 5 / 14
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
November 2023 subject report Mathematics: applications and interpretation SL TZ2

explorations acknowledged the limitations of their techniques, introduced refinements as well as

researched and found other relevant functions applicable to the context of the aim. Less successful
students mechanically selected different functions with no consideration of the phenomenon being
modelled, showing little to no evidence of personal engagement or creative use of mathematics.

Criterion D
Students still tend to briefly reflect on the obvious such as describing the data, data collection, the results
obtained, the validity of the secondary data source or the reason for the choice of data range.

initial sampling process or stating that rounding will affect the accuracy without explaining why this is the
case would be seen as limited reflection.
In statistics-based explorations, students should reflect on the validity and appropriateness of processes
used in context of their exploration and the nature of the collected data.
When evaluating models in a modelling-based exploration a student could for example reflect on how
mathematically appropriate the chosen model would be for the phenomenon, what the appropriate
domain and range would be and why.
Once again it should be emphasized that reflection should be seen throughout and be used to guide the
progress of the exploration rather than just a paragraph at the end listing generic limitations and further
research/extensions. Students should be guided to reflect on the results of each section before moving
onto the next.

Criterion E
Students must clearly demonstrate understanding of the mathematics used to achieve E3 and above in
this criterion.
In statistics-based explorations this is done by looking at the assumptions of the intended processes,
offering sound mathematical reasoning to show how their collected data and the context of the problem
satisfies these assumptions and finally interpreting the results in context. For example, when using linear
regression, the student should interpret the parameters as well as provide appropriate domain and range
restrictions for its application.
It is important to note that obtaining the correct answer to a mathematical process does not necessarily
demonstrate understanding. Understanding is shown through ensuring the relevance of the mathematics
used to achieve the aim as well as the explanations and interpretation of the results and processes used.
The modelling-based explorations showed improvement as there was evidence to suggest that students
have been made aware of the modelling process as stated in section 2.6 of the Mathematics Applications
and Interpretation subject guide. However, there were still instances where the students overlooked the
data trends, merely stated a list of possible functions and using a guess and check process together with
the coefficient of determination to choose a model, often using polynomial functions of very high degrees
with little to no evidence of understanding.

Recommendations and guidance for the teaching of future students

Page 6 / 14
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
November 2023 subject report Mathematics: applications and interpretation SL TZ2

correlation as well as the meaning and application of the coefficient of determination. Generally, students
need guidance in choosing an appropriate statistical process for their exploration.
Although there was improvement seen in the modelling-based explorations there were still too many
explorations where it appeared that the students were unaware of the appropriate process and cycle as
stated in section 2.6 of the Mathematics Applications and Interpretation subject guide. Teachers should
make the time to ensure that students are aware of this and know how to structure a modelling
exploration.
Students would benefit from seeing and grading sample explorations available in the Teacher Support
Material and attempting mini-IAs throughout the course.
Additionally, teachers are also encouraged to guide students on how to comment on the validity of the
mathematical processes and data as well as how to reflect meaningfully on the results through use of the
example explorations available in the teacher support material.
Students should be guided to craft a clear, focused and achievable aim, avoiding where possible the
generic statistical explorations where students intend to find the correlation between two variables or
stating that they want to explore the effect/impact one variable would have on another.

Further comments
As stated in all previous reports, it is very important that teachers mark and annotate the submitted
explorations. Errors should be indicated, and comments should be made directly on the script justifying
where criterion levels were obtained (either in pen and then scanned, or using an appropriate
commenting tool on a Word/PDF version).
The teacher comments justifying the levels awarded should be more than a rewording of the criteria.
The exploration should be double spaced and must contain a page count which excludes the title page
and the appendices. Pages should be numbered.
Teachers should double check that the exploration uploaded to IBIS is correct. There were again too many
explorations seen where all/some of the mathematical expressions were missing/corrupted, and the
diagrams shifted. This is to the detriment of the student.
Providing a template for statistical explorations was prevalent this session and should be avoided as this
usually prevents students from achieving higher levels in most criteria.
If there is more than one teacher marking explorations in the school, then internal moderation must take
place to ensure consistency in the application of the criteria. Where an adjustment is made to teacher
marks, is it applied consistently to all students in the school; failure to standardize internally will unfairly
advantage and disadvantage fractions of your students.
Lastly, it is very important that no personal details such as the name of the teacher/student or the name
of the school is included in any of the documentation.

Page 7 / 14
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
a International Baccalaureate
Baccalaureat International
Bachillerato Internacional
November 2023 subject report Mathematics: applications and interpretation SL TZ2

Standard level paper one

General comments
The paper was overall straightforward with some demanding parts of questions that stretched the most
able students. There were instances when students did not read the question paper for example, question
9 asked them to identify two correct statements, yet they selected three statements. Students that used
their GDC were more successful than those that attempted to use algebraic methods.

The areas of the programme and examination which appeared difficult for the
students
• Inequalities
• Upper and lower bounds
• Inverse functions
• Vertical asymptotes
• Conditional probability

The areas of the programme and examination in which students appeared well
prepared
• Reading a coordinate from a graph
• Distance formula
• Tree diagram

The strengths and weaknesses of the students in the treatment of individual

questions
Question 1 Correlation
This is a textbook style question and so its format was familiar to many students. Most were able to find
the equation of the regression line, the weaker students made a variety of mistakes. The finding of the
correlation coefficient was well done. Almost every student recognized that there was a strong correlation.
terminology such

that it was inappropriate to use the time to walk up the hill to estimate its gradient.

Question 2 Unit conversions & volume of a pyramid

Lower and upper bounds were not well understood. The concept of converting a length was understood
but many missed that the conversion factor needed to be cubed for a 3D shape. Those that wrote down
the volume of a pyramid were able to substitute values in, but alas others chose formulae for different
shapes.

Question 3 Asymptote, power rule & increasing interval

Only the strongest students were able to write down the correct equation of the vertical asymptote and
to correctly use the power rule to differentiate. Some lost the final mark for not simplifying the last term:

Page 8 / 14
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
November 2023 subject report Mathematics: applications and interpretation SL TZ2

2𝑥
= 𝑥. The students that drew a sketch correctly found the minimum point but were unable to write down
2
the interval when the function was increasing. Frequently this question was left unanswered.

Question 4 Voronoi diagrams

The first part, students found easy (reading a coordinate from a graph). When finding the perpendicular
bisector many students spent valuable time attempting with various degrees
4
of success to transform their linear equation 𝑦 − 8 = − (𝑥 − 4) to another form such as
5
4𝑥 + 5𝑦 − 56 = 0. Some erroneously thought the perpendicular bisector goes through the endpoint
rather than the midpoint of the line segment that is being bisected. It seemed Voronoi diagrams were
either well understood or not.

Question 5 Applied sine rule

Stronger students did well in this question and were able to use the sine rule in the context of bearings.
Weaker students assumed that it was a right triangle and used an incorrect trigonometric ratio.

Question 6 Inverse of a function

Inverse of a function was often done incorrectly with students attempting to find the derivative of ℎ(𝑥) or
unsuccessfully algebraically manipulate the function to find the inverse or erroneously writing ℎ(1). Only
the best found ℎ−1 (1) by setting ℎ(𝑥) = 1 and then using their GDC to solve
for 𝑥. Only the very strongest students found the domain of ℎ−1 (𝑥) correctly.

Question 7 Quadratic model

Those that were able to use the given coordinates to find the equations and used their GDC to solve these
simultaneously were more successful that those attempting to use algebraic methods. Those that found
an equation were able to apply this as the scenario,
ground, was well understood. This question was either done well or poorly.

Question 8 Equation of normal and distance formula

students
differentiated the function using the chain rule and then substituted in the given 𝑥 value to find 𝑟 ′ (−1).
The denominator of a gradient should not have a decimal. Of those that attempted the question many
realize
used the distance formula.

Question 9 Box and whisker plots and 𝑡-test

The question asked students to select two true statements about the box and whisker plots, but a number
of students scored zero for the first part of the question because they selected three statements. Those
that wrote their hypotheses using 𝜇 were advantaged because the symbol is inclusive of both

𝑝-value. Weaker students

made a comparison with an incorrect inequality.

Page 9 / 14
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
November 2023 subject report Mathematics: applications and interpretation SL TZ2

Question 10 Tree diagram and conditional probability

1
Almost every student correctly added that the P(tail) = , but finding the probability for the roll of the
2
dice was not done so well. Disappointingly there were students that wrote down a probability greater
than one which is impossible. Conditional probability was not very well understood.

Question 11 Binomial distribution

The weaker students did not recognize the scenario as a binomial distribution. The first part of the
question was done considerably better than the second part. In the first part the students found P(𝑋 = 2)
given 𝑛 = 5 and 𝑝 = 65%. In the second part the students had to firstly find a compound probability and
then use this probability for 𝑝 in the binomial distribution.

Question 12
Most were able to complete the table to correctly rank the number of albums sold in the first week after
releasing an album. Some erroneously wrote down the square of 𝑟𝑠

Some students calculated a 𝜒 2 or 𝑝-value to compare to their 𝑟𝑠 rather than compare 𝑟𝑠 to the given
critical value.

Recommendations and guidance for the teaching of future students

• Read the question paper instructions carefully.
• Review mathematical terminology, from this assessment the following words were often used in
appropriately: outlier and range
• Look at the command terms and notation that are in the subject guide p. 90-94.
• Be familiar with routine requirements of examinations (and generally good practice in mathematics):
- The simplification rules for final answers (available in old coordinator notes and published
markschemes). Specifically, fractional answers that simplify to an integer must be simplified to be
2
e.g. = 1. Such informality is fine to convey working but cannot be credited as
2
a final answer.
4
- - linear equation, such as 𝑦 − 8 = − (𝑥 − 4), does not need to be
5
4 56
transformed to 4𝑥 + 5𝑦 − 56 = 0 or 𝑦 = − 𝑥 + unless stated in the question.
5 5

- Many students are giving final answers to two significant figures. This not only contravenes the
cover instruction of the examination, but without the unrounded value seen or any working
shown it is difficult to give the student any credit that they have applied a correct method.
• Use the GDC rather than time consuming algebraic methods.

Page 10 / 14
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
November 2023 subject report Mathematics: applications and interpretation SL TZ2

Standard level paper two

General comments
While the paper provided a stern test for even the strongest students, it could also be seen as a fair paper.
Although it was pleasing to see many students abide by the specified accuracy in the paper, premature
rounding did appear to be an issue.

The areas of the programme and examination which appeared difficult for the
students
• Trapezoidal rule, specifically finding the correct value of ℎ.
• Conversion between units.
• Stating the hypotheses for a test.
• Performing a goodness of fit test and showing all necessary steps.
• Loan payment schemes.
• Profit functions.
• Analytic solutions.
• Setting up and solving a mathematical model.

The areas of the programme and examination in which students appeared well
prepared
• Substitution in an equation.
• Using a GDC to find the area under a curve.
• Right angle trigonometry.
• Calculating % error.
• Substitution into arc length and sector area formulas.
• Finding the mid-interval value of a class.
• Interquartile range.
• Assessing if a data point is an outlier.
• Finding the down payment of a loan.

The strengths and weaknesses of the students in the treatment of individual

questions
Question 1
Students were successful in finding the values of 𝑎, 𝑏, and 𝑐. The trapezoidal rule was not well understood
with few substituting correct values into the given formula. The most common errors seen were
calculating an incorrect value for ℎ and omitting the set of brackets that contain the entire last part of the
formula. Those who decomposed the formula into the sum of four trapezoids were usually successful. It is
also not clear whether students understood the formula to approximate the area under a curve, as there
were several instances of students using an integral for part (b) and the trapezoidal rule for part (c). Relative
to the trapezoidal rule, this is an inefficient approach and prone to clerical error.

Page 11 / 14
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
a International Baccalaureate
Baccalaureat International
Bachillerato Internacional
November 2023 subject report Mathematics: applications and interpretation SL TZ2

Most were able to write down a correct integral for the area under a curve. For those who did not, the
correct integrand was usually seen with common errors being an adjustment of the lower limit or the
omission of dx notation. Calculation of the percentage error in part (b) was generally well done by most
students, with many accruing follow-through marks from their incorrect values seen in part (b) and part
(c)(ii). Most students chose the correct denominator, thereby implying there was some understanding of
the concept of percentage error.

Question 2
Most students correctly found the lengths of BM and BF. It was surprising to see some use sine or cosine
rules to find angle BF̂M . Premature rounding of angle BF̂M led to the forfeiture of a mark in calculating
the arc length. Unless otherwise instructed, teachers should guide their students to use their unrounded
values in subsequent calculations. The arc length formula was substituted, though many did not multiply
their angle by two. Consistent use of their angle from part (c) was condoned in part (d), though only the
stronger students accrued full marks. When finding the area of sector DFC, common errors included
subtracting the area of a triangle, or an arc length, or not subtracting any part at all. Surprisingly, few
students were able to find the volume of concrete. A range of flawed approaches were seen, included
multiplying measurements with different units, or using volume of pyramid/cone/cylinder formulas.
Students were conscious of showing units throughout this question.

Question 3
Almost all students were able to find the mid-interval value of the class, while the calculation of the mean
proved more problematic. Students who lost the mark in part (a)(i) usually considered the data as discrete,
while the most common error given for part (a)(ii) was the frequency value. Student answers suggest the
calculator was not set up correctly to use the frequencies as well as the data values. While most were able
to identify the quartiles, some only found the frequencies rather than the measurements. Students should
be taught that quartiles can also be found from a cumulative frequency diagram or box and whisker plot
and not just their GDC. The lack of accuracy in reading values from the cumulative frequency graph is a
concern. The students were usually successful in assessing a possible outlier and justifying their reasoning.
However, some were less efficient in their solution, finding both the upper and lower fence for outliers.
The null and alternative hypotheses in the 𝜒 2 goodness of fit test were sometimes reversed. Surprisingly,
students struggled to phrase the hypotheses. The correct wording was given in the question and should
have been mirrored by students. Parameters of the distribution were often omitted in one or both

should note the assumption of normality is only for the population data and not the sample. The lack of
scaffolding in part (e) was troubling for most students. Many were not able to calculate the probability of
normally distributed data and find associated expected values. The lack of signposts should not be seen
as an invitation to not show working. Students should be encouraged to state the degrees of freedom,
write down the p-value and then explicitly state the numerical comparison. Students should be able to
interpret the results of a statistical test and be able to communicate this in the context of the question.

Question 4
Most students were able to find the amount of the loan, though some misunderstood this part and merely
stated the down payment. The methods in this question were split between the compound interest
formula and using the time value money (TVM) app on a calculator. It is important to understand that for
questions involving payments, the use of the compound interest formula will yield incorrect results. The

Page 12 / 14
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
November 2023 subject report Mathematics: applications and interpretation SL TZ2

TVM application is essential for annuities/amortization. Since interest is calculated at the end of a
compounding period, a non-integer final answer in part (c) was incorrect. Very few students were awarded
full marks for the final payment in part (d). The most common error seen in calculating the final payment,
were students incorrectly multiplying the new monthly payment by the residual decimal value of 𝑛 found
in part (c). In part (e), students were most successful when supporting their final answer with complete
working.

Question 5
Part (a) was accessible with most correctly substituting into the expression for the number of mugs sold.
Most student
Many were able to identify the number of mugs sold as the function for the average monthly income, with
the most common error coming from students including 𝑛 in their expression. Many students were
awarded full marks in part (d) regardless of their success in part (c). Most student show
should avoid using the given result in their justification, as it risks
creating a circular argument or . It was encouraging to see many
students recognize this as an opportunity to re-enter the question, successfully finding 𝑃’(𝑥) . Few
students were able to show sufficient justification that this was not the maximum selling price. Part (g)
was a true discriminator with very few finding the function for the new deal from the supplier. Many
students were able to earn one mark for substituting the expression for 𝑛 into 𝐶(𝑛). A successful analytic
approach proved elusive for almost all students. Even so, many students were able to gain the final two
marks of the paper as follow through marks from finding the new optimal price using their equation
from part (g).

Recommendations and guidance for the teaching of future students

• Emphasize a conceptual understanding.
• Time management. On average, one minute should be allocated per mark. Students should be guided
to work on the beginning of each question if they run into difficulty/delays with the later part(s) of
questions.
• The paper has a gradient of difficulty with more accessible questions in the earlier part of the paper.
• Ensure prior learning topics are addressed in the course, particularly where students are found to be
lacking and/or have missed these topics in their earlier studies.
• Students should use a GDC calculator that can support all areas of the course.
• Students should show and use unrounded answers. Unless otherwise directed, students should not
round their intermediate answers within a question part.
• Final answers should be expressed exact or to at least three significant figure accuracy.
• The given information in a question is expected to be used in subsequent parts.
• Show that commands are signposts to re-enter a question.
• Include units in final answers as necessary.
• Read each question carefully.
• Reinforce analytic mathematical techniques.
• Sketching a diagram to illustrate the given information may help understanding of the student and/or
communicate an approach to the examiner.
• Be familiar with the command terms and the information in the formula booklet. For example, if
-step solution is not
required.

Page 13 / 14
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024
November 2023 subject report Mathematics: applications and interpretation SL TZ2

• Where possible, support your answers with relevant working.

• Students should know and use the correct terminology for each area of the course.
• Practise contextualized questions.
• Write all responses in the answer booklet, not in the question booklet; the latter is not shared with the
-
examinations.
• Mistakes should be crossed out rather than over-written.
• Consider the reasonableness of an answer. Full marks may not be awarded for unrealistic answers or
those which contradict the given constraint of a question.
• Process and evaluate the information in a question before commencing calculations.
• Students should know and understand the underlying attributes of a distribution.
• When conducting a 𝜒 2 test for goodness of fit, the type of distribution and its parameters must be
stated.
• Do not infer information from a diagram. For example, unless told in the question, do not assume an
angle is 90°.

Page 14 / 14
© International Baccalaureate Organization 2024