Maths IA criteria meaning

[turtle turtle]

So I was looking at criterion D : 

Reflection

This criterion assesses how the student reviews, analyses and evaluates the exploration. Although reflection 

may be seen in the conclusion to the exploration, it may also be found throughout the exploration.

 

1) What does this mean

2) How are you meant to show this in your maths IA

 

Thanks!

[Guest]

Basically it's how you reflect on what's happening in your IA. In other words, let's say you had this problem with a particular graph and it just wouldn't work - write that down and demonstrate the way you develop a particular line of thinking to work around the problem. Perhaps you notice another strand half way through your IA, you could discuss that in your conclusion - or if you find an equation in, let's say physics that works, you could say you did some research around it and found this equation that you could use for your IA. An even simpler manner, I would say, is to comment on how well an equation you've modelled fits a particular piece of data, how well the correlative coefficient fits and perhaps reasons for abnormal values in statistics.

It's a bit of an iffy thing, but it's really about demonstrating that you're thinking about what you're doing instead of just doing what you'd do in an exam (I think - who knows what the people who made the mark scheme are thinking!).

[turtle turtle]

On 3/4/2016 at 6:53 PM, apoello said:

Basically it's how you reflect on what's happening in your IA. In other words, let's say you had this problem with a particular graph and it just wouldn't work - write that down and demonstrate the way you develop a particular line of thinking to work around the problem. Perhaps you notice another strand half way through your IA, you could discuss that in your conclusion - or if you find an equation in, let's say physics that works, you could say you did some research around it and found this equation that you could use for your IA. An even simpler manner, I would say, is to comment on how well an equation you've modelled fits a particular piece of data, how well the correlative coefficient fits and perhaps reasons for abnormal values in statistics.

It's a bit of an iffy thing, but it's really about demonstrating that you're thinking about what you're doing instead of just doing what you'd do in an exam (I think - who knows what the people who made the mark scheme are thinking!).

Thank you!