IB Mathematics Internal Assessment
Every year more students ask whether ChatGPT and similar tools are allowed in the IA. The honest answer is that it depends on what you ask the tool to do, what your school's policy says, and whether the finished work is genuinely yours. Here is how I think about it as a Coordinator.
The Internal Assessment is meant to be your own work. It is you showing what you can do with mathematics, and your teacher has to be able to authenticate that it is you. Anything that does your thinking for you, or that you present as yours when it is not, is on the wrong side of the line. Anything that helps you understand, check or learn, while the thinking and the writing stay yours, is a very different thing.
That means the question to ask is never "is this tool banned?" It is "if my teacher watched me do this, would the work still be mine?"
Where your school permits it, these keep the thinking with you. Even so, the safest habit is to tell your teacher what you used a tool for.
You do not follow why a model's residuals matter, so you ask a tool to explain it in a different way. Then you close it and write what you now understand. This is no different from a textbook or a patient teacher, as long as you check what it says.
You solved an equation by hand and want to know whether your answer is plausible. Using software to verify a result you derived yourself is ordinary practice. The key word is verify: you did the work first.
How do I plot two series on one set of axes? How do I stop a cell reference moving when I copy a formula? Technical how-to questions about software help you present your own mathematics. They do not supply the mathematics.
Personal engagement is read from your decisions. If the question was handed to you, there is nothing of yours to find, and the work will usually read as generic anyway. Brainstorming with a person who knows you is a very different thing from taking a ready-made question.
If the sentences on the page were generated and you submit them as yours, that is the clearest case of all. Reflection is the easiest part to spot, because it is meant to describe your own choices and your own surprises, and generated reflection describes nobody's.
Asking it to build the model, run the test, or carry out the calculus, then pasting the answer in, replaces the very thing the IA is assessing. Use of mathematics rewards understanding. If you cannot reproduce a step on a blank page, it is not yours.
Generated data presented as collected data is fabrication, whatever produced it. The same goes for asking a tool to "clean up" results until they fit. Your messy, real data is worth more than anything made up.
Plenty of real situations are not clear-cut. A few I am asked about most:
Students sometimes assume the risk is detection software. It is more ordinary than that. Your teacher has seen your class work all year. They know how you write, how you set out a solution, and what mistakes you make. Work that suddenly sounds like somebody else, or contains mathematics you cannot discuss, stands out quickly, whatever tool was used. The consequences of a confirmed breach are serious, and a school's finding of misconduct is far worse than a mediocre mark.
The deeper point is that the IA is scored on thinking that only you can show. A generated draft tends to be smooth, general and safe, which is exactly how generic work scores. Your own awkward, specific, slightly surprised version will usually do better.
Want help that keeps the work yours?
I will tell you honestly what is working and what is costing marks, and I never write any part of your IA. Send me your question or your draft and I will respond in writing.
Get the IA sorted with meMore like this: all Maths IA guides. Related: using your own data in the Maths IA
These pages are free and stay free, but they are general and your IA is not. Send me your research question, or whatever exists so far, and I will tell you in writing whether the topic has a ceiling on it, where the marks are going, and what to change first. That costs nothing and it comes back within 24 hours.
Written by a serving IB Diploma and Career-related Programme Coordinator and Head of Mathematics, who reads internal assessments across every subject group every year. If you then want the whole draft reviewed properly against all five criteria, that is the paid one, and it is refunded if it does not name at least three specific things to fix.
Get a free verdict Full written review, $99
I never write any part of it. Not a sentence, not a calculation, not your data. Under 18: a parent buys this and the thread is with them. I do not work with students at my own school.