# data[].attributes.body
Writing about childhood memories and our leisure is personal interest and not personal engagement, so careful to demonstrate personal engagement and not personal interest.

# data[].attributes.body
We agreed with the marks regarding mathematical communication and personal engagement since the reason why the student chose the topic was clearly stated. Moreover, the student made use of diverse mathematical explanations to support his ideas. However, in terms of presentation, we did not agree with the marks since we thought it was too high level and it was hard for us to understand.

The comment we agreed with the most was personal engagement (and reflection) since it was clear that the student was interested in exploring the topic and some personal reflections on the process was included.

Since the overall presentation was not clear for most of us, we were most surprised by the marks on presentation and communication.

# data[].attributes.body
A: 3
B: 3
C: 2
D: 2
E: 6
= 16

# data[].attributes.body
showing personal engagement can we best demonstrated through constructing a real model

# data[].attributes.body
1) We pretty much agree with the final score even if not exactly the way it was evaluated
2) We agreed that it was hard to show in depth mathematical knowledge from such a simple topic
3) We really agree with most of the comments but dont think they all match up with the scores in Criterion A

# data[].attributes.body
A 2
B 3
C 2
D 1
E 3
We feel like it should be lower based on the lack of actual math.

# data[].attributes.body
1) We agreed but were surprised by low criterion A standards.
2) We agreed that the use of combinatorics was accurate and the math presentation was consistent
3) We were surprised that they said it "flowed well"

# data[].attributes.body
1) We kinda agreed with the marks

2) We agreed that the overall IA was not sophisticated enough mathematics wise.

3) We weren't really surprised by anything.

# data[].attributes.body
I gave 12/20.

A: 3
B: 2
C: 2
D: 2
E: 3
= 12

# data[].attributes.body
We generally agree with the marks. We agree the most that "there are many errors in notation" I was most surprised that the presentation was considered to be a 3 despite not always being coherent.

# data[].attributes.body
1) We strongly agree with the marks, as our mark was basically IDENTICAL to the actual mark given.

2) We agreed with how this person demonstrated LITTLE reflection throughout.

3) We weren't surprised by any comment as we felt that every comment was genuine and extremely accurate.

# data[].attributes.body
I gave 12/20.

A: 3
B: 2
C: 2
D: 1
E: 4
= 12

# data[].attributes.body
A2
B2
C1
D0
E3
Total 8

# data[].attributes.body
Write reflection throughout IA and not just at the end
Make writing engaging (relating to real world more?)
Clear communication

# data[].attributes.body
1) I agreed with the overall mark but not necessarily the marks for each band.

2) The comment I agreed with the most was that there are many errors in mathematical notations and terms.

3) The fact that they said the IA was not always coherent. I thought it was just completely out of place.

# data[].attributes.body
I gave 9/20.

A: 1
B: 2
C: 1
D: 1
E: 4
= 9

# data[].attributes.body
I gave 15/20 (LOL).

A: 2
B: 3
C: 2
D: 2
E: 6
= 15

# data[].attributes.body
I didn't agree with the marks because I thought the IA was not very coherent and concise.

The comment I agreed the most was the ones regarding his personal engagement and the level of sophistication.

The comment I was most surprised by was the one about the overall presentation of the IA. I thought it lacked clarity.

# data[].attributes.body
A2
B3
C2
D2
E4
Total 13 (grading for SL)