(And Why Your Child May Be Performing Better Than They Think)

------

As an IB Mathematics tutor, I see the same pattern every year:

Students score poorly on topic tests… and then score far higher on their final IB exam.

This isn’t luck. It’s a problem with the testing format itself.

Here’s why topic tests often underestimate a student’s real ability — supported by what learning science tells us.

In a single-topic test, every question targets the same concept.

So if a student misunderstands one step, they repeat that mistake again and again.

Educational psychology calls this error propagation — repeating an incorrect procedure reinforces it and makes it more familiar to the brain (Metcalfe, 2017).

A small misconception can affect every question.

The grade drops sharply — not because the student lacks ability, but because the test repeatedly exposes the same weak point.

In a real IB exam, that same misunderstanding affects only a few marks.
Students move on, earn points elsewhere, and show their broader strengths.

Topic tests magnify weaknesses; IB exams balance them with strengths.

Topic tests present the same style of question repeatedly.

This causes two major problems:

The brain tunes out when it predicts the next question will look the same — repetition decreases attention, reducing working-memory performance (Uncapher, Thieu & Wagner, 2016).

So performance may drop simply because the student is bored, not because they lack understanding.

When a student makes the same mistake multiple times in a row, the brain strengthens that wrong method — error reinforcement again (Metcalfe, 2017).

So topic tests not only reveal the error…They build the error.

IB exams, with their varied question types, naturally avoid this trap.

IB exams are a mixed-topic environment. Students can:

• choose where to start,
• skip and return later,
• manage time,
• and apply different ideas in quick succession.
   

This varied practice builds strong transfer skills — the ability to apply knowledge in new contexts — which develops best in mixed, interleaved learning (Schwartz & Martin, 2004).

A topic test removes all of this flexibility.

It’s like preparing for a triathlon by practising only swimming — you don’t get to demonstrate the full range of your skills.

Teachers often assume students already know how to:

• manage time on a mixed paper,
• decide which questions to start with,
• skip questions without panicking,
• and return with a plan.
   

But students don’t come into IB knowing this. These are learned skills, not instincts.

Research on self-regulated learning shows that students often believe they know how to study or take tests effectively, but these skills must be taught and practised (Bjork, Dunlosky & Kornell, 2013).

Topic tests don’t teach these skills because:

• questions must be answered in order,
• the content is narrow,
• and strategy doesn’t play a role.
   

So topic tests measure content recall —

but IB exams measure content + strategy + resilience, a completely different skill set.

Because topic tests occur right after a unit, students often revise only the newest material.

This is known as blocked practice, which can boost short-term performance but weakens long-term retention (Rohrer & Taylor, 2007).

IB exams rely on interleaved practice — mixing topics and revisiting older ideas.

Interleaving strengthens memory, improves method recognition, and significantly enhances exam performance (Rohrer, 2012).

So topic tests reward cramming; IB exams reward continuity.

The students who thrive in IB Maths tend to:

• review older topics as they learn new ones,
• practise a mixture of question types,
• build conceptual links across the syllabus,
• and develop the confidence to navigate a whole paper.
   

This approach aligns with what learning research shows most strongly:
Spacing + interleaving + variety = long-lasting mastery.

If your child is discouraged by topic test scores, remember:

Topic tests are not a reliable predictor of IB exam performance.

They amplify errors, reduce attention, reinforce incorrect techniques, assume exam skills students haven’t learned yet, and don’t reflect the structure of the actual exam.

Once students shift to consistent, mixed-topic revision — the way IB papers are designed — their confidence grows and their results follow.

This is why so many students predicted a “3” on topic tests walk into the exam ready…
…and walk out with a 6.

Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823

Metcalfe, J. (2017). Learning from errors. Annual Review of Psychology, 68, 465–489.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044022

Rohrer, D. (2012). Interleaving helps students distinguish among similar concepts. Educational Psychology Review, 24(3), 355–367.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-012-9201-3

Rohrer, D., & Taylor, K. (2007). The effects of overlearning and distributed practice on the retention of mathematics knowledge. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21(9), 1209–1224.
https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1311

Schwartz, D. L., & Martin, T. (2004). Inventing to prepare for future learning: The hidden efficiency of encouraging original student production in statistics instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 22(2), 129–184.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2202_1

Uncapher, M. R., Thieu, M. K., & Wagner, A. D. (2016). Mechanisms of memory enhancement with attention. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 1(1).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-016-0006-1