Algorithms, Data and Digital Business — assignments and inquiry

1 · Prepare and rehearse

Read the assigned printed pages and use the chapter deck. Complete the teacher-selected 30-minute lab on paper: preserve prediction, intermediate calculations, a decision, its limitation and a dated correction. Hand the paper record to your teacher. These labs use separate synthetic datasets.

Use TraceLab, Tune the Feed or Roundtable only after a prediction. Name what the model changes and what it cannot establish about real people.

2 · Submit the chapter check

Choose only the route assigned: Algorithms (6 prompts), Data (5), Business A (5), Business B (6), or Reflection/correction (4). Plan approximately 15–20 minutes for a knowledge route, then teacher feedback and a fresh check. This timing is a planning estimate.

Use your own school account. Answer independently under the teacher's access arrangements. A reading locator and paraphrase help show engagement; the knowledge explanation supplies stronger evidence than ticking “read”. Keep the original submission and submit a separate correction after feedback. Form confirmation is not an IB grade.

3 · Apply in the existing Sprint 3 tasks

The next registered reading quiz is ibds-26-quiz-w07 /12, with business pp.220–227 and change pp.31–32. Teacher release controls the quiz version and time. This package teaches the business reading; use the existing course material for Change.

Paper 1-style rehearsal · explain, analyse, evaluate

Original unscored practice, not an official IB examination. Use the event-notice scenario in Lab 2. Choose a fresh notice and trace its score and place in the order. Explain how input choice and an objective affect the result. Analyse how a changed ranking could affect two stakeholders, distinguishing a model result from an observed social consequence. Evaluate one possible redesign against a stated objective; discuss a trade-off, an evidence limit and a condition that could change your judgement.

Success: accurate operations → contextual consequences with support → reasoned conditional judgement. Use the preserved P1/P2 practice for the existing teacher-assigned questions and assessment route. No invented official mark maximum applies to this rehearsal.

Paper 2-style inquiry · sources in conversation

Original unscored source-based preparation. Source A: TikTok's provider explanation, June 2020, “What factors contribute to For You?”. Source B: European Commission preliminary finding, February 2026, “Risk assessment” and “Risk mitigation measures”. Read both originals; the dates and purposes differ.

1. Identify one interaction signal in A and one design feature discussed in B. Give locators.
2. Explain how a response can enter the next recommendation. Which source supports which part of the explanation?
3. Compare what the provider account and the preliminary regulator finding can establish about user welfare. Discuss method, purpose and a limit; do not equate disagreement with falsehood.
4. Evaluate whether one proposed design change could improve user agency. Use both sources, qualify any inference and state what further evidence would be needed.

Use a claim–source–explanation chain and bring sources together around the question, rather than writing two disconnected summaries. The Commission text is a preliminary finding, not a final determination. The 2020 provider text does not reveal today's exact ranking weights.

Reflect and revisit

Retain your first answer. Submit Reflection/correction with a reading locator, your revised explanation, support used and one next target. Revisit the named slide or reading, then explain a different example without copying the earlier response.

Chapter decks · Knowledge and reflection route · Original workbook