Welcome to IB Survival
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
There are many issues out there that you could use, just think about any world issue and apply a AOK and 2 WOK.
I did two, one about CHILD ABUSE, which I used Emotion and Perception as the 2 WOK and Ethics as a WOK. The other one was about AIDS in Africa, and I used Emotion and Perception as WOK and Ethics as a AOK.
It worked very good, I got 19 on the first one, 20 on the second one.
Something simple always works if you deduce a lot of TOK from it.
Well at least your hard work on the essay has one good point--you got feedback from IBO in the form of a grade, which you can use to figure out how strong it was and make the new one even better. Sometimes when life sucks, you just give it a hard stare and work more and come out a more capable person. Good luck.
Here are the links to the notes and sample works for TOK that we have in our Files archive.
To be able to download files, you have to be a VIP member or a VIP subscriber. Please see the FAQ for information on how to become a VIP or how to buy a VIP subscription.
Depends on what you are switching from...?
But I loved geography in my first year. But once we started some of the options I wished I never took geo (and i even applied to study geography -.-) So, no. I personally wouldn't take it again, I'd rather do Economics, or a subject from group 7 or 3 if this is your second humanities...
It's a fairly easy subject, depending on your options. However, 7s in the subject are quite rare! But possible! I loved Geography, I'd definitely recommend it!
The first part - which is Population, Resource and Development, is interesting and not too difficult, most of them are common sense. Development is quite hard but in in overall, you will be fine! . and my teacher told me that we can use case studies of our own countries so it's even better . only the option part is horrible (mine is ecology, quite boring )...
Charizard, on Apr 02, 2010 - 16:20, said:
For reasons quite complicated and generally tangled, I am considering switching to geography! However, it is now April and I have missed just about the whole first year (I'm taking the May 2011 exams). I also know nothing about geography.
My question is: How hard do you find geography, and do you think I'd have a chance if I switched now? Tell me about the IB assessments and what the exams are like and what you do and learn in class!
I honestly don't find it too difficult. Yes there are lots to remember but if you start now, you'll be able to manage. Geography is an interesting course but its not too challenging.
I would certainly recommend you to write about market failure. There are many articles about it and it's an easy topic to analyze and evaluate. I got a 19/20 on my IAs and one was about externalities. If you do find an article and need some help I would be glad to help you via MSN.
G'luck finding!
Regards.
While hurricane Katrina would have been a good point to begin searching for an article - I don't recommend it because the incident would most likely force you to choose an article more than a year old (which IB economics does not allow). You may want to try looking for a more recent incident - for example something related to florida's orange industry situation after the recent extreme cold weather.
-You DON'T HAVE TO use numbers if the article does not have them (but use them if it does).
- Other good topics for articles relating to microeconomics can be about to price ceilings/price floors (which is what I did mine on 2 years ago), market failure or taxation (ie. negative externalities - smoking/alcohol etc) to name a few.
I'm going to give you a bit of a disclaimer before we begin: I did not take Economics when I was in IB and I don't know much about what you are and are not allowed to use source wise for your IA. I am taking Microeconomics now at the University level.
If you are allowed to use multiple sources, I would recommend that you consider using Hurricane Katrina as your example. Katrina hit the US in late August of 2005 and completely devastated Gulf Coast Area. Many forms of industry are still recuperating and many of the social aspects of devastation have still been insufficiently addressed. Notably, the Oil and Natural Gas Industry took a big hit. I think you you would be able to find a myriad of articles about this because it was such a big deal (in the States).
I did some quick googling and found a special Energy Information Administrations report that seems to quantify the impact of the hurricane. This website also seems to have Daily and Special Reports about Katrina's Impact on Oil.
Do you think this could possibly be what you are looking for?
I am writing an essay for TOK on this question:
"Does reason have to play a part in all 'good explanations'?"
I am planning to write an essay saying that reason does NOT have to play a part in good explanations, and I have thought of a few examples: religion/the creation of man, the existence of souls, etc. However, I would love to hear your opinions on this topic! Do you think that reason has to play a part in all good explanations? Why?
I would argue that reason has a part to play in every single one of those things you mentioned The thing which is not required is not reason itself, but it's the explanation part which is lacking. The existence of souls, gods and so on relies entirely on the inexplicable, so the reason why reason doesn't have to play a part in them is because no explanation is required. Things are simply "as they are".
A lot of it depends on how you define explanations. And good too, of course. What determines the quality of an explanation? How cohesive it is, how many pieces of evidence supports it, who gives the explanation? I think the majority of any essay response to this should be concentrating on what a good explanation actually is. Then having identified it, seeing whether it is possible without reason.
Reason = logic, usually. I've never heard of a scenario which divides them into two different things.