biochem

In the 5 minutes that you get to read the paper over, decide which bit you want, the prose or the poem. In the first 10-15 minutes read it carefully and annotate the poem so that you have a rough idea of what you're going to write about. Also, write out in rough, a plan of what you'll be discussing in the poem.

After that, just start writing and write and write. When time's running short: ~10 minutes left, start wrapping up your commentary. Obviously if you've run out of things to say before that, you can end it with an ending paragraph summarising your main points. Any time you've got left, skim through your finished commentary to make sure your grammar or spelling's not off, which can happen when you speed write.

This is a fairly good explanation of the main points that you should cover in a commentary: http://en.wikibooks....ish:_Commentary

I'm pretty bad at managing time, but my teacher advises us to spend about half the time on planning and the other half on writing. So read the passage a few times, figure out the argument you'll be making, and make a detailed outline for it. Then start the actual writing. Sounds simple enough in theory...

Here are a few tips on the unseen commentary.

cracking open a commentary

how to

structure/content

analysis and structure

structure for poetry

an example

Sandwich's view of what's going on

structure

what to talk about

Structure

more structure

I used to time it so that I spent the first 5 picking prose/poem as Aboo said (and nearly always chose the poem 'cause it's shorter so you could be more thorough, provided you understood it) and then 5-10 minutes more reading through it several times, underlining things which I wanted to particularly pick out later (aka literary feature hunting) and deciding what the theme was. Having picked the theme, I'd read through the poem with it in mind to make sure that my theme wasn't wrong (as in it the wrong word or phrase to fully describe the feeling of the whole poem) and re-visit everything in the context of the theme. By theme I basically mean "what the author is trying to do". If it matched up, great, if it didn't, a bit of tweaking and you're sorted.

Then I'd just write a quick introduction and plough on into the essay. You want to have 5 minutes remaining at the end to write your conclusion, so planning the whole thing with this in mind, you want to be as far through the poem/prose as you are through the time. So if you have 2 hours, by 1:05 you want to be at least half way through the poem. By 1:35 you need to be moving into the final quarter, and so on.

As for a linear and fluid argument, that's all based on the strength of your introduction. Once you've picked out that central theme, your whole essay already has a linear and fluid argument. You just need to analyse it throughout in a way which supports and keeps returning to what you identified as the central theme, et voila.

I don't think you can prepare in advance, really, except for having already got a good essay technique. It's about what works for you, really. I prefer to write as much as possible, or I'll never get down all the ideas in time -- and by the end feel like I want a new hand! Some people like to write less but spend a lot of time planning their whole essay out into little sections and such. Really, it's just whatever has worked for you in the past. There's no right or wrong approach.

Personally, I didn't have the first clue what I might want to do, so I figured I didn't want to do languages or business and then picked subjects to leave as much else open to me as possible. I did actually think of doing Law for a very long time (and so took two 'hard' subjects plus a essay subject in English A1 and Philosophy (which is also an analytical subject, so good for Law purposes!)) but also figured I might end up doing English, Philosophy or just something scientific. As sciences won't accept you with non-science qualifications, but everybody else will be all over you for doing something "difficult" alongside some sort of demonstration of aptitude, I reasoned it through to taking sciences and then distributing the rest of my subjects around things I have an interest in.

^^ Long ramble! Anyway I did a load of work experience at a law firm, in a hospital, in advertising etc. and at the end of the day, what appealed to me the most was everything I'd done in the hospital. Cheesey as it sounds, I couldn't stand not "making a difference". I mean, english and philosophy are all well and good, but at the end of the day, post-degree, what have you achieved in terms of the world? Nothing, really. Just my opinion, but I couldn't stand it! That and finding biochemistry fascinating kinda helped So I picked to do medicine as last-minute as you like.

There're always going to be people who're dedicated and know exactly what they want to do from very early on. If you're not one of them, there's absolutely no harm in leaving your options open, provided you cover all the bases in the process - including all the extras! So if there's any work experience etc. which would be required, make sure you do work experience for everything you might possibly apply to. Your application has to be competitive, and provided you can do that, everything else can be whatever you want!

In fact, they'll even take you for things you didn't do, provided you show you're now determined. Possibly not for sciences, but I know plenty of people who've gone for arts subjects at the last moment and got in despite never even having taken art. Surreal but true. Lining yourself up with a career from the word GO is not always necessary.

Sometimes I truly wonder if there's anyone else out there that's as ****ed as Iam (well schoolwise)
I just finished IB1 & omw to IB2, The past year I didn't pass a single physics test (HL), neither did I pass any of my math tests (that's too HL, although it's not called HL)I manage all occurring tasks etc on all lectures although I don't take any notes so the very next day it's all outta my head again.I mean why take notes, it's all in the books right?
I've got EE to be handed in after the summer vacation and did I start yet?....Well not really.. Do I have any sources?..well no cause I didn't show up the last week before the vacation to retrieve any books and you can't write your EE without any sources afaik. Is it really that important to get your supervisors feedback on your first draft..?
I actually passed like 3/10 biology tests so I guess that subject's going just fine.
What's the problem? Well It's not a matter of learning difficulties, it's more like a matter of motivation & starting to do stuff but I mean, I can't possibly imagine taking time to do homeworks & other assignments, it just feels wrong.
Neither am I reading any books, thus far I've managed to write essays & all imaginable tasks in my native language (Swedish) without anything read yet, but as the IB test or w/e you refer to it is coming ahead I'll need to know all pieces by heart.
I wish all subjects were more like Business & M since you don't really have to do anything to pass that, it's all about using your common sense and you're fine
And let's not even mention CAS unless you have any outstanding ideas of how one could pass that in a rather simple way

Here is the 2010 one:
 May2010ibexamschedule.pdf   69.51K   555 downloads

November 2009 timetable:
http://www.ibsurviva...?showtopic=5804

Sleep.
Ipod.
Youtube.
Jogging.
Swimming.
Hot showers.
Deserts.
Hot bowls of noodles.
Singing.
The television.
A man's special time.

Well, i read an article in the IB world magazine recently (i think it was recent, at least. Or... wait, is that even the name of the magazine? :P)
Anyhoo, the article basically clarified the usual 'stereotypes' associated with an IBDP. One of the things covered was that the IB was for exceptionally intelligent and talented individuals. The article said this is not the case, and that the IB is basically structured to test not only a person's intellect but also their planning, and time management skills. I.E, hard work. As far as IB goes, you don't need to be the class's topper to reach a 40, just loads and loads of effort, and QUALITY work. not quantity. Ofcourse, you DO need to be a little above average to do well in the IB. :P
But then again, I myself am guilty of being one of those who hardly ever work, or put in that little effort in the last minute, and still manage to scrape a 5 at the least where as people in my class who do regular work get scores below me. Some do.. Not all. but i do know for a fact (atleast i'd like to think) that if i did work hard i would do much much much better. Perhaps even 7s all throughout. But it's easier said than done, huh. :P
But then, it's also a question of the person's working style. Lets say, someone as lazy as me, will work the way he/she works and get the grades they deserve for that much of work. Ofcourse, a smarter person, with the same amount of work put in, could probably do better. And a person with a lesser ability to grasp would probably have to work much longer hours to get the same grade. So it completely depends on the individual.
Also, Geniuses... when they build on their already freakish-ly outstanding brains, turn out the world's greatest scientists/mathematicians/etc. One cannot expect someone like me to become as great as well, newton, or einstein, or Gauss, no matter how much hard work i put in. Or maybe i can, if i could live a few hundred years, and spent every single minute of every single day practicing math, or researching!
So again, it depends completely on the person, and their capacity and working styles. You cannot judge a person's ability by the amount of work they put in. As far as i'm concerned, ability cannot be measured. IQ tests are inaccurate! (and no, i didn't score badly in one, and hence am still bitter about it. :P)
So when it comes to Genius Vs. Hard work, i think it entirely depends on the situation. When it comes to discovering a cure for cancer, i'd say genius. When it comes to scoring 7s in IB IAs, i'd say hardworker. :D
And that's my 2 penny's worth. :)