Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


tim9800 last won the day on May 8 2018

tim9800 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

35 Respected


Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Exams
    Nov 2017
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

2,957 profile views
  1. We know that bond enthalpy is defined as: "The energy required to break one mole of bonds in gaseous molecules in their standard state" D is not the bond enthalpy of HBr because the products contain a species which still has a bond (Br - Br). From my understanding, bond enthalpy requires everything on the products side of the equation to be unbonded i.e. in their isolated states.
  2. The equation in D doesn't balance, even though everything is in gaseous state.
  3. Hey super quick response (hopefully this will get to you in time) Short answer: given the time you have, I wouldn't worry about the minutia between a 4 and 5. Just give it your best shot, because it is more than likely that anything you do won't be huge enough to compensate for the subjectiveness of your markers. Long answer: Still carrying the sentiment of the above, I think whether you get a 4 or 5 in a particular criteria is up to who is marking you. When I prepared for the IOC with my friends, we often graded each other with ranges rather than specific marks (e.g. 4-5, 3-4) knowing that we weren't perfect markers, or markers that replicated our real markers. To answer your questions, there is no definite, cover-all explanation, but I'll try and give a few examples: Criterion A: (How might your interpretation and use of references be careful but not individual or precise?) For both cases, you have multiple solid themes that you introduced well and have good theses for, but in the former you may have more general references than specific ones (e.g. in stanza 1, x, y, z) but still explaining them to an extent (e.g. the overall effect + a few a good quotes in stanza 1 is z, y, z and it establishes meaning a, b, c), whilst in the latter, you have more specific than general references (e.g. x in the beginning of stanza 1, y at the end of stanza 1, and z in line 12 have individual effects, but have the overall effect and meaning of ....), allowing you to explain in more detail. (N.B I'm not saying stanza wide references are bad - they are good in the introduction and when you are doing your syntheses i.e. final sentences of a theme/point, just don't rely on them throughout your analysis if you want a 5) Criterion B: You are right in that there is often little to no time you can devote to explaining structure. You just have to work with what you have. Put one or two sentences in your introduction explaining it and drop it in during your analysis and synthesis. Structure, like stanza-wide or poem-wide effects are good during synthesis when you need something general to conclude on. But to answer your second question, markers as a general rule, almost have an obligation to follow you up on things that you didn't really address in your commentary, so if you can't spare any time in the commentary to mention structure (which is understandable) they will most likely ask you a question or two on it. If you answer it well, then there should be no reason for them to mark you down. Criterion 😄 This is probably the easiest to explain and hardest to do. You want to make transitions between your points seem natural, and to the best of your ability, make them (topic and final sentences of your points) match up with what you said in your introduction. In layman's terms, its how your commentary flows. If one or two of your points have dodgy transitions/don't match up completely with stuff you said before, or segments of your analysis within a single point seem disconnected, then the purpose of your commentary is compromised i.e. the marker will be unsure of what you are trying to argue. Criterion D and E: Who says you need to remove the subject matter from its context? "Implications" can mean talking about the American Dream and what it revealed about society in the 1920s. Saying this, generalizing from the subject matter isn't a necessarily bad thing e.g. Fitzgerald's depiction of the American Dream highlights a confronting disparity between the middle and working class, a disparity that has existed and continues to exist in society today. It gives you a bit of gravitas, but make sure you use it sparingly and, where you do include generalizations, make sure you explain them well. E.g. if you just mention the sentence above without explaining Fitzgerald's motive behind such a depiction (his own disillusionment with capitalist society) or how it is represented in the book (separation between West and East Egg, Valley of Ashes imagery) then your interpretation will not sound independent and thought out. Hope this helps - I'm aware that some of the examples might be a bit exaggerated or oversimplified. DM or reply if you need clarification.
  4. I agree completely with the other replies in the thread, but I want to add that doing two sciences is as rewarding as it is challenging. Though you might not be the best at one of your sciences, the fact the you are interested and willing to consider the possibility of doing two sciences is itself a great thing! For me, the best part of it was seeing how my knowledge of the two sciences interacted, and being able to apply some of the knowledge from one discipline to the other. Some might say that this overlap is minimal, but you'll begin to appreciate the extra time spent on practical skills (uncertainties, interpretation of graphs) in Paper 3 of both sciences, the usefulness having done Thermodynamics twice, and being confident in using molar quantities in Physics. I think my advice to you would be to give double sciences a shot before you put down the possibility - with lots of diligence and self-study, you can definitely do well (specifically, going through past papers under timed conditions, regularly summarizing content and reading all the supplementary material given by your teacher and more) and perhaps end up being satisfied with your broader knowledge of science!
  5. Though I haven't done Biology myself, I can tell you for a fact that any HL science will be very hard. From what I have heard from friends, I would say there is definitely much more to learn in Biology than in Economics. Here's my perspective on Economics, which I did as an HL: I found Economics to be a huge bore, and taking the wrong attitude into economics is probably the number one 7-killer (i.e., the "easy-7" attitude). I was among one of the people who adopted this attitude for much of IB1 and most of IB2, and it was only until I reached the last quarter of IB2 that I realized that I couldn't just walk into the exam room and get a 7. Elaborating on what I mean by boring, much of the last topic of Economics - Section 4: Development Economics - is immensely boring, as it essentially a huge criticism of classical economics split into thousands of tiny criteria and indicators, and what we must do to ensure "sustainable" economic growth. An equivalence for this would be the Ecology in Biology, or Energy Production in Physics... but its a quarter of the whole syllabus. OK, that's an exaggeration, but what is not an exaggeration is the fact that 15% of your final grade will be assessed via Development Economics in Paper 2, which sucks. Additionally, there is an HL-exclusive topic in Economics called Theory of the Firm, which is part of Section 1: Microeconomics. TotF often generates mixed reactions from those who study HL for two reasons. Firstly, because some regard its content as straightforward, whilst others find it complex. I personally disliked it (but you might not) as it came across to me as the latter - the rest of microeconomics was much lighter and easier to understand. Also, it should be noted that ToTF takes up a significant portion of Microeconomics' content (from memory, it was about a third of the section). Secondly, and more importantly, is because of the way it allows one to possibly*** cut down on the content one learns for Economics Paper 1, in which Microeconomics is assessed. This is due to the way that Paper 1 is structured: there are always 4 question in Paper 1: two questions for Microeconomics and two questions for Macroeconomics. You choose one from each section and answer them. Now, if we focus on the two questions for Microeconomics, we would assume one question is TotF-oriented and the other is non-TotF, as the former is a third of the content and the latter is two-thirds, right?? Well, no. This assumption was what kids "banked" on since the start of the new syllabus in May-13 - common sense would say "TotF = 1/3, non-TotF = 2/3. 1/3 < 2/3. Therefore, study TotF" - and generally, they weren't wrong! That was until Nov-16 came in with no TotF question in Paper 1, throwing a lot people who had relied on that assumption into the dark, as they had not studied any non-TotF content. Apart from TotF and Development, the rest of Economics HL is pretty straightforward, and in general, requires a large, but not unmanageable amount of diagrams to be memorized. About what you said in your post about how you weren't that good at memorizing, perhaps diagrams in Economics will help out? Personally, I found that visualizing the diagram actually helped me remember all the theory behind it, and if not, at least I could make educated guesses as to what each point on the diagram meant. So that's what I would say about Ecos HL... maybe someone who did/is doing Biology HL could offer their opinion on this?
  6. 1. How strict is the 6-12 page limit? According to the syllabus, markers are supposed to penalize you for exceeding the limit. However, markers have been known to be lenient on this limit - some treat it as a rough guide, others are much more harsh. As a result, my recommendation would be to stick to the limit, unless you really, really can't cut down your IA under 12 pages. Saying this, my Chemistry IA was 13 pages, Physics IA was 14, both including bibliography. I expect to lose at least one mark in communication for both. 2. Will the moderator just stop reading at 12 pages? Referencing the quote, there is nothing that explicitly says the moderator will stop reading within reason. I would suspect they would finish reading over 12 pages if your IA is like 13,14 or 15 pages, but if your IA is like 50 pages long, they might skim the rest lol. 3. Title Pages We were told not to include title pages in our IAs because they weren't necessary - all your details will be included in a coversheet when your IBDP co-ordinator submits them digitally. As for the research question, just have a heading and type it out: If you do feel the need to include a title page, I don't think it would count towards the limit. Good luck with your IA!
  7. I'm gonna play the devil's advocate here for the sake of maybe uncovering some of the things you might have overlooked. In general, the IB for me has been a really formative experience and has given a lot of skills I doubt I would have acquired from the state-funded equivalent at our school. The challenges in it are probably what have been the most rewarding for me, and getting through them has taught me a lot about myself, anxiety, stress and how to deal with them. At the end, they also teach you how to be satisfied with your mark, and to know that what you put in is what you get out. More objectively, the IB gives you research skills and pushes you, in most facets, to engage in university level content, which, should you choose to pursue in university, will undoubtedly be a huge benefit. Its given me speaking skills, through the oral presentations I've had to give in English A: Lit and TOK, as well as writing skills - how to plan an essay, how to argue effectively - and most importantly, how to study effectively. Where I live, the IB is also advantageous in that it does not "scale" your mark according to the rest of your school cohort, which the state-run alternative does (as in, your performance is somewhat dependent on how the rest of the school does, for any given subject). I'm aware that you might not be able to relate to some, or even all of what I've mentioned, but as a final remark, I want to say there's still time. A lot can happen in 6 months, believe it or not, and I think if you put yourself to it, you could completely pick yourself up to a point where you're satisfied with your IB. Ultimately, its up to you. I do not and cannot know what you're going through right now - but what I can give is my opinion. If you need any more help deciding, feel free to send a PM
  8. The biggest discriminator between SL and HL economics is Theory of the Firm, which is itself half of Microeconomics, should you choose to take HL. Calculations themselves form part of theory of the firm, but to answer you question, calculations are probably around 1/3 to 1/2 of HL Ecos, with the rest being ToTF.
  9. Could totally do something on the Winkler method
  10. Seems fine to me. Your IA seems to revolve around friction and mechanics, the former of which is covered only very briefly in the IB syllabus... but the bright side is that any additional detail you go into will probably come off as personal engagement.
  11. tim9800

    Physics SL IA help

    Ok, gonna try my best without formatting. What you've got so far with Hooke's Law and SHM is a good start, so now we just gotta start looking at some of the equations. From SHM, you know that a ∝ -x (simple harmonic motion) and you know that F = -kx (Hooke's Law) So, using Newton' second law, which states that F = ma, and equating it with Hooke's Law, ma = -kx This is known as the spring equation, and is pretty much what your IA will centred around: varying the three variables (m, a and k) and observing their effect on simple harmonic motion. Any detail beyond this is optional, but you might want to consider some of the following if you are really interested, or want to lock down those sweet personal engagement marks: dampened harmonic motion, driven harmonic motion, solving the spring equation (requires calculus), friction, multiple springs
  12. Yes, you are correct, they do not offer undergraduate medicine. You can get into postgraduate medicine at Sydney through one of two ways: Achieving a perfect ATAR (99.95) or equivalent IB Score (45), giving you guaranteed entry into USyd's postgraduate course Taking any undergraduate course you like, at any university you like, and maintaining good grades (Distinction or above for most of your units), then transferring to Sydney via sitting the GAMSAT and achieving a high enough score (Graduate Australian Medical School Admissions Test) If you are familiar with the UMAT (the Undergraduate Medical Admissions Test), then its pretty much an extended version of that (6 hours instead of 3 hours), and for university graduate students, instead of high schoolers.
  13. Unless Nature (capitalized) is specifically mentioned in the text, you shouldn't capitalize.
  14. The IB Physics syllabus is specific in saying that Physics SL and HL IAs will be marked indiscriminantly ^This should assuage your fears about having an IA that is "too easy", as it did for me. As well as having confirmation in the syllabus, I personally don't believe that there are topics, for any IA, that are "too easy". There may be topics that are overdone, but ultimately, they can still be done well if you adhere to the criteria of an IA, which are Personal Engagement Exploration Analysis Evaluation Communication But if you still believe that your IA should be "unique", I find that the best way is to find an easy topic and add a twist - change a variable that isn't commonly changed by the generic IAs, do it under different conditions etc etc. Hope I've helped!
  • Create New...