Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


aTeddy last won the day on January 18 2017

aTeddy had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

42 Superior


Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Exams
    Nov 2017
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

3,829 profile views
  1. My top three would easily be: 1. You can control everything. As pretentious as this is likely to sound, I went into my senior year of IB believing that I could micro-engineer every single assessment task and make sure that I would definitely get 45 at the end, provided that I just cared a lot and worked hard. Untrue. Assessment tasks that I thought I nailed, I actually did fairly poorly in (e.g Psychology Paper 3, where I attained 14/30) and conversely assessment tasks I had resigned myself to having screwed up, I did really well in (e.g English Lit HL paper 1). IB Moderation can also be a total crap shoot. I've been doing public speaking for most of my school career and I put my literal heart and soul into the IOP and IOC. I copped a moderation factor of -4, and there is nothing I could do about that. Ultimately, in the IB, there is a degree of chance and everything is definitely not always in your hands. You just have to accept that. 2. The IB isn't useful and the learner profile doesn't mean anything. I'm convinced that the IB education is what educational philosophers throughout the ages would support if they lived today. The perception that the IB is not good because its too challenging, or doesn't help some university applications, or doesn't allow you to specialise your interest is either totally unfounded or misses the wider point. When I reflect upon the person I was two and a half years ago and the person I was when I graduated the IB in November, I feel like they are very different and so much for the better. Whilst, it might be partially true that in practical terms, the sheer difficulty of the IB fails to be appropriately recognised by universities, its benefits extend so much further than that. IB equips you with an academic toolbox of critical thinking, quality writing, knowledge of academic conventions, independent thinking and working that is pretty much unparalleled by any other pre-tertiary certificate. It's actually 100% worth doing the IB for this reason alone. 3. IB Students must prepare for many hours every night, consistently, for two years, in order to score competitive grades. I did work hard to get my IB score, but I also had plenty of time to relax. I watched seven seasons of Gilmore Girls twice, watched all of Scandal, Grey's Anatomy and How To Get Away With Murder and played games all throughout the IB. I was also not consistent, I worked hard when it counted and relaxed when I could. It's certainly not true that a successful IB student needs to work consistently and ridiculously hard with no down time.
  2. aTeddy

    Math Studies IA Topics??

    In general, a statistical approach is easiest and recommended, because there is sufficient complexity there for you to write a good piece of work. If you were leaning this way, you would most likely pick three variables of some entity (I picked latitude of a nation, social progress index of a nation and Gini Index of a nation) and statistically analyse their relationship. As a limit to Maths Studies, you'd probably have to compare variable A to variable B individually and then variable A to variable C individually. The processes you'd use would be: scatter plot, pearson's product-moment correlation coefficient (using a GDC), x^2 test, mean, chi-squared (by hand) and possibly linear regression. You'd satisfy the requirement for both the simple and further process and they are pretty hard to get wrong. Unfortunately, the Maths Studies IA is a really generic piece of work and in general, the fairly elementary level understanding of more complex mathematical techniques that you develop really stifles your choice of topic. I would say that almost 100% of my cohort did a statistics IA and compared fairly common variables like age, gender and HDI or variations on that theme. The good news is that its fairly hard to go wrong if you are willing to put the hours in and learn/apply the relevant structuring. Good luck!
  3. Hey there, I did my EE on Kafka's The Trial and Orwell's Homage to Catalonia under the research question: In what ways and for what purpose do Franz Kafka in The Trial and George Orwell in Homage to Catalonia depict the effects of an antagonistic political structure? Firstly, let me say that your choice is certainly appropriate and there is definitely enough for your essay. Originality wise, 1984 ranks fairly low on the list, and you could get just as rich an analysis from any of Orwell's other subversive non-fiction texts like Down and Out in London and Paris, The Road to Wigan Pier or even his critical essays. If you have your heart set on 1984, then you should be fine, just make sure to have an inventive question and rigorous, novel approach. Another thing to be very careful about when studying political authors like Kafka and Orwell is to keep the focus of the essay on the literary merits and techniques of the texts. If you're looking for some ideas: my central ideas in my essay were split broadly into how individual agency is subjugated by oppressive regimes and how beliefs (e.g religion and revolution) that bring societies together are manipulated by oppressive regimes such that they function to suppress resistance. I also used a psychological theory called the "power: approach-inhibition" theory to show demonstrably how the author in Homage and K. in The Trial had their power reduced, reflecting their position as trapped and unable to resist. I compared the texts style, form and structure to show how the broad similarities were carved and also how the subtle differences between each authors own unique perspective were made salient. Ultimately, I really enjoyed the experience and I think you are onto a really great topic. I wish you the best of luck and should you require any help throughout the process, feel free to contact me as in one way or another, I'm familiar with both texts and how they function in tandem.
  4. Hey there. I recently graduated and I would say that while English Literature (especially at HL) was a challenging subject, it can be handled by a proper awareness of the course demands throughout the two year process. For instance, in IB Literature, unlike any other IB courses (by and large), you are able to decide 55% of your mark before even picking up a pen for your final exams. Be consciously aware of that. The Written Assignment and IOP/IOC are far more controllable pieces of work and so if you work to score highly in these areas, you significantly alleviate the anxiety when it comes to a more chaotic and unpredictable setting like the final exams. But that's easier said than done. The skillset that you are asked to develop in IB Literature is quite complex. In my opinion, its analogous to juggling. To score a high grade, you need to not only fluently express yourself with a sophisticated, varied vocabulary, but you also need to construct, in a variety of delivery formats, an argument which is coherent on a macroscopic level (each point in the analysis can be synthesised as a part of a wider whole) and a microscopic level (each point in your analysis is correctly structured so as to prove the point you are making). But that's not all - your thesis about the works should be meaningful and your argument couched in the analysis of literary devices. Again, easier said than done. The best ways to develop these skills is, of course, practicing commentaries, essays and oral analyses regularly. But you shouldn't be passively producing analysis each time, you can expect this to be of more or less the same standard as previous efforts. If you are actually hoping to improve, you should be asking yourself with every sentence and paragraph (be it in a speech or essay) - does this in some way prove my thesis? It might be doing that by proving a subsidiary point within your analysis, or bringing together points you've made into a wider whole, but you should be able to quickly see why that sentence/paragraph is necessary. Not only that, but you should be taking quite a bit of time to plan. A rough guide would be to spend a bit more than 1/4 of your time in the commentary and 1/5 of your time in the essay planning out your argument. Finally, the actual meat of the analysis you produce is going to be, of course, about literature. Over time, you'll begin to intuitively know what points are worth making and your class should help you to identify and analyse techniques within your texts. The final generalised point that I would make is that the subject reports and the syllabus are your best friends. So many students in my cohort would make mistakes that could have been avoided easily if they simply read up on what the IB is asking for. It also seemed to somewhat demystify what an English marker is asking for. Well, they've published a whole bunch of advice, use it! Anyway, I hope you actually end up liking English (I know I did) and this advice helps you.
  5. Heya - I took Biology HL and Psychology HL and graduated this November. It seems to me that you understand what these subjects are about and most of your information seems to be fairly accurate. For me, taking both these subjects was highly challenging and I would easily say that over 50% of my time was invested into these subjects. So maybe to help you decide if you want to go down this path, I will provide an overview of each subject individually. In terms of Psychology, I would highly recommend you take it at HL or don't take it at all. The jump from SL to HL is as small as you could hope it to be - the core topics and options have a bit more content, there is a slightly stricter marking expectation (may 2019 onward), you study one more option (not as hard as it sounds) and you study qualitative methods (boring, but also very content light and logical). This doesn't sound small but compared to a science or some humanities, where the content jump can be as big as 2x SL, its quite tolerable. Psychology is interesting to learn, but it probably won't be the way you expect it, it's really scientific and empirical, which shocked me at first. That being said, you are right that there is a huge impetus to memorise research studies (for a ballpark figure, I memorised 91 studies (aim, method, findings, conclusions and evaluative issues) for my final exams). Nonetheless, I would say Psychology is a rewarding subject to study in IB, because you won't get the experience any other way, and if you say you're intrinsically interested in it, than I'd say you're a nice fit. For Biology, I would approach your decision with healthy caution. Before IB, I found Biology to be really easy and so I decided to take HL. Over time, it became my favourite subject (along with Literature) and it was something I always liked to learn about, which I believe is ultimately a prominent reason that I did well in Biology in IB. The thing is, to a certain eye, Biology is incredibly dry and with that perspective, I'd say its highly unlikely you'll succeed at HL. Of the 20 candidates who took Biology in my year, only 3 took HL and these were the people who were genuinely passionate about learning Biology. If that doesn't sound like you (and I'm so not judging - you either like it or you don't) then I counsel you to take SL, which is a fairly manageable content load even to the dispassionate student. HL Biology has a mind-boggling amount of sheer content (definitely more than any other HL science and probably uncomparable to any other IB syllabus). I don't say this to scare you but as a matter of fact, because time and again, students underestimate Biology as a soft choice when it just isn't. I actually didn't take LangLit, I took Lit, but I know the courses are similar. If English is your native language (or at least equal to your native language) and you can coherently develop complex thoughts orally and write essays well (up to you to evaluate that one) then its a pretty splashable HL subject, because the difference between SL and HL is quite minor. I begun IB1 with average scores in Engilsh, but I found the IB environment to be conducive for success and also found it to be a highly enjoyable subject at the best of times. I hope this information helps you to make your decision and I wish you the best of luck throughout the IB.
  6. I don't really know if I ever felt this way about works we studied in Literature. The most consistently hopeful book we studied was probably Cloudstreet, though I found it an awful period piece. On the other hand, I found works like Waiting for Godot (extremely nihilistic) and Wuthering Heights (violent and dark) to be my favourites. I don't think its at all a bad thing to have nihilistic or dark literature, because it provokes thought and brings you to the heart of a part of existence or a way of understanding life that you previously never thought about. Maybe a good strategy to disconnect yourself from negative feelings is to view it as an intellectual piece, making meaning of it as an abstract argument for a way of understanding life and analyse it on those merits. Side note: At the very least, you should be impressed by the fact you have some sort of connection with the works, most people (including myself more than a few times) come to view literature as a laborious chore over the IB.
  7. To answer your question about how worth it is... I think its dependent upon whether or not you actually need it to matriculate into a desired university course. For a course I want to get into at Sydney University 45 is actually mandated so, in that sense, its a worthwhile goal for me personally. But, you'd have to answer that question based on what your university aspirations are. If you're just doing it for pride purposes then its gonna be a whole lot of effort for what seems like a non-practical goal. My advice would be just concerted effort over time (and probably yes in your summer), becoming familiar with the syllabi and the marking instruments, not ignoring any subject or component of a subject and really being focused and dedicated to your goal throughout the IB. 45 isn't by any means impossible, but in the same respect its not designed to be easy. Good luck with your IB.
  8. aTeddy

    Sampling techniques for IA

    They don't mind at all if you do a convenience sample, in fact its pretty much the standard. I'd recommend bring it up as a flaw in your experiment in the discussion and suggesting the use of a purposive sample for greater symbolic representation and hence representational generalisability. But what you're doing sounds A. OK. to me.
  9. aTeddy

    Do we have a purpose?

    This in itself is a philosophy about the purpose of life. I'm inclined to agree somewhat though. I feel as if, taking the evolutionary theory as an axiom; humans are not a discrete entity, we will change recognisably at some point, just as we have changed from other species. So, I feel it's arbitrary to say we mean something in the cosmic scheme, as the purpose would imply a reason for humans as we currently are. Conversely, though, I don't think it's a particularly fruitful way to live your life, purposeless as it might be. Seeing as this is a question that we can't answer conclusively without making an unprovable assumption (I've taken evolutionary theory to be fact in order to make my conclusion, which is not an incontrovertible truth obviously) - I don't see a good reason to not do as one might please.
  10. aTeddy

    IOP - Strategies to interest the audience

    Getting full marks for Presentation is probably a lot easier than it sounds. All you really need to do is practice your speech a lot, use logical hand gestures, try to eyeball every member of the audience at least once. A powerpoint will probably help, but don't make it to obstructive. I know that a few people in my cohort decided to add "inventive" features to their IOP, and these generally worked out in terms of marks. As a member of the audience, I was not a fan of people who made obvious efforts to be quote, unquote "engaging". It seemed obvious and, honestly a little bit ham-fisted in the majority of cases. Regardless of what you decide, within reason, it probably won't cost you marks.
  11. aTeddy

    Books you wish you could've done in the IB

    The texts that I've studied in IB English have been really a mixed bag. Some texts I loved, like Waiting for Godot and Hamlet. On the flipside, there have been a good deal of texts that I've disliked, like Cloudstreet, Kite Runner, The Visit and Wuthering Heights. Overall we've done a good bit of Orwell [1984, assorted essays], but I would love to do more of his lesser known works like Down and Out in London and Paris/The Road to Wigan Pier. I would also love to have done Franz Kafka's Metamorphoses/ Amerika. I'm doing The Trial for my English EE, though I really love his style. My IB teachers for English seem to dislike the big staples for American literature, except for the Great Gatsby which isn't a great picture for the American dream in honesty. So maybe, something like The Catcher in the Rye by Salinger. One more that comes to mind is the Clockwork Orange, which I would love to analyse in a literary context.
  12. aTeddy

    Are general strikes effective?

    It could be argued that the inherent goal [it is different in every case] of strikes and protests is worth the costs that it leads to. For example, if you lived in a dictatorship and wanted to reform it into a democratic country, you would need a huge grassroots revolution in order to make that happen. I don't think people participate in strikes or protests without some knowledge that it will come at a cost to them. I think then the debate becomes a matter of does the end justify the means? I personally find myself adopting this type of framework and I would say the "yardstick" of 'effective' is does it achieve its goal. If it does, it is an effective protest.
  13. OK, good luck! I just meant, if you where going to get actual people to come in with a weapon / non weapon, then you would have to get people who didn't know each other. Anyway, I hope it works out
  14. You are allowed to do partial replications of experiments, as long as you have an IV and a DV. I believe if you removed the corneal reflection device, then you would still have two variables. The IV - the weapon, DV - whether the man was identified or not. It seems like it would be hard to replicate this study as you would have to employ confederates that your participant didn't know. I think you could do well with it, but you probably could have an easier time with some other studies from the CLOA, i.e Loftus and Palmer in 1974, Brewer and Treyens in 1981 or even some concrete/abstract words and memory studies.
  15. aTeddy

    Does God exist?

    That's just it, the limit of your historical inquiry is New Testament scholars. That's like saying all Quran scholars agree on the facts about Islam, therefore its claims are correct. You ignored the wider point, that you can't just simply state that "X historians believe in this, therefore 100% correct." Historians and scientists alike have had consensus about supposed facts which have been proven palpably untrue later. E.g Geocentric theory. It's an appeal to authority and a textbook fallacy. You don't have even have a wide historical consensus, because the only document which records these supposed facts is an Iron Age book that claims it's truth is undeniable and you are given the caveat of believe it or die. What an unsubstantiated assertion. Why exactly is it a bad reason? It draws all sorts of questions about the veracity of a Jesus character even having existed at all, because the cornerstone of his recorded history is a supposed resurrection after being crucified - a claim which is drawn into doubt in the obvious absence of a tomb for such an instrumental figure. Any historical document is open for criticism. For example, Nazi Germany made supposed "historical documents" about its government and the Holocaust which were inconsistent with a host of other documents. This was obviously propaganda and considered to be so. If you call it a historically accurate document, I think that's a lopsided characterisation of an unscientific, inconsistent book, chock full of religious propaganda. As I have elucidated to you on numerous seperate occasions, belief in Christianity lacks falsifiability. Here's a quote from a post that I've made before and should go someway to explaining it. The ability to engage with Christianity as history is so hampered by it being a religion which employs faith as a necessity. You can select as much "proof" as you want, and atheists can respond with counter-proof, it's just useless, because belief in the religion is inherently a personal choice affected by emotion and faith, rather than pure reason. Not to say pure reason is great, I'm just saying you can't treat a religion in those terms.

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.