• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


SC2Player last won the day on July 14

SC2Player had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

97 Marvelous


About SC2Player

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Exams
    Nov 2017
  • Country
    Hong Kong

Recent Profile Visitors

4,542 profile views
  1. If your predicted grades are what determine your success in applying to university, then it would be worthwhile to attempt to raise your predicted marks, although be careful not to look like you're begging for marks. If your success is based off your final IB marks, then I'd say it's probably not worth it, and just do your best to exceed your predicted. With Physics, maybe you could look at the marks that you obtained for the SL-only subjects, and use that as a sort of basis to justify why you would perform better in physics SL compared to HL. If you obtained high marks for the SL content, then it would make your position quite a bit stronger. Your situation with Business SL is plausible, I'd say. With English B, if your only 6 (and a high one too) is in the mocks, then it's worth it to attempt to shift it to a 7, especially if you have evidence that your mock exams were of lower quality than usual. Grade boundary issues are kind of iffy, because they can shift quite a bit, and it's always safest to choose the highest one for the predicted marks, so I'd say that it's not that relevant. I doubt that you can actually get a predicted for the bonus with only a ToK essay - your EE would need to be finalized first. Overall, I'd say that you should try to find more concrete evidence that you can do better than you did in your mocks.
  2. @ABKor752 put it pretty well in terms of considerations - I have a bit more regarding AYP specifically. Our school made it pretty much mandatory to do AYP Bronze for some reason in Grade 9 - I have no clue how helpful it is really for university (nor where my AYP booklet thingy is either; I probably should find it). Anyways, I have some experience on the matter. Are you attempting to gain bronze, silver, and gold in the two years of IB? Honestly, I'd say that's going to be quite difficult (lots of service hours, 3 expeditions + planning, and the physical recreation bit is quite a lot too). Bronze was already quite time-consuming for me, and that's considering that our school planned our expeditions, ensuring that no lessons clashed by giving the whole grade a free week. Maybe consider doing only bronze, or just bronze and silver; depends on your time and motivation really. With that said, however, you could look into whether or not you could tie together the AYP hours with CAS hours. I do know a lot of people at my school used AYP activities as CAS activities when going for silver or gold, so you could end up effectively doing two things at once with your hours. The residential project for gold may even be a good CAS project. The only thing that probably doesn't count as CAS is the expedition (although you might be able to make it as a CAS project too, if you did enough independent planning). Ask your CAS coordinator on this.
  3. Also, just a quick tip - try searching Wikipedia or WolframAlpha for initial ideas. While the former isn't good for citations and the latter can get quite technical very rapidly, they're good as starting points.
  4. I also agree with your teacher's advice; it is very easy to get confused if you're doing multiple topics simultaneously. I found it best to focus on each topic individually, and perhaps sometimes set a day or two for review of one past topic every now and then so you don't forget. Past papers are always great, as @Martijn.S mentioned, and you shouldn't wait until the end to start doing them - there are more than enough past papers online to practice with, especially for maths, which doesn't really have any major syllabus changes usually.
  5. Hmmm... To provide my own thoughts: Honestly I'd say that your original idea of projecting from 3-D onto 2-D is potentially beyond HL (and maybe even Further HL) maths, and pretty certainly beyond SL maths. Obviously if you can understand it, it's really great, but from my own personal experience, stereographic projection (projection of a sphere onto a plane, which is what you've proposed) involves some quite convoluted algebra and concepts. The Haversine function doesn't seem too bad, but I'm not too sure if it's commensurate with the SL syllabus (I think it's probably OK, as it bears some similarity to Further HL geometry, which is almost definitely beyond SL by definition). I agree with @Martijn.S that you should attempt to provide some personal input, and just copying data makes it difficult to show personal engagement. Dijkstra's algorithm, on the other hand, may be far too simple if you just apply it without proof. While taught as part of one of the Maths HL options (Discrete Mathematics), it covers only about 3-4 pages in the textbook, which took just under half an hour to do IIRC. The proof would be worthwhile to look into though. While I personally think that popularity of a topic isn't really much of a concern (there's bound to be overlap, as you aren't expected to create something original), I'm fairly certain that Dijkstra's algorithm is a rare topic in IAs anyways, as it's a pretty specific topic rarely discussed in most online websites that give IA topics. For your question about answering the RQ, I think you should aim to use maths as much as possible to provide an answer, as the IA isn't really so much about mathematical history or concepts as it is about applying maths.
  6. I'll do a comparison between discrete and calculus: Discrete: Is separated into two sections: Number theory and Graph theory: Number theory is the study of the integers, so you're going to learn about concepts such as integer sequences, divisibility, and primes. Graph theory is the study of graphs (no, not the functions); tbh Google will give yo u a better description than I can. Requires little pre-requisite knowledge compared to calculus option (you only need basic algebra and logic for most of the topics, and mathematical induction for a few). A lot of memorization (probably second most, after the group theory option); you need to memorize most of the formulas in the textbook for the Discrete option, as the formula booklet only gives you three almost completely useless formulas. Content is fairly straightforward to grasp for the number theory section, but the questions can sometimes be pretty hard; conversely, the graph theory section is sometimes more difficult to understand, but questions are mostly straightforward once you get the concepts. Not that many calculations, as it's somewhat more proof-based - you may need to also prove some simple theorems, so it's worthwhile to understand all the proofs. Calculus: Extends the calculus in core, so if you have any difficulties with the core calculus, this option can be pretty difficult. A lot less memorization - the formulas in the booklet are actually useful in this option. Quite a lot of calculations compared to Discrete option (use your graphing calculator to check your answers if you have time when doing this option), but minimally proof-based. Content can sometimes be quite difficult to understand, and questions are usually fairly tricky too. In terms of time spent, I'd say that the Discrete option requires less time - I finished the Discrete option in about 1.5 weeks of intensive study (and by intensive I meant that it was the only thing I studied for in that time period, doing absolutely no other work). With calculus it probably took me about 2 weeks of intensive study. Honestly, if you're considering other options besides your school one, I'd say the Sets, Relations, and Groups option is the easiest (it was for me at least). Once you fully grasp the concepts, the paper is a breeze (I mostly finished practice ones in about 30-40 minutes, out of an hour's time limit). There are virtually no calculations, and most of the paper consists of proofs. The difficulty thereby lies in understanding the concepts, but these are not that difficult IMO, as some of it is kind of obvious, while others mostly consist of memorization of definitions. Don't expect any help from the formula booklet for this option though; this has arguably the most useless formulas ever in the entire booklet (I mean seriously, schools could've saved a bunch of ink by not printing these formula, and I'm pretty sure that nobody would've been affected). It's also got perhaps the most memorization ever, so if you're not that good or hate memorization, then it's probably not the option for you. Ultimately, I suppose it really depends on what you're better at, calculations or proofs/memorization. If you're better at calculations, then consider either the Statistics option or the Calculus one (go with your strengths), whereas if you're better at proofs/memorization, go for either Discrete or Sets, Relations and Groups (check through). In terms of resources, Haese and Harris provides a pretty good overview of each option, with some nice problems too. Past papers, as usual, are perhaps the best for practice. Make sure you study out of the most recently published textbook to account for syllabus changes.
  7. Weird that you can't do Chemistry HL, as most teachers with a chemistry degree should still be capable of teaching the content. With that said, I know that universities in HK require only Chemistry (albeit at HL), while biology is recommended, but not necessary. Check with the universities you're planning on applying to, and look at the entry requirements.
  8. If you've completed the SL syllabus, might be worthwhile. You could also check out the math HL syllabus here and see what you already know. The gap between SL and HL is somewhat big though from what I've read, so be prepared for that.
  9. It may be difficult to measure the instantaneous velocity of the potato, but the average velocity can be calculated from distance traveled and time taken. The usual formulae for dynamic and kinetic friction in the mechanics section can't really be used for rolling friction, but if you know a method for measuring rolling friction between the wheel and the surface of the table, it's doable.
  10. Interesting that you chose Bio and Physics - the usual combinations are Bio+Chem, or Chem+Physics. Biology and Physics aren't particularly interlinked, unlike the other combinations (Bio and Chem apparently supplement each other pretty well, whereas Physics supplements Chemistry very well). It's still doable, just remember that they may be quite far removed from each other.
  11. IGCSE chemistry is definitely not a pre-requisite. I myself started out with much less chemistry knowledge (didn't even know stuff like what acids or bases were or anything about rates of reaction, let alone more advanced topics like organic chemistry), and I'm doing perfectly fine in HL right now. However, @MaferAA is still correct, in that it would be very helpful indeed. His suggestion of starting off with SL first before moving into HL is also pretty good, especially seeing that the HL material builds off the SL stuff. It may be more efficient to focus on the IB syllabus only, but I'd imagine the IGCSE syllabus would provide a more gentle introduction to high school chemistry, so either method would be OK.
  12. We can't give you an investigation topic per se, but it's not that easy to do an IA without experimental data, although it is possible. You could start with these ideas, from the syllabus: using a spreadsheet for analysis and modelling extracting data from a database and analysing it graphically producing a hybrid of spreadsheet/database work with a traditional hands-on investigation using a simulation, provided it is interactive and open-ended. There are quite a lot of simulations and databases online, so it should be possible to find something related to your interests. I also think your original idea is perfectly doable if you have time, as it's quite closely linked with the IB Chemistry syllabus (rate of reaction and energetics). You should be able to do a sizeable number of trials with a mini version of baths and bath bombs - just scale everything down significantly to save time. Remember, you aren't rewarded for the complexity of the topic, but on how well you plan, analyse and discuss it.
  13. For the breadsticks, it's $1.50 for 3 breadsticks, as it says "$1.50 for an order of 3 breadsticks", so you have 12/3 = 4 portions. Should be able to get the correct answer.
  14. It's supposed to be somewhat like a small psychology paper, with an abstract and everything, so usually it's written in third person. At least that's true for the higher-scoring IAs I've read, and what our school told us. And I don't know about IAs for other courses encouraging first person - I'm pretty sure that science IAs are usually written in the third person too. It just makes things look more professional. Keep in mind that journals are also outlining their personal research and ideas too, but are almost always written in the third person (although granted they don't need to fulfil some stupid 'personal engagement' criteria).
  15. Well, you're at high school, so you don't need, and are not expected to, have completely original ideas - that's for university and later. So if they're good at writing essays, follow the criteria carefully, and can integrate the ideas of others well into their papers (I think its OK to also cite the ideas of others in the essay, although I'm not sure about this), then they should still be able to get a 6 or 7 without reading the book. Of course, that in itself takes work, as they still need to read through all the analyses and make sure their essay writing skills are up to par. If they don't read the book, ignore the criteria, and just skim Cliffnotes the day before the exam, they'll probably still do pretty badly anyways. It's not like those websites are bad in themselves or anything, and its still good to read through other analyses of the texts, especially those that may offer different insights, but they are most effective when used alongside the text.