Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Unknown

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Exams
    May 2018
  • Country
  1. I'm writing my first IA draft and I realise that I am very wordy, or maybe I'm putting too many details in but I've only done my introduction and social factors for my STEEPLE and I am now up to 1034 words..? I'm thinking of just doing a PEST analysis instead, but I still want to do my SWOT analysis. So my questions are: 1. Do words count if they are in a table? 2. Do I need to define what a PEST/SWOT analysis is before getting to the details like we're supposed to in exams? 3. Is it bad to be citing information and statistics from a lot of other places other than the supporting documents that you're including in the appendix? Is it bad to be having so many supporting stats in the first place? It feels like most of my 'commentary' is mostly describing what the market environment is like, accounting for why it's like how it is, with a tiny bit of "so what" at the end. Again, just based on my social factors. I kind of want to paste that para here to ask but that'll prob bite me back later...could I pm somebody? 4. "Will the implementation of localisation strategies be enough to allow Airbnb to circumvent the threats that the Chinese market poses?" Does this sound like a rhetorical question? My friend says it sounds like a rhetorical question T.T How would I make my RQ sound less like a rhetorical question? 5. Could I just exceed the word limit for the 1st draft cuz I get super attached to my words (this is semi-rhetorical hah =l ) Thank you! (pandas are soo cute <3)
  2. I've asked my teacher if I could change my topic but he said it's already too late T.T My adapted question now is "How does the difference in the type of intermolecular bonding present in impurities - such as acetone and copper (II) chloride - affect its adsorption by activated carbon and bentonite clay in water, as determined by precipitation and fractional distillation of remaining impurities?" I'm just going to hope for the best now...
  3. Right, so I chose to do a chemistry EE because I figured that I liked it enough and I understand the concepts that are in the textbook so I would be able to apply those concepts to my EE. However, the more I look at my research questions, the more I dislike them and it's just rather frustrating. I've already changed my topic once and I feel like my supervisor is either really annoyed and judge-y about students who don't have their **** together or maybe it's just me seeing things that aren't there. Either way, I don't think he would like it too much if I changed it again just before we leave for summer break cuz we have our EE Cafe next Thursday, where we're meant to share our preliminary research and plan on what we're gonna do for our EE over the summer break. Anyway, my problem with my research questions is that I feel like they are never an 'extended essay' question. They don't feel right. For example, my question now is "How does the difference in molecular polarity affect the adsorption of impurities - such as oil, chloride and copper (II) ions - by activated carbon and bentonite clay?" Adsorption is more of a physical process wherein gases are attracted to the surface of a solid e.g. chlorine gas to pores in activated carbon. I thought it would be a good question when I made it, but now I'm just thinking about how ineffectually I'd explain it through chemistry because from what I've seen of good chemistry EEs, they've always included the chemical structure and explained how the properties of said chemical is due to the nature of the molecule etc. However, if I do it on activated carbon and bentonite clay, 1. bentonite clay is a mixture and I'm not sure if comparing pure activated carbon to a mixture of bentonite clay is fundamentally unfair. 2. Because bentonite clay is a mixture, I wouldn't be able to define its "molecular polarity" exactly. Should I work around it and talk about the polarity of its main constituents even though they aren't in equal proportions? 3. How can I tie in the chemical formula for clay and activated carbon when they are less relevant in the filtration process than their physical structure? 4. How am I even supposed to draw the chemical formula of a mixture..? 5. there aren't as many chemistry principles that apply as I thought there'd be. I'm just a bit lost on what I'm meant to do with this topic now. How do you come up with your perfect chemistry EE question? Haizz... I dunno man. What are we even allowed to ask our supervisors? It's not I want to get spoonfed, but I am not as familiar with chemistry as a subject as I thought I was. As a result, when I think of one topic, I stick with it, only to find problems a couple of weeks after when I sit down to think seriously about said flawed topic. Should I try changing my topic, or would that be weak of me to give in to my fickleness? If I were to still do adsorption, perhaps it'd be better to vary the temperature, but would it become too easy for an EE since it'll just be a direct application of Le Chatelier's Principle? I'll just give some details on how I came up with my topics in the first place in case anyone has any alternative topic suggestions... Note: "Chemistry is the science that deals with the composition, characterization and transformation of substances. A chemistry EE should incorporate chemical principles and theory, and emphasize the study of matter and of the changes it undergoes." Real life situations/applications I'd like to approach: Sustainability - in manufacturing (e.g. Pharmaceutics), waste management (e.g. biodegradable plastics) or water purification (e.g. of heavy metals and oil) Skills that I'd like to use: Titration, Chromatography, Stoichiometry, Spectrometry, Precipitation Topics I think could be interesting but haven't learned yet: Materials Equilibrium Organic Chemistry Reactions Also, just cuz I felt like sharing more, look at this EE example I found! I've only really read the abstract and introduction but this is what I imagine chemistry EEs SHOULD be like, where there are clearly connections to what we're learning in the IB, just in a more real-world context in all it's technical glory, but we STILL actually understand what's happening. Vanillin EE.pdf
  4. So my TOK Presentation is this week and I've been working on it over the weekend but when I asked my teacher if what I've got so far was ok, he told me to change the focus slightly so that it would be more ToK. I don't want to be disrespecting his authority and experience but I suppose I don't really know how to make something more ToK. My RLS: US 2016 Presidential Elections - focus on difference in voters' perspectives on who would be the 'right' decision My current KQ: Can you ever know if a knowledge claim is wrong before making conclusions? Here's my structure so far: Introduce the RLS + KQ Define when a knowledge claim is wrong Illustrate conclusion-making as [purpose -> knowledge -> conclusion] Introduce the historical debate of the wave/particle nature of light before accepting the dual nature. How there were two theories and how ultimately both were accepted after evaluating using inductive reasoning, imagination and shared memory. Claim: Should incorporate knowledge from various sources to be objective. Introduce how "history is written by the victors" and discuss how different perspectives may lead to different versions of history, even when the same WOKs of inductive reasoning, imagination and memory are used to interpret the same evidence. the evaluation of primary sources in constructing history e.g. . how do they then choose what to include and what not to include? Counterclaim: Should maintain different knowledge claims from different perspectives to be objective. Mini-conclusion: the extent of objectiveness achieved is different in NatSci and History because of how each WOK is utilised Reintroduce the original RLS. Ask which should be more important, overall uniformity and harmony in perspective, or representation of various perspectives? Explain if there can be a 'right' and a 'wrong'. should the ethical value in each decision be considered when making a decision? Extension: connect the consequences of each conclusion within the AOK of ethics by evaluating the correctness/ethical value of decisions made within the different theories of ethics -Kants deontology [clinton voters cuz they feel morally obligated to protecting the communities that trump scapegoats] and utilitarianism [trump voters cuz they want their jobs] - which will cause differences in which other WOKs - namely, emotion, reason and faith - is prioritised to determine what’s right/wrong. Mention other RLS where this knowledge question is relevant. E.g. evaluating which university to apply to. [note to self: ...I need another academic rls , probably.] I dunno. How do I make it more ToK? It seemed like the problem was because when I was telling my teacher about it I said 'decision-making' instead of conclusion-making and he said that it's likely that I've already got a strong opinion on the matter cuz of how controversial this election cycle was. Also I'm doing it myself so I've only got 10min to work in. Is this too much?

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.