Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Sandwich last won the day on December 20 2018

Sandwich had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,412 Ridiculously Awesome


About Sandwich

  • Rank
    IB Baffled!

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Exams
    May 2009
  • Country
    United Kingdom

Recent Profile Visitors

38,367 profile views
  1. Moved this to the correct forum. The answer depends on where you are hoping to study - you haven't even said which countries you're considering. The first step is to look up some Universities you might consider applying to and reading their admissions criteria. It's all freely and easily available online just by googling. If you don't meet their entrance criteria (e.g. in the UK you'd be ineligible for all medical schools I know of because you have neither HL Chemistry or HL Biology), then you can rule those Universities out.
  2. Sandwich

    Mock exam revision

    February is a long way away! The best thing to do is get a copy of the Economics syllabus and work your way point by point through the aspects which are going to be tested in your mock exam, until you've covered everything. If you divide everything you need to cover by the number of days you've got before the exam when you'll be able to revise, it'll give you a rough guide of what to aim for every day and hopefully help to motivate you. Every day where you should be revising but instead you don't do anything additional towards the exam, you'll pile up more stuff to cover for other days! I used to find that quite motivating. Otherwise it's overwhelming unless you break it down. 'Be like the squirrel' Which will make sense if you listen to this song. Good luck!
  3. Sandwich

    Pro-Choice or Pro-Life?

    Well any mother's life is at risk in the pregnant versus the non-pregnant state. It's actually how most abortion law works - in the UK, it is only legal to have an abortion before 24 weeks if there is risk to a woman's mental or physical health. Being pregnant is inherently physiologically risky (blood clots, eclampsia, intra-partum haemorrhage, the long-term ramifications on urinary and faecal continence, post-partum depression/psychosis, risk of sepsis, exposure to anaesthetics, the risk of a huge number of potentially life threatening things attends every pregnancy), and so effectively all abortions before 24 weeks are permitted. The position of being pregnant is not a simple issue of 'convenience' - being pregnant has huge ramifications for that person's life during the pregnancy and also afterwards. Whilst taking those risks may be what the mother prefers if they want a baby - if it is an unwanted child then it will nevertheless change the whole of the rest of your life to have to provide for a child and be a parent, or if a decision is taken that the child should be taken into care and put up for adoption, it has a huge impact on the mother to carry the guilt of having done that. This is why in the past, before access to abortion, women would attempt to have backstreet abortions, which carried with them a burden of morbidity and mortality. It's a massive life changing event to have a baby, labelling it as simply an inconvenience is I think to really fail to understand the depth of what it means to the people who are actually having to go through it. I don't think any of us would look at our parents and say that our coming into the world didn't change their entire lives slightly beyond the level of an inconvenience. Being called pro-baby-killer, much like being called pro-life, would of course be another example of inappropriate choice of inaccurate but emotive language to try and provoke a particular response. The whole point is that what is being aborted is not yet a baby in any viable sense - such labels are unhelpful and obscure the actual issues faced by the people who will ultimately be affected. If any position on this issue could be found to be convenient, I think that is would be pro-life groups who can conveniently take a position whereby they feel they can enforce what happens in other people's lives, without ever having to take a single iota of the consequences. To feel that you can dictate the lives of others, including by forcing them to take decisions which will damage them, without having to take any burden on oneself, is convenience in a nutshell. I say all of this not to specifically argue with you, but because I think people need to think about the individuals who ultimately are forced to bear the responsibility for what is potentially your (or somebody else's) decision. Fortunately abortion remains something, in the UK at least (barring Northern Ireland), where people can make their own choice as to where they stand on abortion and either have one or not.
  4. Sandwich

    Are supplemented levels accepted in med schools in the UK?

    I would suggest contacting the medical schools you are interested in and asking the admissions departments directly as I think this would vary by medical school. Some of them may have dim views of 're-sit' exams and only count the grades from your first sitting, but I'm not 100% sure as doing HL separately a year later is a tactic I've never heard of. The safest thing would be just to do HL Chemistry now. Part of the reason they want HL Chemistry is because they know it's challenging and difficult to score highly in as part of the diploma - medical school is also going to be challenging, so if you can do one, the logic is you should be more likely to be able to do the other. It follows that if you're not able to cope with doing HL Chemistry as part of the IB, you may then not cope with the demands of what you're asked to learn at medical school.
  5. Sandwich


    There is no official entrance exam for the IB worldwide - for instance I never had to sit any exam to do the IB. This entrance exam will therefore be a local exam dreamt up by the school you are applying to. It's great that you're motivated to work hard for it, but the people on this website won't be able to help you unless by some amazing coincidence somebody here has also applied to the same secondary school as you once upon a time. You're best off asking your own teachers at school and maybe seeing if you can ask some of the kids who successfully passed the exam and are now doing the IB ahead of you if they have any advice.
  6. Sandwich

    IB certificate or diploma

    It depends on what you want to do in the future. If you wish to apply to University in the UK (I say, based on the flag on your profile...) then persist with the diploma because the individual certificates are worth peanuts. Look up the UCAS points for each and you will soon see that the IB is worth very little without the full diploma. If you are really struggling, consider switching to A Levels where you will be able to ditch English as a subject entirely. The other thing to remember is you're only just starting the IB in the grand scheme of things - you have plenty of time to work on your skills in English. Is English your native language? If not consider if its possible to do your native language as your main language.
  7. Sandwich

    Possibly got the word count wrong?

    If there seems to be a significant discrepancy between your stated word count and your real word count, then they will look into it. However if your essay looks to be about 4000 words and you've written 3989, nobody is going to be going over it and re-counting your paper copy. I wouldn't worry.
  8. Sandwich

    WT1: Original Language of Source Text

    Yes of course, you can use works in translation no problem. Nobody will expect you to crack out the original Greek
  9. I am not super familiar with Gone with the Wind but this sounds like a good idea for an essay question. The only thing that I would consider is whether you really want this to be a 'to what extent?' question. When you ask 'to what extent?' you are implicitly saying that you will cover two things - both how it shows the theme of something (racism, in this case) and also how it doesn't show it. That's how you measure the extent of something. Do you want to cover the second part of that? From what you've said you're not so sure about american culture and so addressing the ways in which it doesn't address the theme of racism might require some more extensive knowledge of the relevant culture from that time period. If you just want to talk about the ways in which Gone with the Wind addresses the theme of racism, change the wording to 'How does Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell explore the theme of racism in US culture?' and you'll no longer have that problem, because you've only committed yourself to exploring the ways in which it does address the theme of racism. The wording of your EE question is essential. Whether you switch it to racism or sexism is really up to you. I think either way because you're addressing a cultural question you'll need to do some research about the state of US society at the time and bring it into the EE. If you're not sure which then I personally would suggest that you do some reading around the culture for both those topics and then see which one you feel like you're finding more relevant information on that would tie in most nicely with Gone with the Wind.
  10. Sandwich

    Pro-Choice or Pro-Life?

    Personally I think that 'pro-life' is a misleading term for being anti-abortion, because it makes the assumption that a fertilised egg at any level is life. You can fertilise an egg in a petri dish (which is done routinely for IVF, a procedure that seems to go largely un-opposed by anti-abortionists), but that is not the same as creating a viable life. That requires a mother to carry the pregnancy to either full term or until such a time for the foetus to become independently viable and capable of sustaining life. The earliest we're able to keep foetuses alive is really 23/24 weeks (with a very few exceptions), and many of those pre-term babies will survive but be significantly affected by health problems - inadequately developed lungs, retinopathy, neurological sequelae of the tendency towards intracerebral haemorrhage, developmental delay. So to get a fertilised embryo to the point where it becomes 'life' requires the mother to carry it. It doesn't really have its own ability for 'life' until some way down the line - its potential for at some point in the future having 'life' is entirely contingent on the mother continuing to carry it until such a point as it is viable. The only one who has 'life' at that time in any real and meaningful sense is the mother. To demand that women place their own right to life as secondary, by law, to the right of a being which: A) Presently has no sustainable life of its own B) Is dependent on the mother to get to the point where it might viably have a life C) Presents health risks to the only presently alive being - the mother - including the risk of maternal death Seems to me to be nothing to do with being pro-life. If you are pro-life then the only currently alive person is the mother - and you are choosing to put her life at risk and denying her the right to self-determination, neither of which are consistent with promoting life. You do this on the basis that the egg has the potential to one day become a life - and even that is uncertain, maybe it will, maybe it won't! Many pregnancies result in miscarriage. The only actual definite life in the equation (the mother's) is being subjugated - you are effectively saying it is less important than a life which does not yet exist in any real form. So I guess I find calling the anti-abortionist position 'pro-life' really the ultimate irony. It's dressing up making value judgements about how you feel people should live their lives in language that makes it sound like a positive thing.
  11. Sandwich

    Does God exist?

    I suppose a point I would make to you is - if you consider religion to be unquestionable and sacrosanct to the point that questioning it is equivalent to a personal insult and indeed even just typing something without capital letters is offensive - in my view you're excluding religion as a special case from the realms of human intellect and questioning and scrutiny. A lot of people would say that in a world of free speech, people should be free to question and defend any belief and thought. If you say that you can question everything except for religion because any questioning of religion is essentially 'intolerance' then I think you've got to take a long hard look at why you think that religion cannot be held to the same level of scrutiny that we hold all other areas of society to. And if you believe it can stand up to the same level of scrutiny, then I would urge you to engage with it, rather than simply labelling it disparaging and intolerance.
  12. Sandwich

    Poem Analysis Question

    Reading the poem the first section is clearly a metaphor between the building of walls and the building of relationships because Seamus Heaney then literally spells that comparison out for you. What does the metaphor of scaffolding to build strong walls v.s. the 'scaffolding' to build a relationship tell you about Seamus Heaney's insights into himself and others - because the whole thing reads a reflection on a key relationship.
  13. Sandwich


    I think it's a decent topic, for me the main thing would be that it's easiest to stay on course with TOK and also to demonstrate to your teacher that you're hitting the criteria if you're completely on-message the whole way through - in other words, use TOK terminology the whole way. Like you could frame your question as "how does our knowledge of ethics shape or limit our knowledge of science?". Remember TOK is all about ways of knowing and areas of knowledge and that's basically what you want to constantly be coming back to in order to score highly in your presentation - emphasising how the areas of knowledge interact and how what you're saying is relevant as an example of these interactions. What you don't want to do is accidentally slip into just telling people a potted history of Agent Orange.
  14. Sandwich


    No reason why it couldn't be based on a TV show. I guess it's hard to say anything more than that without knowing what it actually is
  15. Sandwich

    Consequences for law students if Britain should leave the EU

    Well the UK has of course now suicidally voted to leave... although article 50, the actual thing that starts the process of leaving, has not yet been invoked. It would also take at least 2 years probably to sort out even from when it is activated. So in terms of having to pay fees and so on, I expect if you applied to a UK University soon it wouldn't make much difference. If they accept you on EU principles they can't really take that funding away even if the laws changed mid-way through. So if you applied in the next few years I think you may be alright fees-wise.

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.