How to prepare for IB History?

[Guest HayashiEsme]

For someone like me, who hasn't done History in the last two years (I ended up doing Triple Science + Economics for my IGCSE), a part of me worries that I'll be losing out big time if I don't read up on History. I've been told that the IB Humanities courses have been deisgned so that no prior knowledge is required, but I figured that I'd read it out of interest anyway. Is there anyone who went through the same thing as I did? Any suggestions for a pretty much rusty History student? (The last time I did History, I was in Year 8)

BTW: I'm doing SL History next year, and I believe we're doing Route 2, but it might change depending on the teacher

[khimberleigh]

I don't recommend trying to learn any topics prior to actually starting the course but background reading is a good idea. Make sure you know a bit of basic geography, (where countries are) especially European countries or whichever history you are doing. Also get to know a basic timeline of main events in the twentieth century such as the start and end both World Wars and get to know a couple of important people from the twentieth century. Not their whole biography or anything just what country they were from, position (president etc.) and why they were important. That could include: Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Tsar Nicholas, Kaiser Wilhelm, Woodrow Wilson, Clemenceau, Lloyd George, Churchill, Kennedy etc..

I'm doing HL History, level 2 next year, so if you have any questions feel free to pm me

[Guest HayashiEsme]

Awesome! I'll be sure to read up on that! Thanks for your help:)

Also, do you have any online resource for History that you could recommend? I know that Hank and John Green run CrashCourse, but I believe they're not 100% relevant to the IB Diploma

Edited November 16, 2012 by HayashiEsme

[alefal]

I agree with khimberleigh regarding what you could read on. Just note that only tsar Nicholas II is interesting, not tsar Nicholas I. I would also add Lenin and Trotsky to that list, as they are essential when it comes to the Russian revolution in late 1917.

If you choose to read more in depth about a crisis or war, remember that in the IB system only the causes and consequences are interesting. You will never be asked about the D-day during WW2 or the Battle of Incheon in the Korean War.

I would say that IB Survival is a fairly good online resource. For my part, I haven't used any internet resources for History in general. If you were to use online resources, be critical about what's written there. Although it seems unbiased and correct, don't assume it is. Throughout the IB History course, you will learn to analyse sources through OPVL (Origin, Purpose, Value, Limitation). Be aware of the limitations assigned to the use of internet sources. When that is said, I have used Cold War International History Project (CWIHP) quite a lot for Cold War-related topics (very useful, as it includes both first-hand sources and analysis of those sources), and I've also used another online resource to help me write the internal assessment.

EDIT: If you have any issues or questions regarding History, you could PM me as well

Edited November 16, 2012 by alefal

[Guest HayashiEsme]

Aaah thank you alefal! I'll be sure to read up on it too:)

Edited November 17, 2012 by HayashiEsme

[sarahlouise]

Don't stress about not having done it before, it really doesn't matter.

I would say - don't do anything for paper 1 to prepare before the course actually starts - you'll learn soon enough that you can pretty much get up to 21/25 on that paper with 0 knowledge at all, because it's all analysis. I regret doing as much as I did in terms of notes for paper 1...

Focus on your paper 2 topics. If anything, just find out which are the major areas of focus and which topics you'll be studying. Then I would just get a basic idea of the background of the topics, so that when you come to actually studying them in more detail you'll have a decent understanding.

But really, don't worry about it. All you need to know you WILL learn in the course. Just enjoy the summer! It'll be your last proper holiday for a while...

[alefal]

I would say - don't do anything for paper 1 to prepare before the course actually starts - you'll learn soon enough that you can pretty much get up to 21/25 on that paper with 0 knowledge at all, because it's all analysis. I regret doing as much as I did in terms of notes for paper 1...

Though, that's not completely true, is it? The essay question is always formulated like this: 'using the sources provided and your own knowledge, ...' You would lose a lot of marks if you only used the sources you're given or only your own knowledge. Therefore, it is necessary to have some information about the P1 topics.

However, I agree with you that it isn't necessary to read anything prior to the IB. Of course, if one has background information already, you won't have to do as much reading whilst you're in IB, but it's just a matter of self-discipline and taste.

[milk out of nose]

The not having done it before thing is NOT true. Most of the questions will be very hard to answer without knowing the context.

BUT, don't worry. Most IB students don't actually remember the details off the top of their head. All the really basic knowledge you will Have to know can probably be summed up in 2 pages, and the extra knowledge could be used for fortification.

To learn the dynamics of the topic there is a really good book written that tells you exactly the parts that the IB wants you to get.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Single-Century-History-International-Baccalaureate/dp/9608808731

This is a super condensed version of history to get the important parts. It's basically the bullet points. Good luck!

[alefal]

The not having done it before thing is NOT true. Most of the questions will be very hard to answer without knowing the context.

BUT, don't worry. Most IB students don't actually remember the details off the top of their head. All the really basic knowledge you will Have to know can probably be summed up in 2 pages, and the extra knowledge could be used for fortification.

To learn the dynamics of the topic there is a really good book written that tells you exactly the parts that the IB wants you to get.

http://www.amazon.co...e/dp/9608808731

This is a super condensed version of history to get the important parts. It's basically the bullet points. Good luck!

That does not mean one has to study before one starts with history on the IB, though. If the teacher does what he/she is supposed to, you'll learn IB history well enough in class. Our teacher went thoroughly through how we should write our essays the first semester, and we have learnt all the things we need in class. That is not saying that it is helpful to read some general information before, though.

My best tip is to be an efficient write-taker in class, and rewrite them afterwards. This way you will remember the topics well enough for the exams, and you will have a very good place for information (given that you put all your notes in a binder or something).

The book you link to seems good, but only deals with one aspect of IB history. I'm not sure which route HayashiEsme's class will take, but single party states are only a part (though fairly large) of the syllabus. Remember that one should also be aware of democratisation,, Leauge of Nations, wars (in particular the two world wars and the Cold War), social changes and dictators (especially consolidation of power).

Okay, I just re-read the first post, and if you're doing route 2, also include the rebuilding of nations, economy, politics in the post-WW2-period.

[TykeDragon]

Hey Alefal, I agree with your point that the last question requires own knowledge too, but I don't think Sarah Louise was denying that - in her defence she said 21/25 was achievable without any prior knowledge.... and to be fair, that's true. Difficult but true - 5 marks in question 1 JUST for picking out the messages of a couple of sources... 6 marks in question 2 JUST for comparing/contrasting two sources... 6 marks in question 3 JUST for discussing the usefulness of two sources, separately, by using the information they give you and making logical weakness/strength observations.... And if you use only (but all) sources in the mini essay Q4, you can get about half marks I would say. Bearing in mind it's 19/25 for a 7 in that paper, a 7 in the paper is most definitely possible with no prior knowledge!

OP, with regard to your question... I do HL route 2, exam is in May, and I must say the course is very interesting! But it does vary. For some, the Cold War is part of route 2, and we don't go through the Cold War. Plus, your school may choose different Civil Wars. We look at Spanish CW and Chinese CW, but not Nigerian/Korean.

So I would recommend you look at 1905-1945 sort of era, with European History, as the most definite things you will be studying are the causes of WW1 (including Balkans), the consequences of WW1 (as alefal said, you'll learn the 'practices' but mostly for completion I would say, you'll mostly be asked about comparing causes of wars, or what effects they had. However, I have seen a question about how technology ensured victory in 20th century wars.) Also, pay attention to long/short term causes of WW2 as you may be asked to contrast the causes of WW1/WW2. A large question, but simple enough if you prepare for it and know the stuff! Also, you're fairly sure to study at least a couple out of Lenin&Stalin/Hitler/Mao as questions asking you to compare the policies of two single party states leaders from DIFFERENT regions (so hitler and stalin would not cut it) are fairly common.

You'll also definitely be studying the peacekeeping period as it is the prescribed doc paper topic, and what the hell, sure it's worth looking into as it'll prepare you for studying it anyway, and the few extra marks the own knowledge gets you in document paper could mean a grade difference. So although the observation you could score highly without is correct, it is also nevertheless worth studying it. Maximise your coursework and document paper scores as they are the easiest part. My coursework first draft was almost a 7, and i'm aiming to redraft it to about 23/25.

Only other thing I can say, is to try to advertise HL history. I don't mean to sound like a nerd, but I think it's great! Personally, I prefer the higher component of the course to the standard level! Obviously subjective, but I'm enjoying the topics we're studying of Italian & German Unification 1815-1871, Bismarck's Germany 1871-1890, and basically the whole period of Russia through it's last tsars from the 1850s all the way to WW1, which ties in nicely with the SL course of Lenin from 1917 and Stalin from early 1920s. So if you can fit in HL history, don't be shy about it I recommend it over standard level Perhaps unless you need biology at HL for what you want to do, swap the two around - I hear that SL biology is in a different league of difficulty to HL - so it's a huge difference

Edited December 11, 2012 by TykeDragon

[alefal]

Hey Alefal, I agree with your point that the last question requires own knowledge too, but I don't think Sarah Louise was denying that - in her defence she said 21/25 was achievable without any prior knowledge.... and to be fair, that's true. Difficult but true - 5 marks in question 1 JUST for picking out the messages of a couple of sources... 6 marks in question 2 JUST for comparing/contrasting two sources... 6 marks in question 3 JUST for discussing the usefulness of two sources, separately, by using the information they give you and making logical weakness/strength observations.... And if you use only (but all) sources in the mini essay Q4, you can get about half marks I would say. Bearing in mind it's 19/25 for a 7 in that paper, a 7 in the paper is most definitely possible with no prior knowledge!

OP, with regard to your question... I do HL route 2, exam is in May, and I must say the course is very interesting! But it does vary. For some, the Cold War is part of route 2, and we don't go through the Cold War. Plus, your school may choose different Civil Wars. We look at Spanish CW and Chinese CW, but not Nigerian/Korean.

So I would recommend you look at 1905-1945 sort of era, with European History, as the most definite things you will be studying are the causes of WW1 (including Balkans), the consequences of WW1 (as alefal said, you'll learn the 'practices' but mostly for completion I would say, you'll mostly be asked about comparing causes of wars, or what effects they had. However, I have seen a question about how technology ensured victory in 20th century wars.) Also, pay attention to long/short term causes of WW2 as you may be asked to contrast the causes of WW1/WW2. A large question, but simple enough if you prepare for it and know the stuff! Also, you're fairly sure to study at least a couple out of Lenin&Stalin/Hitler/Mao as questions asking you to compare the policies of two single party states leaders from DIFFERENT regions (so hitler and stalin would not cut it) are fairly common.

You'll also definitely be studying the peacekeeping period as it is the prescribed doc paper topic, and what the hell, sure it's worth looking into as it'll prepare you for studying it anyway, and the few extra marks the own knowledge gets you in document paper could mean a grade difference. So although the observation you could score highly without is correct, it is also nevertheless worth studying it. Maximise your coursework and document paper scores as they are the easiest part. My coursework first draft was almost a 7, and i'm aiming to redraft it to about 23/25.

Only other thing I can say, is to try to advertise HL history. I don't mean to sound like a nerd, but I think it's great! Personally, I prefer the higher component of the course to the standard level! Obviously subjective, but I'm enjoying the topics we're studying of Italian & German Unification 1815-1871, Bismarck's Germany 1871-1890, and basically the whole period of Russia through it's last tsars from the 1850s all the way to WW1, which ties in nicely with the SL course of Lenin from 1917 and Stalin from early 1920s. So if you can fit in HL history, don't be shy about it I recommend it over standard level Perhaps unless you need biology at HL for what you want to do, swap the two around - I hear that SL biology is in a different league of difficulty to HL - so it's a huge difference

Well, my school operates with 22-23+ marks for a 7, which means you'll have to show your own knowledge at my school, at least (not that it is hard, the inter-war period is nice that way). If it is lower, though, it isn't hard at all.

Otherwise, you have good points, TykeDragon.

You will most likely encounter the inter-war period (Versailles Treaty, League of Nations, Hitler, appeasement, Locarno Treaties, invasions of quite a few areas, etc.), authoritarian/one-party states (both right-wing (Hitler, Mussolini, etc.) and left-wing (Lenin, Stalin, Castro, Mao), social and political changes (Europe and Middle East, 19th and 20th century), democratic states (in particular the Weimar Republic and European states after 1945), the Cold War, the unification of Italy and Germany, and certain topics about the Middle East. If you were to read on anything, I would start with the inter-war period, as the paper 1 is only about this topic. But, as I said, I don't think it's necessary to read on anything prior to the history course, because you will learn everything you need in class.

[Guest HayashiEsme]

Oh wow, I can't thank everybody enough for their input on everything. Really appreciate it:) I'm just beginning to start my reading as well, so this has been amazing!

@TykeDragon Funny you mention the switch between HL Biology and SL History - I was thinking about that, but then backed out at the last minute when I started hearing lots of horror stories from HL History students. The Head of History even turned to one of his students and went "HL History's hell isn't it?" when I was supporting a friend to ask about History in IB. I used to think that a 7 in HL History was basically impossible since nobody got them at my school, until I came onto IBSurvival and seems like everyone who enjoyed it gets 7s which was why I shied away from it as well. Also I've just made a pretty drastic change from a Science-focused Diploma package to a Humanities-focused Diploma package, so everything still feels a little daunting, (but if my gut instinct's right, this should be the better combination out of the two.) Would you consider HL History to be extremely stressful? Another History teacher had a pretty long chat with her students warning them that it will be extremely stressful - someone dropped out on the first week too because they couldn't hack the workload. I'm curious about it all, since I didn't do too much in trying to figure out how everyone in HL History was dealing with the subject, and I usually never end up dealing with the same troubles most people have with a subject anyway.

[TykeDragon]

It's pretty subjective, to be honest. I hear people saying HL Biology is hell, too.

HL History is only really stressful if you get behind and/or don't enjoy it, because if you get behind it becomes daunting how much reading you need to do. There is a lot of information, which may be boring if you don't like History. However, you seem to be enjoying your reading so far, and have a look into the unifications of Germany and Italy as these are very interesting topics!

Haha don't assume that being interested alone gets you a 7 though! 7s still are incredibly rare, as in only the top 3% or something of students achieve them! This is because there is a lot of information to be processed and specifically recalled and you need to write essays, quickly. In the Paper 2 and Paper 3 exams, you are expected to turn out a decent essay in roughly 45 mins (50 on higher paper.) These essays need to be organised and clear, with a good argument and the ability to identify good factors and points, with relevant accurate factual info to support them. On top of this, writing a narrative account like a story (in 1914 this happened... then in 1915 this happened... so it can be seen that this..) will not do, you need to analyse everything.

However, I would recommend History because its so interesting, and it is certainly feasible to improve your exam and essay techniques so that you can improve your marks, once you know where you're going wrong. Trust me - don't be too intimidated, or feel down because of poor grades. In my Year 12/ IB1 I scored a mediocre level 5 because my document paper technique sucked, and my essays fell short because I was too descriptive and lazy on recalling accurate 'IDHK' - in depth historical knowledge. However, I decided I would improve my grade so I could get a good prediction for uni, and by the start of Year 13 I had proved I was hardworking enough to be upped to a 6, and I studied how to improve my technique. I work harder in lessons, and learnt 'secrets' to how to pick up marks in the document paper and improve essays, like being specific, relevant and analytical, not vague and descriptive. As a result, I came out as a borderline 7, and managed to get myself predicted a 7

So the moral of the story is, just enjoy it and try hard! 7s are hard. Not guaranteed; not impossible - I am inclined to say the exact same for Biology. Trust me, I don't think choosing biology for grade prospects is a good idea my friend, it may just make you become lazy as well as you'll trick yourself into thinking you took the easy choice so don't have to work as hard!

What would you enjoy most, learning about animals, plants etc and writing scientific short answer/data response/structured essay questions, or learning about the development of countries and war, and writing analytical essays arguing a case to answer questions? That's the biggest question!

[Guest HayashiEsme]

I actually suffer from a limitation to how many HL subjects I can take in IB, which my school made to be 3:( I'm taking Biology as my HL, not only because it's my "safeguard 7" (and even then, it's not a walk in the park.), but also to fulfil this lifelong dream of mine to learn about genetics. Sounds dull now, in comparsion to all the History I've been reading, but I've always gone to school thinking that I'll finally be learning about genetics, and them disappointed to find out that you only learn that as a proper topic in IB, and only at HL. Also it's the Science I'm the most passionate about. Had it been my way, I'd take on History as my fourth HL!

Good to know that History at HL's only as demanding as I expected:) I spent the last hour or so reading up about ancient Chinese History with Crash Course World History as a supplement. Can't say too much about it so far, but I'm enjoying it:)

Did my IGCSEs recently, and 45 minutes is definitely a comfortable time I can write a response in. Answering essay based questions with a thoughtful analysis of both sides is definitely something I quite enjoy doing. Ahaha!

Awh darn, you're definitely making me rethink my Diploma package for the second time TykeDragon:). Ayeeee Biology really feels like it's sticking out of my Diploma package like a sore thumb now, it really is! Do you know how big the jump between SL and HL History is though?

Edited December 12, 2012 by HayashiEsme

[TykeDragon]

Lol don't consider it a limitation you only do 3 HLs... My school are the same, and it's because the IB course is demanding enough, and universities really don't care, so what's the point? Not saying I discredit people who do 4 HLs, good on them, but it's true.

The jump from SL to HL is considerable. Obviously the SL part is the same. You study the same topics like world and civil wars, and single party states for paper 2, also the Peacekeeping for paper 1. All that changes with HL is the addition of the HL topics - italy/germany, bismarck, and russia for example, is what i've said we do. HL students also do paper 3, which is 3 essays on these topics, however sometimes you will get a SL topic on the HL paper, such as peacekeeping or world war. that doesn't mean the jump is negligible though - it's still 3 more essays and a lot of material to cover! Plus, the easy coursework is weighted less at HL (20% as opposed to 25% i believe) It's definitely promising you enjoy analytical writing and the material covered - and I agree about China, it's history 1900-1950 ish is really interesting, especially as its hard to imagine it is so recent that it was subjected to warlordism! (however the thing about times though is that it is a huge step up from GCSE and IGCSE, but of course your essay writing and time management will improve through the IB anyway!)

Do biology if it interests you more, but I must say if you're in it for one topic you'll be disappointed when that topic gets treated as only a small fraction of your IB course, and you happened to find the rest of the stuff boring. As I've said, it's entirely subjective what YOU would prefer, but personally I would much much rather be in HL history than HL biology. Plus, from what I hear, it's beneficial points wise to make that swap as a 7 in SL biology sounds much easier than HL biology, whereas I don't think SL history has 7s as more common than in HL. In fact, I would wager that the HL students, as the ones with the biggest interest and overall essay writing skillset, is more likely to excel!

Probably easy to counter that, but just saying.

[alefal]

Well' it's not completely true that universities don't care, especially in universities where bachelor is four years instead of three. Usually, IB students aren't allowed to skip the first year altogether, but they will normally get extra credit for their subjects, particular (and in some cases only) the subjects taken at higher level. Though, I completely agree with you that the IB is tough enough, and it is really a privilege that we're doing the IB. Therefore, three subjects at higher level isn't a limitation, but rather a privilege. My school also has this restriction that we're not allowed to take more than three subjects at higher level.

Some students have freedom to take more than three HL-subjects, we have freedom from taking more than three HL-subjects.

At my school, there is actually no difference between SL and HL. SL-students also learn what HL-students learn. The difference for us is how much the IA is weighed and Paper 3. I don't think anyone in our class finds history itself stressful.

Just to supplement TykeDragon's discussion about taking biology or history at higher level, also check what the universities you want to attend to demand.

[TykeDragon]

OP, what do you intend to do at university? That will potentially settle it.

[Guest HayashiEsme]

Yep, agree with your thoughts on the forth HL TykeDragon and Alefal, I said the whole thing in the heat of the moment. I think that HL History would be the right thing to do, and I hate to admit this but what my friends had a huge part in dissuading HL History from being my HL choices. They've been worried about how I might deal with the IBDP because of how badly I dealt with IGCSE when anything emotional came my way, which didn't help the anxiety I build up in my head when I'm super stressed. I've had my grades plummet pretty significantly over the last two years (what would be Grades 10 and 11 for Tyke, I believe), but it's not harming to the extent of the teachers starting to rethink my potential in any way (in fact, the teachers who knew what was going on with my life at home were really supportive.)

On top of that, I transferred from Singapore's local system to the International school system for secondary school, I've always had the edge with the Sciences and Maths - that's just something I was good at not because I was a gifted goddess of logic subjects, I just came from a really competitive school that was so competitive I had 4 mock exam papers to practise every night in the lead up to the PSLE. (Not fun, absolutely not fun.) When I hit grade 10, I was pretty stunned by how much I didn't actually know about the Sciences (I flew by grades 8 and 9 with Primary school knowledge and so everything I had to regurgitate out for the Science was pretty much running through my head all day long by then.), and it really felt like falling down long long flight of stairs. I ended up spending Year 10 freaking out quite a bit, but at the same time, starting from scratch and learning from loads and loads of trial and error how I was supposed to go about learning and tackling the Sciences.

At the same time, I started learning Economics for the first time, and everything just came so naturally to me! It was really great because for the first time in awhile, I felt like things made sense and I not only felt like I could enjoy the class (and not feign interest), I actually had the capacity to have fun and joke with friends in class too. Which I really really missed.

I could say the same for Literature too. Didn't have a really helpful teacher for the first half of IGCSE, but when the new teacher came in, he really showed me how to appreciate Literature which was amazing. I grew up in a competitive school where they'd reward the kid who read the most number of books all the time, so I drew a parallel as a kid and came to the conclusion that since all the stuff people reward others for were there when the task at hand was extremely dull, reading was probably horrible too. Gosh, I remember times where I cried because I didn't want to read. Aaaah how times have changed! I guess another thing was that I noticed that both Literature teachers really took to the things I'd share when we discussed about our literary analysis. So there was the birth of me as a Literature student, hands down my favourite class of the year. HL Literature was a last minute change too, actually, I was pretty apprehensive with putting Literature as my HL despite everything, because of how I struggled during the year to come up with good essay responses. Which I found out later to be because of how I never had time to properly write my essays since I'd always have to spend so much time making sure that I understood what I was doing with the Sciences. I sat down with my Shakespeare text on one hand, the movie playing on the computer, Sparknotes running on my iPhone and reanalysed everything from scratch and wrote an essay, and I had my faith in my Literature responses restored. I did catch the teacher known around school to be a ToK enthusiast and my Chemistry teacher reading my essay plan that had my interpretation of the story that I was pretty proud of on one of my responses when they were invidulating, which was really cool too.

Now how I got to History was by the suggestion of my Economics teacher to me. Actually, it wasn't a suggestion, he kept persisting with it in class and at parent teacher night that I do History. I'll be honest, I was pretty shocked that he suggested it to me. I didn't remember enjoying History in Grade 8 and 9 as much as I did with Science, seeing a magnesium ribbon burst into a flame of bright light. It did help that we had a really fun teacher, but it all changed when I had a nice sitdown with my Grandma over how Japan affected China and how her family were affected. That was the turning point for me, I finally realised that I've missed out on such a great thing by not taking History. I started craving to find out more, thinking that I've missed out on a completely different perspective on the things in life. By that time though, the final subject submissions were far beyond over, so I kept going back and forth between changing it.

From my friends' perspective I guess swapping from Science-focused to Humanities-focused looked like a radical change that didn't quite suit my skills (What did fuel their confusion and eventual detest to the new change was that, while I felt like I was going through hell, I was still getting scores above the class average anyway. I just had no idea why the answers I threw in were right half the time.), and it certainly didn't help that we were in the midst of IGCSE, which led them to think that I was probably going through a phase or something. Actually, I was convinced that I was going through a phase too. But in reality, it actually really helped that I was doing the IGCSEs then because it became really apparent where my strengths and weaknesses were, so I did the change.

I kept Biology thinking that if I were to actually be, in fact, going through a phase, then I'd go through the hassle of swapping one less class out of my HLs, also I didn't think the IB Co-ordinator would be too happy if I did a 2 subject swap when IB begins anyway. I was pretty well versed in Biology by then, so I thought, it would be all good anyway, and I had the idea that at least the 7 in IB Biology would be more attainable than HL History's.

I'm sorry to make everyone here read my life story essentially, but I figured that I'd share where my unsure head was coming from. TL;DR: I'd swap the HL Biology with SL History, but I felt like I was dealing with the choosing between good grades, no enjoyment; or average grades, with maximum enjoyment.

As to what I'm thinking of doing in Uni? Right now I'm thinking of Liberal Arts in the US or a Humanities of choice in the UK. I haven't done enough research as to what kind of university could suit me better so I've got no clue. I'll tell you something that I've got cemented in my mind though: it's definitely NOT one of the Sciences! Ahahah!

The plan for now is to sit through the first two weeks of SL History and figure out if HL really is right for me, and then do the swap. I can't do the second change right now anyway since all the teachers have flown back for the holidays, so that's the earliest I can do it too. I'll have the Head of History teach me History at SL, so this should be interesting:) You guys have been beyond helpful, I don't know what else to say besides the hugest thank you for your help on this thread too:) I'll be doing some reading for leisure on vacation too, so this has been a great starting point!

edit: Since I feel so bad for making whoever who read that go through my text of doom, here's a badly drawn cookie:P

Edited December 14, 2012 by HayashiEsme

[khimberleigh]

At my school we're encouraged to do HL history because the Paper 3 history exam (which is HL only) is marked significantly easier than the Paper 2. If you look at the markschemes what would get you a 11-12 on the paper 2 would get you a 13-14 on the paper 3 (which is a 7). Also, as your overall mark for the subject is based on all three papers and the IA, the paper 3 usually brings up your average. Therefore, although it's a bit more work, it's easier to get a 7 doing HL than SL History.

[alefal]

Yep, agree with your ...

I found your history very interesting, actually. You have a very interesting story for the American application essays at the very least! I thank you for the imaginary cookie, though!

If you won't do anything science-related in uni, then I wouldn't worry about not having biology at higher level. Actually, if you choose the 'right' courses (not many of them, but they exist), history at higher level might help you quite considerably. Also, as TykeDragon mentioned earlier, the work difference between History SL and HL is not really a large one compared to biology SL and HL (I don't have the subject, but from the stories I've heard, it's much worse regarding work load).

I would suggest to start with your university planning early, by the way. You'll have an easier IB2-life that way