Jump to content

History IA Pls help!!


turtle turtle

Recommended Posts

I wanted to do the topic: Were the middle-eastern mandate system, league of nations and German reparations terms of the Treaty the best you could expect for the times?

But is it alright to list three separate areas to investigate and answer them separately (since it's all part of the same treaty), or is this not good and will lose marks?

 

Thank you!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 09/06/2016 at 10:57 AM, IB_taking_over said:

In the interest of word count, you are probably best to pick one and deal with just that. Otherwise you are likely to be superfisical in your analysis. 2200 words sounds like a lot more words than it actually is once you start writing. 

thanks for your reply, ive actuallly finished writing the essay and each part in part d has 300 words, do u think it would be superficial? thnx!

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, turtle turtle said:

thanks for your reply, ive actuallly finished writing the essay and each part in part d has 300 words, do u think it would be superficial? thnx!

without seeing it, I cannot be 100% sure. But, I'm 99% it is as part D is superficial recommended to be 500-650 words. 

8 hours ago, turtle turtle said:

oh rlly i didnt know that lol. but i chose the topic  last year, so ib cant reallly expect me to change it though?

you should be fine. Chances are your questions is not in the exact same wording (and if it didn't exist at the time they can't really blame you.)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, IB_taking_over said:

without seeing it, I cannot be 100% sure. But, I'm 99% it is as part D is superficial recommended to be 500-650 words. 

you should be fine. Chances are your questions is not in the exact same wording (and if it didn't exist at the time they can't really blame you.)

Do you think I could do: to what extent were the middle eastern mandates and the German reparation clauses the best that could be expected for the times and not do the league of nations (700 words analysis total) ? or is it weird to list two separate sections and analyse them?

 

about whether the analysis is superficial, there were only 3 middle eastern mandates and they all had the same outcome. and then for German reparations, I analyse whether the reparation clauses were the best that could be expected. Do you think this would still be a superficial analysis? and thnx for ur replies :)

Edited by turtle turtle
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I thought you were graduating next year (can't trust these exam sessions on profiles, so many people write the wrong ones) -- in this case, if you're graduating Nov 2016, of course it's OK to have that topic.

I also think you should really be asking your teacher. S/he is the expert and many IAs are assessed only internally. I would say it's OK to have two parts, as long as they are somewhat related (and yours seem to be). But we aren't teachers and the IB experience varies so much between schools and countries that it's very hard to get a definite right answer from us. Good luck!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 15/06/2016 at 8:58 PM, ellie said:

Sorry, I thought you were graduating next year (can't trust these exam sessions on profiles, so many people write the wrong ones) -- in this case, if you're graduating Nov 2016, of course it's OK to have that topic.

I also think you should really be asking your teacher. S/he is the expert and many IAs are assessed only internally. I would say it's OK to have two parts, as long as they are somewhat related (and yours seem to be). But we aren't teachers and the IB experience varies so much between schools and countries that it's very hard to get a definite right answer from us. Good luck!

Thanks so much for the replies! I'm actually changing my topic to the mandate system. Do you think that an examiner could get biased and mark me down for saying that britain was largely to blame for the problems in the middle east?

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, turtle turtle said:

Thanks so much for the replies! I'm actually changing my topic to the mandate system. Do you think that an examiner could get biased and mark me down for saying that britain was largely to blame for the problems in the middle east?

In all technically, yes they could. But that would be really petty (this is history and not English so the examiners are slightly less petty...) Chances are your IA will only be graded by your teacher since only a sample are sent away.

As long as a prove why you are correct what the examiner thinks should not be a factor in deciding your score.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From experience, if you make your self a checklist and grade your essay yourself, you will realize your weakness and strength. I mean, reflection is one of the ib learner traits and I can assure you that the grade you give yourself is the grade that your teacher will give you

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...