IOC Looking for structures to follow for IOC

[the shiz]

Hey guys,

I was just wondering if any of you guys, especially the ones who have done the IOC already and succesfully, have got some good structures to follow when doing the IOC. Is there 1 that will suit both a prose and poem or will I have to learn 2 possible structures?

Many Thanks,

the shiz

[Sandwich]

Do you mean the oral you do with your teacher or the oral presentation you give to your class?

You should be familiar with the material for both of them before having to do your presentation, but if you're ever stuck, just do it all in chronological order (i.e. line by line). It can never fail

[the shiz]

Do you mean the oral you do with your teacher or the oral presentation you give to your class?

You should be familiar with the material for both of them before having to do your presentation, but if you're ever stuck, just do it all in chronological order (i.e. line by line). It can never fail

Thanks for replying

I was talking about the internal oral commentary, so the one with my teacher only based on an unseen extract. I understand that I need to be familiar with the texts and will be by the time I have to present. Doing it line by line seems like a good idea, but I have heard of other people using spics and specs, scasi etc. Can anyone who has used these methods before comment on their effectiveness?

Thanks

[Sandwich]

For that one you get only a brief period of time beforehand to get to grips with the extract. In my personal opinion, the very last thing you want to do is spend time organising, categorising things etc. when actually you just need to get on with it and make sure the content is there! You get no more marks for getting it into themes (e.g. SCASI) versus having it chronologically unless your chronological one fails to mention any of the points of SCASI or you don't make it cohesive. It's super easy to link bits together within such a tiny extract, though, so I've never known that be a problem for anybody.

Really, just putting the extract in context of the other poems/play/novel plot line and then launching into a chronological account is the most efficient use of your time, IMO, if you want that input Also it means you don't have to worry about structure at all - no division of brain power! xP

[laryxle]

I haven't done the actual IOC yet but I have done a couple of practice ones and I definitely found it easier when I knew the passage well. Personally I wouldn't want to get a poem and I found doing that a lot harder. What I found works kind of well is;

context (for passages not poems)

tone

introduction - state thesis

theme 1

technique that explores theme - effect

technique that explores theme - effect (do as many as you want)

link theme to characters, settings etc.

link theme back to thesis

theme 2

same thing again etc.

conclusion

I found that to be quite successful, but obviously a thematic approach isn't the most academic way to do it, however it helps me with my organisation of ideas.

I think the problem with a line-by-line structure is that 10/30 marks go towards structure and that structure often makes it hard to form some kind of coherent argument, and it can have problems with timing (I listened to a sample IOC where the person did line-by-line but ran out of time so ended up missing a few lines of their passage)

[SharkSpider]

IB tends to have this nice way of making everyone think things are far more ordered and requirement-based than they actually are, and IOCs are a big one, for that. If a student walks in and sounds as if they're fitting whatever passage they get in to some arbitrary, memorized IOC scheme, markers are instructed to lower the student's mark, because it shows, clearly, that the student has no understanding of what structure is, and why it's important in an IOC. Basically, you want to talk about the work. You don't want to talk about this, then this, then this, etc, because that's basically another way of telling IB you missed the point. What you do want, on the other hand, is to talk in a way that seems logical, to the examiner.

As a personal example, when I did my own IOC (which was 29/30), I got lucky enough to speak on a Keats poem, Ode on a Grecian Urn. Basically, I spent the entire time talking about why it was an ode, ie. I discussed how the speaker was interacting with this object, and from there, I went in depth with individual passages and thoughts that were carried through, until I argued that the conclusion of the poem (where the author decides that this piece of art has given him insight in to human nature and mortality) was developed throughout the poem itself in a way that mirrored how a reader would read the poem, which I thought was really cool, because Keats was almost writing an ode on the ode he was currently writing. Of course the process involved discussion of some other themes, lines of importance, etc. but the only structure that I had to follow was to tie everything in to the general purpose or movement of the piece.

When you do your own IOC, that's all you have to do, as well. If it's a passage from a greater work, talk about how it moves the work from one state to another (if it does that) or what it provides to the reader. If you get in to major themes, you can talk about how the passage develops and possibly offers new insights in to them, and if there's a particularly striking part of the passage, you can discuss inflection and the choice of placement. Overally, I think the best way to find meaning for an IOC is to think to yourself "why should I care about this passage more than another passage?" or in the case of a poem "why should I read this poem and think about it?"

[avident]

My teacher told us to do short poems line-by-line. With long ones you simply don't have the time for that. Literary extracts could be approached for example in a thematic way: you could emphasize a particular theme, show how it manifests in the extract, and base your argument on that.

In the end, I would have to agree though that there are no hard and fast rules. Just make a coherent argument that is valid and lucid and you will be fine.

Good luck!

[Censored Dreams]

We were told to look for specific features and find lines throughout the extract that support it, for example, finding examples of alliteration throughout the entire extract and commenting on its effect and purpose, and then moving onto tone and going through the whole extract, then dicton, etc. IB prefers to give candidates a better grade to a sophisticated approach then just stepping through in chronological order in the extract.

I'm going to have mine in about 2 weeks, but I'm having a practice one this week so I'm kinda worried, but I'll manage

[ChikkyD]

There is no set structure for the IOC. My mock IOC is in three days, while my real IOC is in two weeks, so I'm a little nervous. We've been told to look for language features or literary techniques and analyse through them. But it varies. I cannot emphasize enough that there is no set structure. Although, a candidate should definitely have a fluid and comprehensive argument throughout the entire commentary. As long as you have a point, and you get it across through the help of features within the extract, all will be good

Good luck!

[dessskris]

there is actually, a rough structure:

Greetings.

Name, class, school.

I am going to comment on an extract taken from the (Genre) (Work Title) by (Author).

This extract comes from... (chapter title or number, or which stage in the plot)

This extract is about...

What happens before & after the extract.

The theme in the extract and how the writer shows the theme (using which literary features)

Start commenting line by line.

Re-state the main topic of the extract and how it is shown in the extract. Conclude what you have explained.

That is all I can comment on about the extract.

[ChikkyD]

there is actually, a rough structure:

Greetings.

Name, class, school.

I am going to comment on an extract taken from the (Genre) (Work Title) by (Author).

This extract comes from... (chapter title or number, or which stage in the plot)

This extract is about...

What happens before & after the extract.

The theme in the extract and how the writer shows the theme (using which literary features)

Start commenting line by line.

Re-state the main topic of the extract and how it is shown in the extract. Conclude what you have explained.

That is all I can comment on about the extract.

Sorry, let me rephrase. I was more talking about the body of the commentary, rather than the pleasantries and necessities to say. There is also no need to comment on the extract line by line. That is an acceptable way of analysing the extract, however it is definitely not the only way to go about it

[L.wolf]

I have my IOC next week and I was told by my teacher that we should structure the presentation by themes and comment on how literary features, tone, diction etc. enforce or support each theme.

[Drake Glau]

Shazam

[BJD]

I haven't done the actual IOC yet but I have done a couple of practice ones and I definitely found it easier when I knew the passage well. Personally I wouldn't want to get a poem and I found doing that a lot harder. What I found works kind of well is;

context (for passages not poems)

tone

introduction - state thesis

theme 1

technique that explores theme - effect

technique that explores theme - effect (do as many as you want)

link theme to characters, settings etc.

link theme back to thesis

theme 2

same thing again etc.

conclusion

I found that to be quite successful, but obviously a thematic approach isn't the most academic way to do it, however it helps me with my organisation of ideas.

I think the problem with a line-by-line structure is that 10/30 marks go towards structure and that structure often makes it hard to form some kind of coherent argument, and it can have problems with timing (I listened to a sample IOC where the person did line-by-line but ran out of time so ended up missing a few lines of their passage)

In regards to your structured IOC, what is meant by thesis? Surely the thesis will be the intention of the writer by writing this poem or have I misunderstood that?

[Wide Eyed Wanderer]

The IOC assessment criteria has four components: Understanding of the Text, Interpretation and Personal Response, Presentation and Use of Language.

My teacher suggests this format.

After you finish the formalities ( candidate number etc), state which passage you have (read out the first and last phrase). IOC starts after this.

Paragraph 1: Contextualize. State what happens before and after this passage, and why this passage is important in the story as a whole. For higher levels, you may also want to place the work in context of the writer's other works as well as within other works produced in the same era.

Para 2: Theme. State the theme in this passage, and how it is being developed. If there isn't a theme, there must be dramatic changes in a character's role or in the storyline as a whole. You will almost never be given a passage which doesn't feature either of these.

Para 3, 4, 5: Literary devices. Talk about setting, style, diction, mood, tone, imagery, figurative language. Make sure you mention technical terms (Hint: according to the IB guide, if you simply say that an extract is from a poem, a play, or science fiction, it still counts as technical literary language - so don't forget to specify). However, it is not enough to simply state the literary devices, you must analyse their effect in the passage and in the story. So instead of just saying that the length of sentences suddenly decreases, talk about how they increase the pace and cause tension to rise. This is a good place for personal response - you can say "I FEEL that Shakespeare makes use of reason in Brutus's speech so that the contrast between this speech and Antony's speech can be magnified"

Conclusion: Summarize whatever you have said. Add more personal response here.

Tip: If you happen to miss a point and suddenly remember it after you've finished that topic, do NOT just insert it there. You will lose marks for presentation. Instead, wait till the end. Usually, the teacher will pry it out of you, or you can try to integrate that point into the response to another question.