Thinking of doing History SL

[Hassty]

I've studied a little history under social studies, and didn't do it for my GCSEs. A lot of people have told me History is too much work if I haven't done it as a serious subject prior to IB.

I'm still convinced history is my best choice, because I've studied economics and while I enjoyed it, it's not really for me. And a lot of geo seems similar to it. I like the freshness of history and find the course most interesting.

So what do I need to know about taking the subject? As a completely ab. initio student.

[Award Winning Boss]

History isn't too much work if you haven't studied it before. It's a lot of work regardless of that fact. If you find it the most interesting, take it. It's pretty interesting at times but the workload can detract from that interest, however, you're taking it as a standard level subject so it's actually much less to do which will help the case for taking it. 

[Hassty]

History isn't too much work if you haven't studied it before. It's a lot of work regardless of that fact. If you find it the most interesting, take it. It's pretty interesting at times but the workload can detract from that interest, however, you're taking it as a standard level subject so it's actually much less to do which will help the case for taking it.

Ah alright, thank you for the encouragement! Is the difference between HL and SL that much though? I hear for humanity subjects it's more similar compared to sciences. And apparently History HL comes with a lot of workload as it is.

[Award Winning Boss]

 

History isn't too much work if you haven't studied it before. It's a lot of work regardless of that fact. If you find it the most interesting, take it. It's pretty interesting at times but the workload can detract from that interest, however, you're taking it as a standard level subject so it's actually much less to do which will help the case for taking it.

Ah alright, thank you for the encouragement! Is the difference between HL and SL that much though? I hear for humanity subjects it's more similar compared to sciences. And apparently History HL comes with a lot of workload as it is.

 

 

The way I've always thought of it is that if you're going to take SL history, you might as well take HL history instead and make it count for something. However, there was a decent difference. When I did history the SL course was WWI, WWII, peacekeeping and single party states. Then the HL course was the unification of Germany and Italy. In the long run, it did add up. 

 

Did any of that make sense? I fear I rambled... 

[Hassty]

History isn't too much work if you haven't studied it before. It's a lot of work regardless of that fact. If you find it the most interesting, take it. It's pretty interesting at times but the workload can detract from that interest, however, you're taking it as a standard level subject so it's actually much less to do which will help the case for taking it.

Ah alright, thank you for the encouragement! Is the difference between HL and SL that much though? I hear for humanity subjects it's more similar compared to sciences. And apparently History HL comes with a lot of workload as it is.

 

The way I've always thought of it is that if you're going to take SL history, you might as well take HL history instead and make it count for something. However, there was a decent difference. When I did history the SL course was WWI, WWII, peacekeeping and single party states. Then the HL course was the unification of Germany and Italy. In the long run, it did add up. 

 

Did any of that make sense? I fear I rambled...

Haha, I understand what you mean though! I want to go into biochemistry, so my group 3 doesn't have to count for anything really. And thank you, I appreciate your input Feel free to ramble whenever

[itsnadia]

Hi Hass, 

 

I was in the same position as you were last year, I took economics for GCSE instead of history. And now I am taking Higher History and Higher Econ. It was quite tough in the beginning and even now, especially since I didn't have the skills to write a history essay. But it is my favorite class, and you definitely have to put in a lot of work with different essays and lots of reading. And if you are doing it at SL you will be fine! Because you will have a whole year to study for the two topics and then you will improve by a lot! 

 

And if you are in UWC you will do fine! I have friends from UWC Li Po Chun and they are doing great! 

[Sceptyczka]

The content of History SL isn't difficult to understand and when you learn how to write history essays you will find it much easier.

However, it requires a lot of reading (even at SL!) and can be pretty time-consuming.

I guess History is the hardest subject from Group 3 (the next-hardest would be Econ).

 

So if you don't have good time management skills and aren't really into reading and writing, I wouldn't recommend choosing History (unless you are willing to improve your skills).

Still, it's a VERY rewarding course in terms of learning how to write anatically.

I have benefited a greatly from History SL (even though I sometimes struggled with it).

Edited June 19, 2014 by Sceptyczka

[Hassty]

Hi Hass, 

 

I was in the same position as you were last year, I took economics for GCSE instead of history. And now I am taking Higher History and Higher Econ. It was quite tough in the beginning and even now, especially since I didn't have the skills to write a history essay. But it is my favorite class, and you definitely have to put in a lot of work with different essays and lots of reading. And if you are doing it at SL you will be fine! Because you will have a whole year to study for the two topics and then you will improve by a lot! 

 

And if you are in UWC you will do fine! I have friends from UWC Li Po Chun and they are doing great!

Oh, hopefully I'll be able to adjust quickly! Thank you very much

[Hassty]

The content of History SL isn't difficult to understand and when you learn how to write history essays you will find it much easier.

However, it requires a lot of reading (even at SL!) and can be pretty time-consuming.

I guess History is the hardest subject from Group 3 (the next-hardest would be Econ).

 

So if you don't have good time management skills and aren't really into reading and writing, I wouldn't recommend choosing History (unless you are willing to improve your skills).

Still, it's a VERY rewarding course in terms of learning how to write anatically.

I have benefited a greatly from History SL (even though I sometimes struggled with it).

I agree, history seems to be the best group 3 for me. I'll try my best, but if I'm not able to handle it though, I could easily switch to Econ SL whenever I want. My background with the subject would help. Thank you for your advice!

[flinquinnster]

 

History isn't too much work if you haven't studied it before. It's a lot of work regardless of that fact. If you find it the most interesting, take it. It's pretty interesting at times but the workload can detract from that interest, however, you're taking it as a standard level subject so it's actually much less to do which will help the case for taking it.

Ah alright, thank you for the encouragement! Is the difference between HL and SL that much though? I hear for humanity subjects it's more similar compared to sciences. And apparently History HL comes with a lot of workload as it is.

 

 

Personally, I thought there was a massive difference between History HL and SL - my impression was that there was almost double the content of an already content-heavy SL course. However, I concede that in terms of conceptual understanding HL probably isn't that much of a difference from SL. It might just be because I didn't like history that much and I found all the essays, writing and reading a bit overwhelming, but I personally think that SL History is quite enough to be getting on with.

[Hassty]

History isn't too much work if you haven't studied it before. It's a lot of work regardless of that fact. If you find it the most interesting, take it. It's pretty interesting at times but the workload can detract from that interest, however, you're taking it as a standard level subject so it's actually much less to do which will help the case for taking it.

Ah alright, thank you for the encouragement! Is the difference between HL and SL that much though? I hear for humanity subjects it's more similar compared to sciences. And apparently History HL comes with a lot of workload as it is.

 

Personally, I thought there was a massive difference between History HL and SL - my impression was that there was almost double the content of an already content-heavy SL course. However, I concede that in terms of conceptual understanding HL probably isn't that much of a difference from SL. It might just be because I didn't like history that much and I found all the essays, writing and reading a bit overwhelming, but I personally think that SL History is quite enough to be getting on with.

Oh, well, I'm pretty sure I won't end up with History HL in any case, haha thank you!

[yii yann]

I've studied a little history under social studies, and didn't do it for my GCSEs. A lot of people have told me History is too much work if I haven't done it as a serious subject prior to IB.

I'm still convinced history is my best choice, because I've studied economics and while I enjoyed it, it's not really for me. And a lot of geo seems similar to it. I like the freshness of history and find the course most interesting.

So what do I need to know about taking the subject? As a completely ab. initio student.

 

If you want to go into biosciences, then you're right, your group 3 SL subject would essentially be a "filler". In that case, history SL seems like a disproportionately large investment of time and effort - it is a very content heavy subject. Time which could be better spend on your HLs. 

 

If it is an option, I'd suggest going with something simpler, like economics, even if it's not really your thing. So long as you're sorta okay with the subject, it might be a better idea to do Econs SL than History SL. 

[Hassty]

I've studied a little history under social studies, and didn't do it for my GCSEs. A lot of people have told me History is too much work if I haven't done it as a serious subject prior to IB.

I'm still convinced history is my best choice, because I've studied economics and while I enjoyed it, it's not really for me. And a lot of geo seems similar to it. I like the freshness of history and find the course most interesting.

So what do I need to know about taking the subject? As a completely ab. initio student.

 

If you want to go into biosciences, then you're right, your group 3 SL subject would essentially be a "filler". In that case, history SL seems like a disproportionately large investment of time and effort - it is a very content heavy subject. Time which could be better spend on your HLs. 

 

If it is an option, I'd suggest going with something simpler, like economics, even if it's not really your thing. So long as you're sorta okay with the subject, it might be a better idea to do Econs SL than History SL.

Well, what I'm thinking is I'd be able to do much better in a subject I find interesting than one I don't. So what I'm planning to do is switch to economics if I'm really unable to handle the history workload. Thanks for your advice tho!

[cjy]

 

 

I've studied a little history under social studies, and didn't do it for my GCSEs. A lot of people have told me History is too much work if I haven't done it as a serious subject prior to IB.

I'm still convinced history is my best choice, because I've studied economics and while I enjoyed it, it's not really for me. And a lot of geo seems similar to it. I like the freshness of history and find the course most interesting.

So what do I need to know about taking the subject? As a completely ab. initio student.

 

If you want to go into biosciences, then you're right, your group 3 SL subject would essentially be a "filler". In that case, history SL seems like a disproportionately large investment of time and effort - it is a very content heavy subject. Time which could be better spend on your HLs. 

 

If it is an option, I'd suggest going with something simpler, like economics, even if it's not really your thing. So long as you're sorta okay with the subject, it might be a better idea to do Econs SL than History SL.

Well, what I'm thinking is I'd be able to do much better in a subject I find interesting than one I don't. So what I'm planning to do is switch to economics if I'm really unable to handle the history workload. Thanks for your advice tho!

 

Do history. SL History is not that content heavy, The bulk of my revision was for the HL only paper. I didn't revise at all for the first paper, as it was source technique, and I probably spent a 30/70 split of my time on Paper 2 (which is SL) to Paper 3 (which is HL). 

[John Hoose]

History SL is a fantastic subject - take it. 

 

Paper 1 is a document test that requires basic test strategy revision. 

Paper 2 is just two essays, on somewhat overlapping topics - similar kind of essays, and many aspects of WW1 or WW2 essays can also be incorporated into the Single Party states. If you study right, it shouldn't take that much time. 

 

Paper 3 - oh wait, History SL doesn't have a paper 3