IOP tips?

[CommeDesEnfants]

Does anybody else find the criteria to be overwhelmingly vague? I mean, what EXACTLY separates "generally" from "well?" Doing it over and over again? Using big words? Having a lot of quotes? You tell me.

My topic is on happiness within Mansfield stories and how she destroys it so show that true joy can never really be found and is easily destroyed. I've got the details of what I want to say, but I'm really paranoid that I'll end up with another 5. Basically, I've got

-some analysis of literary features (simile, metaphor, contrast, juxtaposition, irony, etc)
-some reference to writing style (ellipses, breaking of the fourth wall, series of questions in a row, etc)
-long-winded explanation of various symbols

and I explain the significance of and analyze what the author is doing, but I'm still not 100% sure if it's right. I haven't really planned it out yet, but it's inevitable that it'll last at least 12 minutes; I might even run out of time to do a third short story.

What else should I include?

And yes, I have scoured this forum for other topics that are similar to this one, and considered the advice given. Again, I'm still overcome by how frustratingly vague the entire criteria really is; they really should seek to elaborate on it more, but then again, my friend has told me that IBO is all about vagueness.

[Capa]

I agree that the criteria is a bit vague, at the same time, I believe this is the way morst IB criterias are in most subjects. You simply just have to be able to separate "very good" from "exellent" by looking at you work and see if it REALLY can be said to be exellent or not. However, the criterion also gives a good description outside the grid so it should not be too difficult to know what to include. Just do everything exactly as the criteria says and you should be able to achieve 7. In IOP I think it is very important to state the effect of everything, rather than just saying that it is there.

Capa...

[Vvi]

When talking about literary features, symbols and stylistic devices, be careful not to be narrative. I found that this was what separated the people who got 7's in my class and the people with 5's. Most people say "The author uses onomatopoeia in the text. She uses the word "buzz" to describe the sounds that the bees make." They leave it there, and don't go on to explain the effects of the literary devices, which is the point. Anyone can pick out alliteration or rhyme, but good students know how to explain the effects of that device, and how it impacts on the text as a whole.

Structure is also a crucial component, and if you look at the criteria you will see that a lot of marks are given for it (10 I think, out of 30?) Which is why you need to sit down, write down topic sentences, bullet points about the topic and lastly a linking sentence that also introduces the next paragraph/point.

Below is an extract from my own IOP from two consecutive paragraphs, I wrote it out on paper (not knowing that we weren't allowed to just read out an essay. The teacher didn't make it clear to us, but I still got a 28).

[i]"Mr. Rochester asserted his power over her [Antoinette] from the very beginning, taking over her estate, and in this sense he is like the sargassum seaweed, seemingly harmless on the surface but trapping Antoinette in its strands.

The seaweed also floats on the surface of the water, rootless and separate from the seafloor. This is a reflection of Jean Rhys’ own life, where she felt rootless and did not feel as if she belonged in either the Caribbean or England."[/i]

The first sentence is the end to a longer paragraph, but you can see the link that I make between seaweed in both paragraphs. One my points was about how seaweed in Wide Sargasso Sea (by Jean Rhys) traps the heroine, and the other point about how it conveys her estrangement.

My teacher told is to use the PEE(L) structure. Point, Example, Explanation, Link. That's what I used. Easy name to remember (without the L).

Edited January 27, 2009 by Vvi

[CommeDesEnfants]

Yes, I do actually analyze the literary techniques. I say everything from:

[i]"The fact that John Hammond has forgotten his glasses and cannot see anything without them is interesting. Mansfield has done this to show that not only is his physical sight impaired, he is also unable to instantly identify his wife's distance from him when he is completely absorbed and essentially blinded by his desire for them to be alone."[/i]

to

[i]"A simile is created when white seagulls flew away "like bits of white paper" as John Hammond waits for his wife (215). Through this, Mansfield shows the frailty of the entire situation and truly demonstrates how insecure and indecisive Hammond is feeling as he nervously watches his wife's ship hesitatingly approach."[/i]

to

[i]"It is wholly ironic that the man on Janey's ship dies from a heart failure. While this mysterious man had died of physical heart failure, John Hammond has essentially internally died from his heartbreak over this new revelation."[/i]

I just kind of typed those three sentences on a whim and will probably [b]not[/b] be using them in my presentation, but that's basically the gist of what I'm saying throughout. I don't identify millions of literary techniques, but instead focus on symbols that are significant and affect the story in some way.

Edited January 28, 2009 by Tyrannitar

[Vvi]

I think you will be fine then, it doesn't sound like you have no idea what you're doing. There's a thread on how difficult it is to achieve a 7 in English (http://www.ibsurvival.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=3125), and my teacher told us that she thinks it depends on the examiners mood. So really, you can only do so much analysis. Otherwise it ends up sounding abstract and made up.