What are my child's chances of getting into the IB program?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the TOK class is required but does anyone know what is taught in that class?

It’s my DD’s favorite class she’s ever taken.

It’s basically epistemology—what do we know, and how do we know it? Why is knowledge important? How does it relate to concepts like culture and community? She loves it because it’s very analytical, and favors deep thinking and argumentative writing over regurgitating facts.

They do a good bit of writing and some presentations, but in general it’s kind of an overarching theory class that is supposed to tie together all the other courses they take. But I’m sure the quality depends a lot on the instructor, too.

I found it pretentious and cringey, but I agree that it depends a lot on the instructor.

Most often it’s still going to regurgitate some ideas from Plato, Kant, Hume, Locke etc, albeit at poorly understood high school level.

To be honest the writing part of my DC IB program was quite underwhelming, essentially quantity over quality. It doesn’t help that the instructor is actually not capable of writing or teaching.

Instead of the extended essay I think my student would have been way better off with a solid practice of a five paragraph essay, strong understanding of grammar and a well developed vocabulary. I’d much prefer a short assignment that is well edited to be crisp and clear instead of 10 pages of rambling sentences. The teacher feedback was nonexistent, so had have to figure it out on his own.

It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

I don't think you're wrong (tbh I haven't read my kid's ToK essay), but I read their college application essays and they were fantastic. I was supposed to copyedit and the only thing I saw missing was one comma.

For a student who actually likes writing, IB is great. And if the fotm is a mishmash of social justice theory and woo woo "everything is colonialism, and colonialism is bad," well, so what? Gives them a heads up on what to question about what they've learn in college when all their peers are pounding Said and Kende back like they're Baptist missionaries on a bender.

I think it's still preferable to them deciding "The Fountainhead" is the best book ever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the TOK class is required but does anyone know what is taught in that class?

It’s my DD’s favorite class she’s ever taken.

It’s basically epistemology—what do we know, and how do we know it? Why is knowledge important? How does it relate to concepts like culture and community? She loves it because it’s very analytical, and favors deep thinking and argumentative writing over regurgitating facts.

They do a good bit of writing and some presentations, but in general it’s kind of an overarching theory class that is supposed to tie together all the other courses they take. But I’m sure the quality depends a lot on the instructor, too.

I found it pretentious and cringey, but I agree that it depends a lot on the instructor.

Most often it’s still going to regurgitate some ideas from Plato, Kant, Hume, Locke etc, albeit at poorly understood high school level.

To be honest the writing part of my DC IB program was quite underwhelming, essentially quantity over quality. It doesn’t help that the instructor is actually not capable of writing or teaching.

Instead of the extended essay I think my student would have been way better off with a solid practice of a five paragraph essay, strong understanding of grammar and a well developed vocabulary. I’d much prefer a short assignment that is well edited to be crisp and clear instead of 10 pages of rambling sentences. The teacher feedback was nonexistent, so had have to figure it out on his own.

It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

I don't think you're wrong (tbh I haven't read my kid's ToK essay), but I read their college application essays and they were fantastic. I was supposed to copyedit and the only thing I saw missing was one comma.

For a student who actually likes writing, IB is great. And if the fotm is a mishmash of social justice theory and woo woo "everything is colonialism, and colonialism is bad," well, so what? Gives them a heads up on what to question about what they've learn in college when all their peers are pounding Said and Kende back like they're Baptist missionaries on a bender.

I think it's still preferable to them deciding "The Fountainhead" is the best book ever.

My point was that the IB writing is not always “deep thinking and analysis” as one poster said up thread. Even you seem to agree that you’ll often encounter the cliche “everything is colonialism, and colonialism is bad”, but supposedly it’s fine because they’ll encounter the same cliche in college, and it’s better than some other right wing cliches. I think all cliches are equally useless.

There’s a lot of writing in IB but not enough variety and not enough feedback. I would be much happier with shorter assignments but have kids learn how to write at least one of each: descriptive essay, a review, an argumentative essay, a piece of creative writing, a poem, a laboratory report etc. Otherwise you end up with students that don’t know basic stuff like you’re not supposed to write a scientific/mathematical exposition in first person.

I don’t know who Said or Kende are, or what the issue is the having “the fountainhead” their preferred book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

You found? Did you take the class? Where and when did you take it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the TOK class is required but does anyone know what is taught in that class?

It’s my DD’s favorite class she’s ever taken.

It’s basically epistemology—what do we know, and how do we know it? Why is knowledge important? How does it relate to concepts like culture and community? She loves it because it’s very analytical, and favors deep thinking and argumentative writing over regurgitating facts.

They do a good bit of writing and some presentations, but in general it’s kind of an overarching theory class that is supposed to tie together all the other courses they take. But I’m sure the quality depends a lot on the instructor, too.

I found it pretentious and cringey, but I agree that it depends a lot on the instructor.

Most often it’s still going to regurgitate some ideas from Plato, Kant, Hume, Locke etc, albeit at poorly understood high school level.

To be honest the writing part of my DC IB program was quite underwhelming, essentially quantity over quality. It doesn’t help that the instructor is actually not capable of writing or teaching.

Instead of the extended essay I think my student would have been way better off with a solid practice of a five paragraph essay, strong understanding of grammar and a well developed vocabulary. I’d much prefer a short assignment that is well edited to be crisp and clear instead of 10 pages of rambling sentences. The teacher feedback was nonexistent, so had have to figure it out on his own.

It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

I don't think you're wrong (tbh I haven't read my kid's ToK essay), but I read their college application essays and they were fantastic. I was supposed to copyedit and the only thing I saw missing was one comma.

For a student who actually likes writing, IB is great. And if the fotm is a mishmash of social justice theory and woo woo "everything is colonialism, and colonialism is bad," well, so what? Gives them a heads up on what to question about what they've learn in college when all their peers are pounding Said and Kende back like they're Baptist missionaries on a bender.

I think it's still preferable to them deciding "The Fountainhead" is the best book ever.

You can have an opinion about your kids classes without having to take them yourself, that’s basically the entire DCUM, people offering their perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the TOK class is required but does anyone know what is taught in that class?

It’s my DD’s favorite class she’s ever taken.

It’s basically epistemology—what do we know, and how do we know it? Why is knowledge important? How does it relate to concepts like culture and community? She loves it because it’s very analytical, and favors deep thinking and argumentative writing over regurgitating facts.

They do a good bit of writing and some presentations, but in general it’s kind of an overarching theory class that is supposed to tie together all the other courses they take. But I’m sure the quality depends a lot on the instructor, too.

I found it pretentious and cringey, but I agree that it depends a lot on the instructor.

Most often it’s still going to regurgitate some ideas from Plato, Kant, Hume, Locke etc, albeit at poorly understood high school level.

To be honest the writing part of my DC IB program was quite underwhelming, essentially quantity over quality. It doesn’t help that the instructor is actually not capable of writing or teaching.

Instead of the extended essay I think my student would have been way better off with a solid practice of a five paragraph essay, strong understanding of grammar and a well developed vocabulary. I’d much prefer a short assignment that is well edited to be crisp and clear instead of 10 pages of rambling sentences. The teacher feedback was nonexistent, so had have to figure it out on his own.

It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

And at which school was this the experience?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the TOK class is required but does anyone know what is taught in that class?

It’s my DD’s favorite class she’s ever taken.

It’s basically epistemology—what do we know, and how do we know it? Why is knowledge important? How does it relate to concepts like culture and community? She loves it because it’s very analytical, and favors deep thinking and argumentative writing over regurgitating facts.

They do a good bit of writing and some presentations, but in general it’s kind of an overarching theory class that is supposed to tie together all the other courses they take. But I’m sure the quality depends a lot on the instructor, too.

I found it pretentious and cringey, but I agree that it depends a lot on the instructor.

Most often it’s still going to regurgitate some ideas from Plato, Kant, Hume, Locke etc, albeit at poorly understood high school level.

To be honest the writing part of my DC IB program was quite underwhelming, essentially quantity over quality. It doesn’t help that the instructor is actually not capable of writing or teaching.

Instead of the extended essay I think my student would have been way better off with a solid practice of a five paragraph essay, strong understanding of grammar and a well developed vocabulary. I’d much prefer a short assignment that is well edited to be crisp and clear instead of 10 pages of rambling sentences. The teacher feedback was nonexistent, so had have to figure it out on his own.

It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

I don't think you're wrong (tbh I haven't read my kid's ToK essay), but I read their college application essays and they were fantastic. I was supposed to copyedit and the only thing I saw missing was one comma.

For a student who actually likes writing, IB is great. And if the fotm is a mishmash of social justice theory and woo woo "everything is colonialism, and colonialism is bad," well, so what? Gives them a heads up on what to question about what they've learn in college when all their peers are pounding Said and Kende back like they're Baptist missionaries on a bender.

I think it's still preferable to them deciding "The Fountainhead" is the best book ever.

You can have an opinion about your kids classes without having to take them yourself, that’s basically the entire DCUM, people offering their perspective.

In fact, you can have an opinion about anything without knowing anything about it at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the TOK class is required but does anyone know what is taught in that class?

It’s my DD’s favorite class she’s ever taken.

It’s basically epistemology—what do we know, and how do we know it? Why is knowledge important? How does it relate to concepts like culture and community? She loves it because it’s very analytical, and favors deep thinking and argumentative writing over regurgitating facts.

They do a good bit of writing and some presentations, but in general it’s kind of an overarching theory class that is supposed to tie together all the other courses they take. But I’m sure the quality depends a lot on the instructor, too.

I found it pretentious and cringey, but I agree that it depends a lot on the instructor.

Most often it’s still going to regurgitate some ideas from Plato, Kant, Hume, Locke etc, albeit at poorly understood high school level.

To be honest the writing part of my DC IB program was quite underwhelming, essentially quantity over quality. It doesn’t help that the instructor is actually not capable of writing or teaching.

Instead of the extended essay I think my student would have been way better off with a solid practice of a five paragraph essay, strong understanding of grammar and a well developed vocabulary. I’d much prefer a short assignment that is well edited to be crisp and clear instead of 10 pages of rambling sentences. The teacher feedback was nonexistent, so had have to figure it out on his own.

It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

I don't think you're wrong (tbh I haven't read my kid's ToK essay), but I read their college application essays and they were fantastic. I was supposed to copyedit and the only thing I saw missing was one comma.

For a student who actually likes writing, IB is great. And if the fotm is a mishmash of social justice theory and woo woo "everything is colonialism, and colonialism is bad," well, so what? Gives them a heads up on what to question about what they've learn in college when all their peers are pounding Said and Kende back like they're Baptist missionaries on a bender.

I think it's still preferable to them deciding "The Fountainhead" is the best book ever.

You can have an opinion about your kids classes without having to take them yourself, that’s basically the entire DCUM, people offering their perspective.

In fact, you can have an opinion about anything without knowing anything about it at all.

And sharing them is the DCUM method!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the TOK class is required but does anyone know what is taught in that class?

It’s my DD’s favorite class she’s ever taken.

It’s basically epistemology—what do we know, and how do we know it? Why is knowledge important? How does it relate to concepts like culture and community? She loves it because it’s very analytical, and favors deep thinking and argumentative writing over regurgitating facts.

They do a good bit of writing and some presentations, but in general it’s kind of an overarching theory class that is supposed to tie together all the other courses they take. But I’m sure the quality depends a lot on the instructor, too.

I found it pretentious and cringey, but I agree that it depends a lot on the instructor.

Most often it’s still going to regurgitate some ideas from Plato, Kant, Hume, Locke etc, albeit at poorly understood high school level.

To be honest the writing part of my DC IB program was quite underwhelming, essentially quantity over quality. It doesn’t help that the instructor is actually not capable of writing or teaching.

Instead of the extended essay I think my student would have been way better off with a solid practice of a five paragraph essay, strong understanding of grammar and a well developed vocabulary. I’d much prefer a short assignment that is well edited to be crisp and clear instead of 10 pages of rambling sentences. The teacher feedback was nonexistent, so had have to figure it out on his own.

It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

I don't think you're wrong (tbh I haven't read my kid's ToK essay), but I read their college application essays and they were fantastic. I was supposed to copyedit and the only thing I saw missing was one comma.

For a student who actually likes writing, IB is great. And if the fotm is a mishmash of social justice theory and woo woo "everything is colonialism, and colonialism is bad," well, so what? Gives them a heads up on what to question about what they've learn in college when all their peers are pounding Said and Kende back like they're Baptist missionaries on a bender.

I think it's still preferable to them deciding "The Fountainhead" is the best book ever.

You can have an opinion about your kids classes without having to take them yourself, that’s basically the entire DCUM, people offering their perspective.

In fact, you can have an opinion about anything without knowing anything about it at all.

Ahhh, the classic “what do we know and how do we know it”, the hallmark of the IB graduate that passes off as “critical thinking”. Honestly I’m so sick of this formulaic approach to anything, that is my issue with the writing style of the IB program. It’s quite different than the writing done for most majors or careers.

Apologies if that comes off too harsh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the TOK class is required but does anyone know what is taught in that class?

It’s my DD’s favorite class she’s ever taken.

It’s basically epistemology—what do we know, and how do we know it? Why is knowledge important? How does it relate to concepts like culture and community? She loves it because it’s very analytical, and favors deep thinking and argumentative writing over regurgitating facts.

They do a good bit of writing and some presentations, but in general it’s kind of an overarching theory class that is supposed to tie together all the other courses they take. But I’m sure the quality depends a lot on the instructor, too.

I found it pretentious and cringey, but I agree that it depends a lot on the instructor.

Most often it’s still going to regurgitate some ideas from Plato, Kant, Hume, Locke etc, albeit at poorly understood high school level.

To be honest the writing part of my DC IB program was quite underwhelming, essentially quantity over quality. It doesn’t help that the instructor is actually not capable of writing or teaching.

Instead of the extended essay I think my student would have been way better off with a solid practice of a five paragraph essay, strong understanding of grammar and a well developed vocabulary. I’d much prefer a short assignment that is well edited to be crisp and clear instead of 10 pages of rambling sentences. The teacher feedback was nonexistent, so had have to figure it out on his own.

It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

I don't think you're wrong (tbh I haven't read my kid's ToK essay), but I read their college application essays and they were fantastic. I was supposed to copyedit and the only thing I saw missing was one comma.

For a student who actually likes writing, IB is great. And if the fotm is a mishmash of social justice theory and woo woo "everything is colonialism, and colonialism is bad," well, so what? Gives them a heads up on what to question about what they've learn in college when all their peers are pounding Said and Kende back like they're Baptist missionaries on a bender.

I think it's still preferable to them deciding "The Fountainhead" is the best book ever.

You can have an opinion about your kids classes without having to take them yourself, that’s basically the entire DCUM, people offering their perspective.

In fact, you can have an opinion about anything without knowing anything about it at all.

Ahhh, the classic “what do we know and how do we know it”, the hallmark of the IB graduate that passes off as “critical thinking”. Honestly I’m so sick of this formulaic approach to anything, that is my issue with the writing style of the IB program. It’s quite different than the writing done for most majors or careers.

Apologies if that comes off too harsh.

dp.. you are comparing a HS writing style in a specific program with workplace writing style. That's a ridiculous comparison.

IB is its own thing. Why are you comparing it to workplace writing? So strange.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the TOK class is required but does anyone know what is taught in that class?

It’s my DD’s favorite class she’s ever taken.

It’s basically epistemology—what do we know, and how do we know it? Why is knowledge important? How does it relate to concepts like culture and community? She loves it because it’s very analytical, and favors deep thinking and argumentative writing over regurgitating facts.

They do a good bit of writing and some presentations, but in general it’s kind of an overarching theory class that is supposed to tie together all the other courses they take. But I’m sure the quality depends a lot on the instructor, too.

I found it pretentious and cringey, but I agree that it depends a lot on the instructor.

Most often it’s still going to regurgitate some ideas from Plato, Kant, Hume, Locke etc, albeit at poorly understood high school level.

To be honest the writing part of my DC IB program was quite underwhelming, essentially quantity over quality. It doesn’t help that the instructor is actually not capable of writing or teaching.

Instead of the extended essay I think my student would have been way better off with a solid practice of a five paragraph essay, strong understanding of grammar and a well developed vocabulary. I’d much prefer a short assignment that is well edited to be crisp and clear instead of 10 pages of rambling sentences. The teacher feedback was nonexistent, so had have to figure it out on his own.

It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

I don't think you're wrong (tbh I haven't read my kid's ToK essay), but I read their college application essays and they were fantastic. I was supposed to copyedit and the only thing I saw missing was one comma.

For a student who actually likes writing, IB is great. And if the fotm is a mishmash of social justice theory and woo woo "everything is colonialism, and colonialism is bad," well, so what? Gives them a heads up on what to question about what they've learn in college when all their peers are pounding Said and Kende back like they're Baptist missionaries on a bender.

I think it's still preferable to them deciding "The Fountainhead" is the best book ever.

You can have an opinion about your kids classes without having to take them yourself, that’s basically the entire DCUM, people offering their perspective.

In fact, you can have an opinion about anything without knowing anything about it at all.

Ahhh, the classic “what do we know and how do we know it”, the hallmark of the IB graduate that passes off as “critical thinking”. Honestly I’m so sick of this formulaic approach to anything, that is my issue with the writing style of the IB program. It’s quite different than the writing done for most majors or careers.

Apologies if that comes off too harsh.

dp.. you are comparing a HS writing style in a specific program with workplace writing style. That's a ridiculous comparison.

IB is its own thing. Why are you comparing it to workplace writing? So strange.

That’s what I keep saying, IB is too much of its own thing.

Compare it to the writing you will do in college for most majors, that’s what the high school is supposed to prepare you for. The TOK essay doesn’t strike me as particularly useful, relevant or pertinent.

When you follow a recipe for your writing based on faux analysis and critical thinking cliches you’re going to be prepared for majors that value faux analysis and critical thinking cliches.

To be successful in college for the vast majority of majors as far as writing skills are concerned master two things: how to do a review of a topic and how to write a lab report. Unfortunately there aren’t many high schools that do this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the TOK class is required but does anyone know what is taught in that class?

It’s my DD’s favorite class she’s ever taken.

It’s basically epistemology—what do we know, and how do we know it? Why is knowledge important? How does it relate to concepts like culture and community? She loves it because it’s very analytical, and favors deep thinking and argumentative writing over regurgitating facts.

They do a good bit of writing and some presentations, but in general it’s kind of an overarching theory class that is supposed to tie together all the other courses they take. But I’m sure the quality depends a lot on the instructor, too.

I found it pretentious and cringey, but I agree that it depends a lot on the instructor.

Most often it’s still going to regurgitate some ideas from Plato, Kant, Hume, Locke etc, albeit at poorly understood high school level.

To be honest the writing part of my DC IB program was quite underwhelming, essentially quantity over quality. It doesn’t help that the instructor is actually not capable of writing or teaching.

Instead of the extended essay I think my student would have been way better off with a solid practice of a five paragraph essay, strong understanding of grammar and a well developed vocabulary. I’d much prefer a short assignment that is well edited to be crisp and clear instead of 10 pages of rambling sentences. The teacher feedback was nonexistent, so had have to figure it out on his own.

It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

I don't think you're wrong (tbh I haven't read my kid's ToK essay), but I read their college application essays and they were fantastic. I was supposed to copyedit and the only thing I saw missing was one comma.

For a student who actually likes writing, IB is great. And if the fotm is a mishmash of social justice theory and woo woo "everything is colonialism, and colonialism is bad," well, so what? Gives them a heads up on what to question about what they've learn in college when all their peers are pounding Said and Kende back like they're Baptist missionaries on a bender.

I think it's still preferable to them deciding "The Fountainhead" is the best book ever.

You can have an opinion about your kids classes without having to take them yourself, that’s basically the entire DCUM, people offering their perspective.

In fact, you can have an opinion about anything without knowing anything about it at all.

Ahhh, the classic “what do we know and how do we know it”, the hallmark of the IB graduate that passes off as “critical thinking”. Honestly I’m so sick of this formulaic approach to anything, that is my issue with the writing style of the IB program. It’s quite different than the writing done for most majors or careers.

Apologies if that comes off too harsh.

dp.. you are comparing a HS writing style in a specific program with workplace writing style. That's a ridiculous comparison.

IB is its own thing. Why are you comparing it to workplace writing? So strange.

That’s what I keep saying, IB is too much of its own thing.

Compare it to the writing you will do in college for most majors, that’s what the high school is supposed to prepare you for. The TOK essay doesn’t strike me as particularly useful, relevant or pertinent.

When you follow a recipe for your writing based on faux analysis and critical thinking cliches you’re going to be prepared for majors that value faux analysis and critical thinking cliches.

To be successful in college for the vast majority of majors as far as writing skills are concerned master two things: how to do a review of a topic and how to write a lab report. Unfortunately there aren’t many high schools that do this.

Ask any former IB student, and they will tell you that IBDP helped them in college. Some will even say that after IDBP, college was a cake walk.

Whatever faux analysis they wrote about, it certainly prepared them for college. The vast majority of these students end up in T50 and above, and do very well in college.

So whatever your issue with the IBDP, know that the vast majority of the graduates go on to do very well in college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the TOK class is required but does anyone know what is taught in that class?

It’s my DD’s favorite class she’s ever taken.

It’s basically epistemology—what do we know, and how do we know it? Why is knowledge important? How does it relate to concepts like culture and community? She loves it because it’s very analytical, and favors deep thinking and argumentative writing over regurgitating facts.

They do a good bit of writing and some presentations, but in general it’s kind of an overarching theory class that is supposed to tie together all the other courses they take. But I’m sure the quality depends a lot on the instructor, too.

I found it pretentious and cringey, but I agree that it depends a lot on the instructor.

Most often it’s still going to regurgitate some ideas from Plato, Kant, Hume, Locke etc, albeit at poorly understood high school level.

To be honest the writing part of my DC IB program was quite underwhelming, essentially quantity over quality. It doesn’t help that the instructor is actually not capable of writing or teaching.

Instead of the extended essay I think my student would have been way better off with a solid practice of a five paragraph essay, strong understanding of grammar and a well developed vocabulary. I’d much prefer a short assignment that is well edited to be crisp and clear instead of 10 pages of rambling sentences. The teacher feedback was nonexistent, so had have to figure it out on his own.

It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

I don't think you're wrong (tbh I haven't read my kid's ToK essay), but I read their college application essays and they were fantastic. I was supposed to copyedit and the only thing I saw missing was one comma.

For a student who actually likes writing, IB is great. And if the fotm is a mishmash of social justice theory and woo woo "everything is colonialism, and colonialism is bad," well, so what? Gives them a heads up on what to question about what they've learn in college when all their peers are pounding Said and Kende back like they're Baptist missionaries on a bender.

I think it's still preferable to them deciding "The Fountainhead" is the best book ever.

You can have an opinion about your kids classes without having to take them yourself, that’s basically the entire DCUM, people offering their perspective.

In fact, you can have an opinion about anything without knowing anything about it at all.

Ahhh, the classic “what do we know and how do we know it”, the hallmark of the IB graduate that passes off as “critical thinking”. Honestly I’m so sick of this formulaic approach to anything, that is my issue with the writing style of the IB program. It’s quite different than the writing done for most majors or careers.

Apologies if that comes off too harsh.

dp.. you are comparing a HS writing style in a specific program with workplace writing style. That's a ridiculous comparison.

IB is its own thing. Why are you comparing it to workplace writing? So strange.

That’s what I keep saying, IB is too much of its own thing.

Compare it to the writing you will do in college for most majors, that’s what the high school is supposed to prepare you for. The TOK essay doesn’t strike me as particularly useful, relevant or pertinent.

When you follow a recipe for your writing based on faux analysis and critical thinking cliches you’re going to be prepared for majors that value faux analysis and critical thinking cliches.

To be successful in college for the vast majority of majors as far as writing skills are concerned master two things: how to do a review of a topic and how to write a lab report. Unfortunately there aren’t many high schools that do this.

says who?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the TOK class is required but does anyone know what is taught in that class?

It’s my DD’s favorite class she’s ever taken.

It’s basically epistemology—what do we know, and how do we know it? Why is knowledge important? How does it relate to concepts like culture and community? She loves it because it’s very analytical, and favors deep thinking and argumentative writing over regurgitating facts.

They do a good bit of writing and some presentations, but in general it’s kind of an overarching theory class that is supposed to tie together all the other courses they take. But I’m sure the quality depends a lot on the instructor, too.

I found it pretentious and cringey, but I agree that it depends a lot on the instructor.

Most often it’s still going to regurgitate some ideas from Plato, Kant, Hume, Locke etc, albeit at poorly understood high school level.

To be honest the writing part of my DC IB program was quite underwhelming, essentially quantity over quality. It doesn’t help that the instructor is actually not capable of writing or teaching.

Instead of the extended essay I think my student would have been way better off with a solid practice of a five paragraph essay, strong understanding of grammar and a well developed vocabulary. I’d much prefer a short assignment that is well edited to be crisp and clear instead of 10 pages of rambling sentences. The teacher feedback was nonexistent, so had have to figure it out on his own.

It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

I don't think you're wrong (tbh I haven't read my kid's ToK essay), but I read their college application essays and they were fantastic. I was supposed to copyedit and the only thing I saw missing was one comma.

For a student who actually likes writing, IB is great. And if the fotm is a mishmash of social justice theory and woo woo "everything is colonialism, and colonialism is bad," well, so what? Gives them a heads up on what to question about what they've learn in college when all their peers are pounding Said and Kende back like they're Baptist missionaries on a bender.

I think it's still preferable to them deciding "The Fountainhead" is the best book ever.

You can have an opinion about your kids classes without having to take them yourself, that’s basically the entire DCUM, people offering their perspective.

In fact, you can have an opinion about anything without knowing anything about it at all.

Ahhh, the classic “what do we know and how do we know it”, the hallmark of the IB graduate that passes off as “critical thinking”. Honestly I’m so sick of this formulaic approach to anything, that is my issue with the writing style of the IB program. It’s quite different than the writing done for most majors or careers.

Apologies if that comes off too harsh.

dp.. you are comparing a HS writing style in a specific program with workplace writing style. That's a ridiculous comparison.

IB is its own thing. Why are you comparing it to workplace writing? So strange.

That’s what I keep saying, IB is too much of its own thing.

Compare it to the writing you will do in college for most majors, that’s what the high school is supposed to prepare you for. The TOK essay doesn’t strike me as particularly useful, relevant or pertinent.

When you follow a recipe for your writing based on faux analysis and critical thinking cliches you’re going to be prepared for majors that value faux analysis and critical thinking cliches.

To be successful in college for the vast majority of majors as far as writing skills are concerned master two things: how to do a review of a topic and how to write a lab report. Unfortunately there aren’t many high schools that do this.

Ask any former IB student, and they will tell you that IBDP helped them in college. Some will even say that after IDBP, college was a cake walk.

Whatever faux analysis they wrote about, it certainly prepared them for college. The vast majority of these students end up in T50 and above, and do very well in college.

So whatever your issue with the IBDP, know that the vast majority of the graduates go on to do very well in college.

Good to know, I’m sure you have also sampled the programs with 25% IB diploma passing rate and surveyed what college they go to and how well they did afterwards.

I’m hoping you’ll be able to post without resorting these silly bragging snippets like “after IBDP, college was a cake walk”. No, it wasn’t, let’s not exaggerate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the TOK class is required but does anyone know what is taught in that class?

It’s my DD’s favorite class she’s ever taken.

It’s basically epistemology—what do we know, and how do we know it? Why is knowledge important? How does it relate to concepts like culture and community? She loves it because it’s very analytical, and favors deep thinking and argumentative writing over regurgitating facts.

They do a good bit of writing and some presentations, but in general it’s kind of an overarching theory class that is supposed to tie together all the other courses they take. But I’m sure the quality depends a lot on the instructor, too.

I found it pretentious and cringey, but I agree that it depends a lot on the instructor.

Most often it’s still going to regurgitate some ideas from Plato, Kant, Hume, Locke etc, albeit at poorly understood high school level.

To be honest the writing part of my DC IB program was quite underwhelming, essentially quantity over quality. It doesn’t help that the instructor is actually not capable of writing or teaching.

Instead of the extended essay I think my student would have been way better off with a solid practice of a five paragraph essay, strong understanding of grammar and a well developed vocabulary. I’d much prefer a short assignment that is well edited to be crisp and clear instead of 10 pages of rambling sentences. The teacher feedback was nonexistent, so had have to figure it out on his own.

It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

I don't think you're wrong (tbh I haven't read my kid's ToK essay), but I read their college application essays and they were fantastic. I was supposed to copyedit and the only thing I saw missing was one comma.

For a student who actually likes writing, IB is great. And if the fotm is a mishmash of social justice theory and woo woo "everything is colonialism, and colonialism is bad," well, so what? Gives them a heads up on what to question about what they've learn in college when all their peers are pounding Said and Kende back like they're Baptist missionaries on a bender.

I think it's still preferable to them deciding "The Fountainhead" is the best book ever.

You can have an opinion about your kids classes without having to take them yourself, that’s basically the entire DCUM, people offering their perspective.

In fact, you can have an opinion about anything without knowing anything about it at all.

Ahhh, the classic “what do we know and how do we know it”, the hallmark of the IB graduate that passes off as “critical thinking”. Honestly I’m so sick of this formulaic approach to anything, that is my issue with the writing style of the IB program. It’s quite different than the writing done for most majors or careers.

Apologies if that comes off too harsh.

dp.. you are comparing a HS writing style in a specific program with workplace writing style. That's a ridiculous comparison.

IB is its own thing. Why are you comparing it to workplace writing? So strange.

That’s what I keep saying, IB is too much of its own thing.

Compare it to the writing you will do in college for most majors, that’s what the high school is supposed to prepare you for. The TOK essay doesn’t strike me as particularly useful, relevant or pertinent.

When you follow a recipe for your writing based on faux analysis and critical thinking cliches you’re going to be prepared for majors that value faux analysis and critical thinking cliches.

To be successful in college for the vast majority of majors as far as writing skills are concerned master two things: how to do a review of a topic and how to write a lab report. Unfortunately there aren’t many high schools that do this.

Ask any former IB student, and they will tell you that IBDP helped them in college. Some will even say that after IDBP, college was a cake walk.

Whatever faux analysis they wrote about, it certainly prepared them for college. The vast majority of these students end up in T50 and above, and do very well in college.

So whatever your issue with the IBDP, know that the vast majority of the graduates go on to do very well in college.

Good to know, I’m sure you have also sampled the programs with 25% IB diploma passing rate and surveyed what college they go to and how well they did afterwards.

I’m hoping you’ll be able to post without resorting these silly bragging snippets like “after IBDP, college was a cake walk”. No, it wasn’t, let’s not exaggerate.

Here's a TOK-type question: which programs are those, and where did you get that information? As far as I know, MCPS does not publish that information. MCPS does publish information about how many students took an IB test and how many of them got a score of [something, I forget what] or higher on it, but that is not the same thing. If there are schools in MCPS where only 25% of students in the IB DP end up getting the IB DP, that's news to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know the TOK class is required but does anyone know what is taught in that class?

It’s my DD’s favorite class she’s ever taken.

It’s basically epistemology—what do we know, and how do we know it? Why is knowledge important? How does it relate to concepts like culture and community? She loves it because it’s very analytical, and favors deep thinking and argumentative writing over regurgitating facts.

They do a good bit of writing and some presentations, but in general it’s kind of an overarching theory class that is supposed to tie together all the other courses they take. But I’m sure the quality depends a lot on the instructor, too.

I found it pretentious and cringey, but I agree that it depends a lot on the instructor.

Most often it’s still going to regurgitate some ideas from Plato, Kant, Hume, Locke etc, albeit at poorly understood high school level.

To be honest the writing part of my DC IB program was quite underwhelming, essentially quantity over quality. It doesn’t help that the instructor is actually not capable of writing or teaching.

Instead of the extended essay I think my student would have been way better off with a solid practice of a five paragraph essay, strong understanding of grammar and a well developed vocabulary. I’d much prefer a short assignment that is well edited to be crisp and clear instead of 10 pages of rambling sentences. The teacher feedback was nonexistent, so had have to figure it out on his own.

It’s worst when the TOK is mashed with the flavor of the day of postmodernism, post colonialism, social justice soup. Then it turns into indigenous ways of knowing, all cultures are equal cliches and tropes that truly are painful to read. I found TOK to be the a very poor example of deep thinking, analysis and argumentative writing.

I second the other poster that the writing part of IB was not impressive to say the least.

I don't think you're wrong (tbh I haven't read my kid's ToK essay), but I read their college application essays and they were fantastic. I was supposed to copyedit and the only thing I saw missing was one comma.

For a student who actually likes writing, IB is great. And if the fotm is a mishmash of social justice theory and woo woo "everything is colonialism, and colonialism is bad," well, so what? Gives them a heads up on what to question about what they've learn in college when all their peers are pounding Said and Kende back like they're Baptist missionaries on a bender.

I think it's still preferable to them deciding "The Fountainhead" is the best book ever.

You can have an opinion about your kids classes without having to take them yourself, that’s basically the entire DCUM, people offering their perspective.

In fact, you can have an opinion about anything without knowing anything about it at all.

Ahhh, the classic “what do we know and how do we know it”, the hallmark of the IB graduate that passes off as “critical thinking”. Honestly I’m so sick of this formulaic approach to anything, that is my issue with the writing style of the IB program. It’s quite different than the writing done for most majors or careers.

Apologies if that comes off too harsh.

dp.. you are comparing a HS writing style in a specific program with workplace writing style. That's a ridiculous comparison.

IB is its own thing. Why are you comparing it to workplace writing? So strange.

That’s what I keep saying, IB is too much of its own thing.

Compare it to the writing you will do in college for most majors, that’s what the high school is supposed to prepare you for. The TOK essay doesn’t strike me as particularly useful, relevant or pertinent.

When you follow a recipe for your writing based on faux analysis and critical thinking cliches you’re going to be prepared for majors that value faux analysis and critical thinking cliches.

To be successful in college for the vast majority of majors as far as writing skills are concerned master two things: how to do a review of a topic and how to write a lab report. Unfortunately there aren’t many high schools that do this.

says who?

You’re doing the “what do we know and how do we know it” again!

Seriously, you don’t see how your mind is held captive to these tropes? Take a step back and you’ll understand how this can be so annoying for other people because it adds nothing to the conversation.