Category: IO

IO Final

evielearnerportfolioLeave a comment

My final IO was between the THT section in the Jezebels club and a political cartoon called Rule of Law. I actually first came up with this connection when first coming up with IO ideas in Y12 (DP Year 1) and I first wrote it out in the second paragraph of a post on my learner portfolio titled ‘IO Preparation’, published on December 21, 2019. They connected with higher-ranking men worsening the oppression of women.

Excerpt from Learner Portfolio post titled ‘IO Preparation’, published on December 21, 2019

I think it went well. My memorisation and practice enabled me to learn what I said really well to help the fluidity of my IO, I used the same technique as I did in my practice as I found that worked well, except this time I memorised more as I had more time to work on it. When I was speaking I was confident in what I was saying, and I did end up saying more analysis than I planned as I recently had discovered more things to analyse. I think I did a better job analysing my non-literary extract but I hope that my literary extract was still analysed well enough. I feel like I improved from my practice as my connections and global issue was much stronger so I hope it paid off but I am glad it’s over and now all I need to focus on in English is Paper 1, due to COVID.

IO Practice

evielearnerportfolioLeave a comment

On Tuesday 15th, I did my practice IO presentation. It compared the section from TILOHL about Henrietta’s procedure with an article from IFLScience about drug use on rats. I connected this through the ethics and consent in scientific procedures. To practice what I was going to say, I memorised the introduction paragraphs for each text as that had necessary information in it that I needed to say, and then with the analysis sections it was easy to do as my 10 points included the examples and why I used them. I found it a lot easier to learn what I was going to say for the analysis sections as I could easily analyse the examples I had and for the memorised paragraphs I just practiced them over and over again.

After doing my IO, I got feedback. I did well on keeping time and staying within 10 but also not being too short. I also had a good balance, time wise, between the extracts. The main thing to work on is my analysis of the different elements as my literary extract was analysed better than my non-literary- this was mainly due to not being that focused on this practice as it wasn’t anything like what I would be doing in my final. I think overall I did okay for my practice, my grade wasn’t the best but I know I can improve for my final.

After the First Reading of Henrietta Lacks

evielearnerportfolioLeave a comment

After reading ‘The Immortal life of Henrietta Lacks’ by Rachel Skloot, I was really interested in her as a person. The idea that her cells were took from her body without her consent and then turned into the huge discovery that they were, was really interesting. It prompted me to do more research about HeLa and I found interesting things that the cells are used for like:

  • Polio vaccines
  • Different virus testing
  • Cancer research
    • Helping define cancer markings in RNA
  • Gene mapping

I think that with this book, we will be able to talk more in depth about racism, healthcare treatment, corruption in the healthcare system in the past and possibly, corruption in the justice system (the law). This book has many topics that can apply to possible IO ideas as I feel like there will be many non-literary texts to analyse like maybe more articles. Also the idea of HeLa and how her cells were taken without consent could be able to be a TOK real life situation as it looks at natural sciences and perhaps the methodology and ethics being the main concepts involved.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HeLa

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/henriettalacks/importance-of-hela-cells.html

https://science.howstuffworks.com/life/cellular-microscopic/hela-cell.htm

IO Preperation

evielearnerportfolioLeave a comment

When preparing for the IO it was difficult to find segments from both the literary and non-literary text types. I couldn’t decide what made lines from different texts connect with each other. I looked through the articles to look for the first pairing and when looking at one of the articles, specifically to do with the “What Christine Blasey Ford reveals about womanhood” article, I found that Moira Donegan gives examples of what is expected of a woman and certain gender roles and behaviours that they are expected to have. This idea that is represented through how Donegan wrote the article is also present in The Handmaid’s Tale through what is expected of the handmaids and other women in their roles for this society. I looked at how the handmaids were expected to act and compared it too how Christine Ford acted.

When using a political cartoon as the non-literary text type I found it was easier as I could clearly see a connection with the ‘Rule of Law’ cartoon and a segment from ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ at Jezebel’s when the commander was saying how you ‘can’t cheat nature… at least for men’. I saw a connection as ‘Rule of Law’ implies there is a rule hidden in the law (law against assault and fair judgment of punishment) if you were a man, particularly a rich white man. This links to ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ as there are things that men are able to do which in comparison women aren’t, but women understand that men can get away with these things and accept that it’s in men’s nature. I looked at how men can act and be treated differently to women which was what I focused on when thinking of points I can analyse.

Oral Presentation and Paper 2 Practice Essay

evielearnerportfolioLeave a comment

For our oral presentation, our group looked at a prompt under the identity concept in our course. Specifically on the prompt, It could be argued that in some societies or cultures women at a disadvantage to men or even actively discriminated against. To what degree is this evident in the way women are represented in The Handmaid’s Tale. We made the points that through the change in society, the way they are represented and the perspectives of other characters, we can clearly see the discrimination women face through what Atwood has wrote.

The feedback we mainly got was to interpret the prompt better in order to show our understanding more as we didn’t do that. I also personally think I could of wrote the first point better, so that’s something I can work on for my essay.

For the essay we kept the same prompt and I used the quotes and points we made in the essay. I think I rewrote the first point better and paraphrased the prompt. I am still confused a bit on the interpretation but after the essay is handed back to us, I will double check if the interpretation is ok.

The presentation was a chance to practice skills that will be necessary in our IO that we will do in the future. The presentation skills can be applied in our DP core through our TOK presentations as well as being transferable to other subjects were presentations are necessary.

What would the pro-life side think?

evielearnerportfolioLeave a comment

During a class discussion at our table, we were thinking about what the pro-life side would think about this book. We first were thinking about if they would agree with the points made about abortion and also about the views about women and babies. We were thinking that they would as the points made by Aunt Lydia in particular, are logical and make sense even if I don’t personally agree with them. 

I also wondered if a religious person with pro-life views, specifically more fundamentalist Christians,  agrees with the use of religion in this book. Since the view of religion is so twisted and manipulated in order to fit with the beliefs of the society would a religious person agree with the points made? Would they like the use of the religious aspects or would they consider it blasphemous? Also if a religious person agrees with the manipulated religious aspects would that mean that the aspects of religion that the person believes in could also be manipulated to fit what the views of this pro-life side think?

Hypothetically, if the religious side of thinking, in regards to pro-life and fundamentalist views, believes a twisted view of religion then that would mean that by that side referencing the bible when talking about the pro-life debate would have been twisted to match that view. Also, the bible has constantly been read and had the meaning deciphered, not always in the correct way. 

A bible verse often used alongside the pro-life movement is Deuteronomy 30:19 “I call heaven and earth to witness against you today that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Choose life so that you and your descendants may live.” The specific part ‘Choose life so that you and your descendants may live.’ has been taken literally in regards to keeping the ‘descendants’ alive referring to the children which obviously is a big argument with the fetal right, arguing against the ‘unnecessary murder’.

Abortion and Fetal Right Debates

evielearnerportfolioLeave a comment

During class we planned two debates, with one being about Abortion and the other being fetal rights. I was arguing for the proposition side believing fetuses should have rights.

During the first debate on abortion, the prompt was ‘Is abortion morally wrong?’ Many points were brought up to do with the rights of women and how they would be taken away with the lack of choice that would come with making abortions illegal globally, these were made by the opposition side. The proposition side, against abortions, were making points to do with religion and the child. Even though both sides argued well, the opposition side won. Most of our class are pro-choice so obviously, there might have been the pre-conceived opinions influencing our choice.

During the second debate on fetal rights, the prompt was ‘Do fetuses have rights?’ The opposition side was bringing up points to the fact that they believe the fetus should have some sort of rights but ultimately giving fetuses rights would affect the rights of the women negatively, they were arguing about the rights of women being more important. They brought up points about the stages of development in the fetus, one key point is that the fetus shared similarities to a chicken fetus so why should we consider it a developing human with rights. The proposition side, the side I was arguing for, brought up points to do with how the stages of development didn’t represent the value a human being should have and that the fetal rights will give fetuses equal rights like that of the women, also including protection against drug and alcohol abuse during pregnancy. At the end of the debate, the proposition side won. This was against the true opinion of the audience as the majority doesn’t believe in it. The reason we won was our arguing skills, specifically the reply speakers speech. It was hard to argue for something I don’t believe in but it was good to get a different perspective on these issues. I also learnt a lot more about the development of fetuses in the womb and the anatomy of the fetus.

Linking these debates to the Handmaid’s tale, there is a lot of connection to choice and freedom. Since the Gilead society is very restrictive it linked to the pro-life movement. In the Gilead society, they are focused on having children which I assume would cause stigma on abortions, they mIght even be illegalised but they are not fully mentioned in the book. The society also is religious, or at least portraying religion in a twisted and manipulated in order to fit with what the people in control want. So the arguments made on the anti-abortion side to do with religion would be somewhat applicable. The main purpose of the society is to have children so having abortions be legal would be counterproductive.

The quote “There is more than one kind of freedom, said Aunt Lydia, Freedom to and freedom from” (30) applies in some way. The entire debate about pro-choice or pro-life which would link to the fact that the women in this society are affected by the ‘type of freedom’ that they would have. When Aunt Lydia says ‘freedom to’ she is referencing to the ‘days of anarchy’ where women were independent and responsible for their money, jobs, sexual freedom. Though on a more negative side the abuse they got from men (catcalling, sexual assault, rape, inappropriate behaviour) which all of this they now have ‘freedom from’ but by completely isolating them and making them be in a lose-lose situation with men having the upper hand. This was like a brainwashing technique for them to accept this situation. Since the pro-choice argument links with rape victims and the children due to this situation it links with the ‘freedom to’ side, with it linking to the days before the societal shift. 

Also, Serena Joy before the societal change was advocating for women to work and not fall into the gender norms of being housewives and mothers but now she is trapped doing the very thing she was against. 

The real-life connection between the book and these issues that we are facing nowadays is interesting. This would be a good topic to discuss in the IO as there are many links with the book with gender equality and what women face.

First Reading Reflection (THT)

evielearnerportfolioLeave a comment

After reading The Handmaid’s Tale for the first time I really like the book. I think because it is set in a dystopian society and could be something that happens to us, it makes it more interesting to read and see how the author, Margaret Atwood, portrays the world. I also think that the fact that this was written in the ’80s and the problems Margaret Atwood researched and the issues that were present in this time period still apply. 

My favourite section of the book was from Jezebels’ to the end of the book (Page 205- 320). I liked it the most as a lot of things happened throughout this section. It involved the wife, Offred and Nick, Offred and the Commander, it showed the ways that Offred has changed with her views on Love and Luke as well. Then we find out about what happened with Offred at the end. At the end of the book, Serena Joy finds out about Offred and the commander, which she doesn’t take well. Offred knows that something might happen but she doesn’t do anything. She hears the black van and Nick is the one who opens the door which makes her accuse him of being an eye. Nick says that it’s ok and that she should go with them. He says it’s Mayday which links with the earlier quote about what Mayday means when Ofglen said it was a password. “‘There’s a password,’ she says… ‘Mayday,’ I repeat… M’aidez.” (Page 208). Offred ends up going with the van. 

The ending, usually something that answers questions, creates more. Is she took to the colonies, killed or saved? Who are the mayday people that took her? Was it really someone that was helpful? Is Nick helpful? Will she see Luke and her daughter again? What would happen with Luke/ Nick Triangle? Does Nick actually like Offred or is he just doing it to be paid? We can guess but never really fully know.

I think during my next reading I want to look more into the symbolism and look deeper into the book and analyse it more as this will be interesting in order to look at how it connects with women inequality, views of the future and other issues the book brings up.

Historical Notes

evielearnerportfolioLeave a comment

After the book ends there is a section titled Historical Notes. It is written as if its a transcript of a conference about the Gileadean Society set in 2195. It’s talking about this as if it was in the past with someone specialised in 20th to 21st-century archives. This society has led to an association and people study and learn about this time period. People study this time period. The keynote briefly passes over one of the changes the Gileadean society caused. “What was once the city of Bangor, in what, at the time prior to the inception of the Gileadean regime, would have been the state of Maine.” (Page 309). References the historical information Margaret Atwood did for this book but in a way to say this is what caused the Gileadean Society. They propose various ideas that link to what we are doing in class by looking at different questions the book opens up. They propose that the names used in the book were pseudonyms and because of the name “Offred’ they can propose ideas as to who the commander was due to finding high-ranking Gileadean officials with the name or nickname as “Fred”. They propose that it was “Nick” who “by evidence of the very existence of the tapes” must have helped “Offred” to escape with the Mayday group who they said was a “shadowy… underground group” (Page 318). 

The person who is speaking as an “expert” at the keynote, a man named “Professor Pieixoto”. He seems like an arrogant speaker like he’s an expert in this field. When he asks at the end if there’s “any questions” (Page 320), he asks it kind of cockily like there’s no reason anyone shouldn’t know about this society after he has spoke. Also, it’s like him making himself the authority figure of this section of history. He is also kind of dismissing Offred’s story, yes he is being objective about history but he is almost saying that her account wasn’t as good, in terms of history. “She could have told us much about the workings of the Gileadean empire, had she had the instincts of a reporter or a spy.” (Page 318).

At the end of the book, by saying that someone must have escaped in order to have the tapes, it gives a prediction based off of ‘facts’ which can technically answer some of the questions proposed when we finished the book. Though it doesn’t answer all the questions and also creates more about who really was Offred, Nick, Moira and the people that made up the society. It answers some questions but still keeps the mystery that Margaret Atwood created through her ending.