Gallery view
Search
Core: Knowledge and the Knower
The core theme, Knowledge and the Knower, forms the backbone of the TOK course. It focuses on the relationship between the individual knower and the knowledge they acquire, emphasizing personal perspectives, cognitive biases, and ethical responsibilities.
Optional: Connecting Knowledge to Real-World Contexts
The optional themes allow students to explore knowledge through specific societal and cultural lenses, making TOK more relatable and engaging. These include:
•
Knowledge and Technology: How advancements shape the creation and distribution of knowledge.
•
Knowledge and Politics: The relationship between knowledge, power, and governance.
•
Knowledge and Indigenous Societies: How traditional knowledge systems contribute to global understanding.
•
Knowledge and Language: The role of language in constructing and communicating knowledge.
•
Knowledge and Religion: The interplay between faith, spirituality, and knowledge systems.
How Themes Shape Knowledge Questions in the Exhibition and Essay
Themes are not just abstract ideas—they are tools to frame and analyze knowledge questions effectively.
•
In the TOK Exhibition
Themes provide the context for justifying object selection and linking objects to the IA prompt.
◦
Example: A student exploring Knowledge and Indigenous Societies might choose an artifact like a tribal mask to analyze how cultural heritage conveys knowledge about identity and values.
•
In the TOK Essay
Themes allow you to connect abstract prescribed titles to concrete contexts and examples. They provide the framework for comparing perspectives across AOKs.
•
Example: A title on evidence might draw on Knowledge and Technology to explore biases in AI-driven decisions, while Knowledge and Language could reveal how linguistic framing shapes evidence interpretation.
1.1 Theme
The Areas of Knowledge (AOKs) represent the domains through which humans acquire, create, and interpret knowledge. They are central to the TOK framework and offer distinct methodologies, tools, and challenges for exploring knowledge questions in both the exhibition and essay. The five AOKs are:
1.
Natural Sciences
•
Nature of AoK: Concerned with understanding the physical world through observation, experimentation, and reasoning.
•
Methods: Observation, experimentation, and hypothesis testing.
•
Tools: Instruments (e.g., microscopes, telescopes), empirical data, and statistical analysis.
•
Frameworks: Scientific theories and laws (e.g., gravity, thermodynamics).
•
Ethical Considerations:
1.
Ethical issues in experimentation (e.g., animal testing, human trials).
2.
Responsibility in applying scientific discoveries (e.g., nuclear energy, genetic engineering).
2.
Human Sciences
•
Nature of AoK: Explore human behavior and societal systems, drawing on disciplines such as psychology, sociology, and economics.
•
Methods: Surveys, experiments, and qualitative analysis.
•
Tools: Case studies, demographic data, and psychological tests.
•
Frameworks: Theories of behavior, cultural models, and economic principles.
•
Ethical Considerations:
1.
Challenges in ensuring unbiased research (e.g., cultural sensitivity in anthropology).
2.
Ethical dilemmas in psychological or sociological studies.
3.
Mathematics
•
Nature of AoK: Deals with abstract reasoning, patterns, and logical proofs to explain relationships in numbers and space.
•
Methods: Logical proofs and deductive reasoning.
•
Tools: Symbols, formulas, and computational models.
•
Frameworks: Axioms, theorems, and mathematical structures.
•
Ethical Considerations:
1.
Ethical concerns in algorithm design and data manipulation (e.g., bias in AI tools).
2.
Use of mathematical models in decision-making (e.g., predicting elections or allocating resources)
4.
Arts
•
Nature of AoK: Encompasses creative expression through mediums like literature, music, and visual arts.
•
Methods: Interpretation, critique, and creative experimentation.
•
Tools: Mediums such as paint, text, or sound; critical theories like semiotics.
•
Frameworks: Aesthetic principles and cultural context.
•
Ethical Considerations:
1.
Debates on cultural appropriation and intellectual property.
2.
The ethics of censorship versus freedom of expression.
5.
History
•
Nature of AoK: Investigates past events to understand present contexts and anticipate future implications.
•
Methods: Analysis of primary and secondary sources.
•
Tools: Archival research, historiography, and comparative studies.
•
Frameworks: Chronological models and causal explanations.
•
Ethical Considerations:
1.
The responsibility to represent marginalized voices.
2.
Ethical implications of historical revisionism or omissions.
1.2 AoK
The 12 key concepts will help you analyze how knowledge is constructed and understood across different Areas of Knowledge (AoKs). Below is an overview of each concept with examples to clarify their application.
1. Evidence
•
Definition: The information or data that supports or challenges a claim.
•
Key Questions:
◦
What counts as evidence in different AOKs?
◦
How do we decide if evidence is reliable?
•
Examples:
◦
In natural sciences, experimental results are evidence.
◦
In history, primary sources like diaries or photographs serve as evidence.
2. Certainty
•
Definition: The extent to which we can be confident that a claim is true.
•
Key Questions:
◦
Can we ever be certain about knowledge?
◦
How does certainty differ across AOKs?
•
Examples:
◦
In mathematics, certainty comes from proofs.
◦
In ethics, certainty is harder to achieve due to subjective interpretations.
3. Truth
•
Definition: A claim that aligns with reality or is universally accepted as valid.
•
Key Questions:
◦
How do we define truth?
◦
Can truth change over time or in different contexts?
•
Examples:
◦
Scientific truths like Newton’s laws were considered absolute until new theories emerged.
◦
Artistic truth might differ depending on cultural perspectives.
4. Interpretation
•
Definition: The process of explaining or understanding the meaning of something.
1.3 Concept
Gallery view
Search
The TOK exhibition is an essential component (worth 33% of final grade) of the IB TOK course, providing students with an opportunity to connect abstract knowledge questions with 3 tangible, real-world objects. Showcasing your exhibition to your teachers and peers is not part of the official grading. This guide covers everything from understanding the purpose of the exhibition to exemplar writings, ensuring a high-quality submission.
•
Purpose: To explore how TOK concepts manifest in the real world by analyzing three specific objects in relation to a prescribed IA prompt.
•
Scope: The exhibition is not a personal opinion piece; it’s a critical reflection on how knowledge is produced, shared, and applied in everyday contexts, using tangible objects as evidence.
•
Word Count Limit: 950
Assessment Criteria
Does the exhibition successfully show how TOK manifests in the world around us?
Level 1 - Rudimentary (1-2) | Level 2 - Basic (3-4) | Level 3 - Satisfactory (5-6) | Level 4 - Good (7-8) | Level 5 - Excellent (9-10) |
The exhibition presents three objects, but the real-world contexts are not stated, or the images presented may be highly generic images of types of objects rather than of specific real-world objects.
Links between the objects and the IA prompt are made, but these are minimal, tenuous, or unclear.
There is very little justification offered for the inclusion of each object in the exhibition.
The commentary on the objects is highly descriptive or consists only of unsupported assertions. | The exhibition identifies three objects, but the real-world contexts may be implied rather than explicitly stated.
Basic links between each object and the IA prompt are made, Explanations of these links are unconvincing and/or unfocused.
There is a superficial justification for the inclusion of each object in the exhibition.
Reasons for the inclusion of the objects are offered, but may be inappropriate as evidence and/or irrelevant to the IA prompt. There may be significant repetition across the justifications of the different objects. | The exhibition identifies three objects, although the real-world contexts may be vaguely or imprecisely stated.
There is some explanation of links between each object and the IA prompt.
There is some justification for the inclusion of each object in the exhibition.
Some points are supported by evidence and references to the selected IA prompt. | The exhibition identifies three objects and their real-world contexts.
Links between each of the objects and the IA prompt are explained. These explanations may lack precision and clarity in parts.
There is justification of the contribution that each individual object makes to the exhibition.
Many points are supported by appropriate evidence and references to the IA prompt. | The exhibition clearly identifies three objects and their specific real-world contexts.
Links between each object and the IA prompt are clearly made and well-explained.
There is a strong justification of the particular contribution that each individual object makes to the exhibition.
All, or nearly all, of the points are well-supported by appropriate evidence and explicit references to the IA prompt. |
Possible Characteristics
• Ineffective
• Descriptive
• Incoherent | • Simplistic
• Limited
• Underdeveloped | • Adequate
• Competent
• Acceptable | • Focused
• Relevant
• Coherent | • Convincing
• Lucid
• Precise |
IA Prompts (last updated: 2022)
The 35 IA prompts for the TOK exhibition are thought-provoking questions that explore how knowledge operates in real-world contexts. Students choose one prompt to anchor their analysis, using three specific objects to illustrate their response and demonstrate their understanding of key TOK concepts.
While the prompts remain largely consistent over time, the IB reviews and updates the list periodically (currently assumed to be around 4-5 years) to ensure relevance and alignment with evolving educational goals. It is important for students to confirm they are working with the most current set of prompts for their assessment year.
2.1 Overview
Selecting the right IA prompt is critical for crafting a compelling ToK Exhibition. The prompt serves as the foundation for your exploration of real-world objects and their connection to ToK Concepts.
5 Step Guide
1.
Understand the Purpose of the Prompt
•
The prompt serves as the foundation of your exhibition. It frames your analysis of knowledge concepts and how they relate to real-world objects.
•
Each prompt is an open-ended question that allows you to explore knowledge questions. Your goal is to create a clear, thoughtful, and personalized response through objects.
2.
Identify Your Strengths and Interests
•
Your personal interest will make the process more engaging and meaningful.
•
Think about your strengths, preferred Areas of Knowledge (AOKs), and objects that fascinate you.
◦
Consider personal experiences, current events, or stories from the news that could become your objects.
◦
Reflect on your favorite subjects (e.g., history, science, art, etc.) and the AOKs you feel most confident discussing.
Example:
•
If you love biology, a prompt like "What counts as good evidence for a claim?" could work since you can potentially explore how scientific experiments or scientific models serve as evidence in justifying knowledge claims in natural sciences.
•
If you love psychology, a prompt like “Can new knowledge change established values or beliefs?” could work since you can potentially explore how discoveries in psychology challenge traditional views on human behavior such as shifting attitudes on mental health.
•
If you love history, a prompt like “Are some things unknowable?” could work since you can potentially explore the limitations of producing knowledge only through historical artifacts.
•
If you love mathematics, a prompt like “Are some types of knowledge more useful than others?” could work since you can potentially explore how mathematical knowledge is often seen as universally applicable compared to more context-dependent knowledge in other fields.
•
If you love art, a prompt like “What is the relationship between personal experience and knowledge?” could work since you can potentially explore the influence of memory and emotions in the creation of art.
3.
Shortlist ~3 Prompts
•
By narrowing your options, you reduce choice paralysis and focus on the most promising prompts.
•
Pick prompts that you feel comfortable answering with potential objects in mind.
◦
For each prompt, think of 2-3 possible objects that could connect to it.
◦
If you can’t think of any objects for a prompt, it may not be the right fit.
4.
Choose 1 Prompt with Strong Objects and Concepts
•
You want a clear and manageable focus.
•
Select the prompt that feels most personal, interesting, and conceptually rich.
◦
There are no prompts you should or should not pick that guarantees a higher score. It’s more important to pick a prompt that you fully understand and personally interested in.
•
Ask yourself these questions:
◦
Do I find this topic interesting to explore for several weeks?
◦
Do I have at least 3 strong objects that clearly connect to the prompt?
◦
Can I link at least 3-4 key TOK concepts to this prompt?
If you answer "yes" to all three questions, you’ve found your prompt!
2.2 Selecting the Best IA Prompt
Selecting effective and strong objects is essential for a high scoring exhibition. Your objects should not only be personally relevant and interesting to explore your chosen prompt but also allow for meaningful connections to ToK concepts.
Since demonstrating personal connections with your chosen objects is crucial for the exhibition, using ideas for objects from AI sources is not recommended (since it will not know what objects you own). However, using them as idea starters to help you find objects that convey a similar idea is okay.
Checklist for Individual Objects:
Is your object tangible and specific?
•
Objects must be real, not hypothetical or abstract.
•
Objects should have a clear story or background that connects to the prompt.
Good Example: A scientific article with peer-reviewed findings.
Weak Example: A generic image of a globe.
Does your object align with the prompt?
2.3 Choosing Effective Objects
The TOK exhibition is centered around one IA prompt, explored through three specific objects that exemplify the chosen prompt. Each object requires a written commentary of approximately 315 words, where students explain how the object connects to the prompt and illustrates key TOK concepts. The exhibition does not require an overall introduction or conclusion. Instead, the focus is on clear, concise analysis of each object in isolation, while maintaining a consistent connection to the chosen prompt throughout.
a. Background
Introduce the object and identify its specific real-world context.
•
What is it? Where is it from?
•
Explain your personal connection with the object.
•
Keep the paragraph shorter than 100 words.
2.4 Structuring the Exhibition
Essay
“What challenges are raised by the dissemination and/or communication of knowledge?”
The TOK prompt I have selected is: “What challenges are raised by the dissemination and/or communication of knowledge?”. This exhibition explores this prompt by reflecting on knowledge and language, and more specifically on whether subtext and connotation always create confusion rather than help us to communicate knowledge. The language we use in our everyday lives can often be interpreted many different ways by different people, depending on their cultural background, beliefs, ideologies, affiliations, personal experiences etc. In particular it seems that subtext and connotation can be particularly challenging as they are often only recognised by people that share some particular knowledge or experiences, and it seems that they can easily be interpreted very differently by different people which can cause confusion and hinder communication of knowledge.
Object 1. Starbucks holiday cup
This cup was used by Starbucks in 2017 and was controversial because some people viewed the symbol of the two hands holding hands on the cup as a sign that Starbucks was promoting a homosexual agenda, because they saw the cups as having an LGBT subtext. However, many other people just saw the cup as spreading joy and love during the holiday season and did not think that there was any particular subtext at all.
This cup is particularly interesting for this exhibition because a Starbucks spokesman said that they had intentionally designed the cup so that customers could interpret it in their own way, which suggests that they were deliberately trying to communicate in an open or vague way rather than seeing the disagreement this might cause as being negative/ a challenge. In this way, the cup highlights how confusion arising from the use of subtext can be useful or can actually even be used by people intentionally to provoke discussion. The cup generated a lot of media attention for the company while still allowing them to say that how the cup was to be interpreted was up to their individual customers to decide.
2.5 Exemplar A
Essay
“Does some knowledge belong only to particular communities of knowers?”
Object 1: Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe
Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe is a novel that was published in 1958. It tells the story of the Igbo people (a Nigerian tribe) and their deeply rooted cultural and religious practices. Achebe infuses his writing with cultural references and literary devices (such as “Okonkwo’s fame had grown like a bush-fire in the harmattan”) that show how the Igbo people understand their world. Their economy is based on agriculture, so they have specific words like “harmattan” which represents the dry and dusty season. This knowledge may seem strange and foreign to me, but this is crucial knowledge for the Igbo people to have because if they plant their yams during this season they will not survive. Achebe was born in an Igbo town and is part of this community of knowers, so he understands the Igbo people and shares their knowledge.
As a white girl from an affluent town, I read about other cultures and through studying them in school, I respect and appreciate them. However, I also must acknowledge that I will never be able to fully understand them, as I was not born into this culture and I don’t think that anyone outside of a culture or community can truly know things in the same way as someone inside it. People see the world through the paradigms that are created through their personal experiences, so culture is a lens that every person sees the world through.
2.6 Exemplar B
Gallery view
Search
The TOK prescribed title essay is a central component (worth 67% of final grade) of the IB TOK course, challenging students to engage critically with a chosen title. It encourages exploration of knowledge questions (KQ) and concepts through the lens of Areas of Knowledge (AoKs). Understanding its purpose, structure, and assessment criteria is crucial for writing a focused and well-argued essay.
•
Purpose: To answer a prescribed title (PT) by analyzing knowledge questions using AoKs, concepts, and examples.
•
Scope: The essay is not about personal opinion; it’s a critical engagement with how knowledge is created, validated, and communicated.
•
Word Count Limit: 1600
Assessment Criteria
Does the student provide a clear, coherent and critical exploration of the essay title?
Excellent 9-10 | Good 7-8 | Satisfactory 6-6 | Basic 3-4 | Rudimentary 1-2 | 0 |
The discussion has a sustained focus on the title and is linked effectively to areas of knowledge.
Arguments are clear, coherent and effectively supported by specific examples. The implications of arguments are considered.
There is clear awareness and evaluation of different points of view. | The discussion is focused on the title and is linked effectively to areas of knowledge.
Arguments are clear, coherent and supported by examples.
There is awareness and some evaluation of different points of view. | The discussion is focused on the title and is developed with some links to areas of knowledge.
Arguments are offered and are supported by examples.
There is some awareness of different points of view. | The essay is connected to the title and makes superficial or limited links to areas of knowledge.
The discussion is largely descriptive. Limited arguments are offered but they are unclear and are not supported by effective examples. | The discussion is weakly connected to the title.
While there may be links to the areas of knowledge, any relevant points are descriptive or consist only of unsupported assertions. | The essay does not reach the standard described by the other levels or is not a response to one of the prescribed titles for the correct assessment session. |
Possible characteristics
Insightful
Convincing
Accomplished
Lucid | Pertinent Relevant Analytical Organized | Acceptable Mainstream Adequate Competent | Underdeveloped
Basic
Superficial Limited | Ineffective
Descriptive Incoherent Formless |
3.1 Overview
TOK prescribed titles typically fall into a few distinct types of questions, each designed to prompt critical thinking and nuanced analysis of knowledge issues. Here's an overview of the common types of questions in prescribed titles.
1.
Yes/No Questions
These questions invite the writer to take a stance but require justification, nuance, and exploration of both sides. Though it appears as a yes/no question, a strong TOK essay will explore the complexities, conditions, and implications of answering in either direction.
"In the production of knowledge, are we too quick to dismiss anomalies? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.”
•
Example Argument: “In the natural sciences, anomalies often serve as catalysts for paradigm shifts, and dismissing them too quickly risks overlooking opportunities to drive transformative advancements in knowledge.”
•
Example Counter Argument: “However, in the natural sciences, dismissing anomalies can be a practical necessity to avoid being misled by experimental errors, ensuring the focus remains on replicable findings.”
2.
“To What Extent” Questions
These questions require evaluation of the degree or limits of a claim or principle. They emphasize analysis, comparison, and weighing of evidence.
“To what extent do you agree that there is no significant difference between hypothesis and speculation? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.”
•
Example Argument: “In the human sciences, hypotheses differ significantly from speculation because they are systematically developed based on observable phenomena, whereas speculation lacks the methodological rigor required to generate knowledge.”
Example Counter Argument: “Nonetheless, in the human sciences, the distinction between hypothesis and speculation is often blurred because the complexity of human phenomena sometimes prevents hypotheses from being empirically tested, leaving them closer to informed speculation.”
3.
“How” Questions
These questions focus on mechanisms, methodologies, or relationships between concepts, often requiring detailed exploration of processes or implications.
“How might it benefit an area of knowledge to sever ties with its past? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.”
•
Example Argument: “In history, severing ties with its past allows the field to overcome entrenched biases and prioritize marginalized perspectives, fostering a more equitable understanding of historical narratives.”
3.2 Types of Prescribed Titles (PT)
When approaching the TOK PT essay, one of the most critical steps is selecting the appropriate PT and relevant Areas of Knowledge (AoKs) to analyze. Your choice can significantly impact how well you respond to the PT and demonstrate your understanding of TOK concepts.
3 Step Guide to Selecting a PT and Choosing Two AoKs:
1.
Break Down the Titles and Understanding Their Implications
•
Understand the type of question and identify the key terms and assumptions in each title.
2.
Rank Titles by Analytical Depth and Scoring Potential
•
Select titles with AoKs you’re comfortable investigating in depth, ensuring you understand their methods and tools.
•
Remember that each AoK has unique methods of inquiry, standards of evidence, and purposes. Use these characteristics to evaluate which AoKs are relevant to your chosen title.
◦
Natural Sciences: Empirical data, experiments, and falsifiability.
◦
Human Sciences: Observation of human behavior, interpretation, and ethical considerations.
◦
Mathematics: Logical reasoning, axioms, and universal applicability.
◦
The Arts: Creativity, subjective interpretation, and emotional impact.
◦
History: Evidence from the past, narratives, and perspectives
3.
Choose a Title That Matches Your Strengths
•
Play to your academic strengths and interests. Avoid unnecessarily challenging yourself with titles that do not make clear sense to you.
•
Note that you are not limited to selecting AoKs that match your course selection.
◦
Selecting the right AoK is not about choosing the “best” AoK but the ones that allow you to construct a compelling, well-supported argument tailored to the PT.
May 2025 Prescribed Titles | Key Terms |
1. Do historians and human scientists have an ethical obligation to follow the directive: “do not ignore contradictory evidence”? Discuss with reference to history and the human sciences. | • Ethical obligation
• Contradictory evidence |
2. Is our most revered knowledge more fragile than we assume it to be? Discuss with reference to the arts and one other area of knowledge. | • Revered knowledge
• Fragile |
3. How can we reconcile the relentless drive to pursue knowledge with the finite resources we have available? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge. | • Reconcile
• Pursue knowledge
• Finite resources |
4. Do the ever-improving tools of an area of knowledge always result in improved knowledge? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge. | • Ever-improving tools
• Improved knowledge |
5. To what extent do you agree with the claim “all models are wrong, but some are useful” (attributed to George Box)? Discuss with reference to mathematics and one other area of knowledge. | • Models
• Useful |
6. Does acquiring knowledge destroy our sense of wonder? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge. | • Acquiring knowledge
• Sense of wonder |
3.3 Unpacking the PTs and Selecting AoKs
Crafting a compelling argument for a TOK essay requires balancing intuition, evidence, and critical reflection. Here's a streamlined three-step process to guide you in building arguments that align with the PT while showcasing your analytical skills.
Step 1: Unpack the PT and Draft an Argument with Gut Feeling
1.
Interpret the Title: Identify key terms or phrases in the title.
•
For example, if the title asks about "certainty in the pursuit of knowledge," think about what certainty means to you and how you’ve encountered it.
2.
Ask Yourself Key Questions:
•
Which AoKs immediately come to mind for this title?
•
What examples seem relevant?
•
What TOK concepts (e.g., evidence, justification, or power) could connect with this?
3.
Write Down a Draft Argument: Use your intuition to form a rough thesis or statement that responds to the title. Don’t worry about perfection; focus on expressing your gut reaction.
Example: "Historians and human scientists share an ethical obligation to consider contradictory evidence, as ignoring it can distort the pursuit of objective understanding; however, the extent of this obligation differs. In History, selective evidence risks shaping biased narratives while in the Human Sciences, empirical methodologies allow contradictory evidence to be managed systematically."
Step 2: Research Real-Life Situations (RLS) That Support the Idea
1.
Identify Relevant RLS: Choose specific, real-world examples that align with the PT and AoKs.
•
Avoid RLSs that many students might also consider using. In other words, start with what you already know and begin your research for more complex and sophisticated RLSs.
•
Utilize AI-platforms (e.g., ChatGPT) to brainstorm ideas.
◦
“List 5 examples of real-life situations when past historians did not ignore contradictory evidence.”
◦
“Generate 3 more examples of real-life situations when historians did not ignore contradictory evidence which significantly contributed to unveiling the narratives of social minorities.”
2.
Pick a RLS That Strengthens Your Argument: Analyze examples critically, linking them to at least 2 TOK concepts each.
3.4 Building a Strong Argument and Selecting RLSs
a. Introduction
Define the title, introduce the knowledge question (optional), and state thesis.
•
Hook: Establish the broader context and significance of the title.
•
Knowledge Question (KQ): reformulated question of the PT
◦
Purpose of KQ: By exploring and answering the KQ in your essay, you should naturally be able to answer the PT as well.
•
Thesis: Outline the approach you will take, including the two AOKs and justification.
PT: “Without application in the world, the value of knowledge is greatly diminished.” Consider this claim with respect to two areas of knowledge.
Quality of Writing | Example |
Initial Writing | “Application can be defined as the use of knowledge in ways that affect the world and people. With this definition, this essay will explore how application plays a role in both the arts and the natural sciences in determining the value of knowledge.” |
Improved Writing | “Within the arts, I define application as making relevant commentary about the state or future state of the world, while in the natural sciences I see application as making relevant and impactful changes to the natural world. These divergent forms of applications are essential in determining the value of knowledge, as they shape its relevance and utility.” |
b. Argument
Analyze the claim for AOK1 using one unique RLS.
•
Topic Sentence: Begin by clearly stating the main argument of the paragraph. Ensure it is specific to the AoK you are addressing.
•
Explain Key Concepts: Provide a brief explanation of any key concepts or terms that are central to your argument. This step helps clarify your point and ensure that the reader understands the context of the argument.
•
Introduce RLS: Introduce the RLS that will support your argument. This should be concise and directly connected to the point you are making. Include appropriate citations.
Quality of Writing | Example |
Initial Writing | “John Hopkins University, which has long been recognized as a leading institution in the field of higher education and research, has consistently maintained its position as the top recipient of research funding for 35 consecutive years. This reflects the university's commitment to advancing knowledge and fostering innovation across a wide range of disciplines. While it is well-known that a significant portion of their annual $2.2 billion in research funding is allocated to medical research, there are also many instances where John Hopkins supports research in fields that may be considered more niche by the general public. For instance, a substantial portion of the funding is directed toward specialized research in astrophysics, including an area of study focused on understanding the interactions between black holes and black stars.” |
Improved Writing | “John Hopkins University, has led the world in research funding for 35 years in a row, but although large percentages of their $2.2 billion fund is given to medical research, they routinely fund more obscure research, like a subset of astrophysics concerned with finding how black holes can block black stars.” |
3.5 Structuring the Essay
May 2016
Prescribed Title #4: “Without application in the world, the value of knowledge is greatly diminished.” Consider this claim with respect to two areas of knowledge. |
Unpacking PT
Interpret the Title:
•
Key terms: application, value of knowledge
◦
What does it mean for a knowledge to be applicable? Does the same meaning apply for all AoKs?
◦
Can we differentiate the type of application? If so, which type of application makes the knowledge more valuable?
Ask Yourself Key Questions:
•
Which AoKs immediately come to mind for this title?
◦
Art and Natural Science
•
What examples seem relevant?
◦
Art
▪
Argument: art that specifically capture the truth of the world
▪
Counterargument: art that has application to only a particular culture making aesthetics also important
◦
Natural Science
▪
Argument: supporting research that can change the current world
▪
Counterargument: necessity of conducting research that has more theoretical applicability
•
What TOK concepts (e.g., evidence, justification, or power) could connect with this?
◦
Value, explanation, responsibility, truth, culture
Write a Draft Argument:
"Knowledge can have application in the world in two different ways: it can make relevant comments about the world and it can make impactful changes to the world. These applications are essential in determining the value of knowledge."
Essay
As a child growing up, I understood the point of learning rudimentary science and mathematics to avoid coming across as particularly ignorant, but I failed to see the possible future use of concepts such as Pythagoras Theorem in mathematics or the Steady State Theory in physics. From the age of 13, I was convinced that I was headed for a career in Law, and questioned the point of acquiring knowledge that did not directly assist me in my future profession. I held application in the world, specifically my future career, as the benchmark for the value judgement of knowledge. Although I still use application in the world as the main factor in evaluating knowledge, my understanding of application in the world has changed drastically, now allowing for the definition to differ in respective areas of knowledge. For instance, within the arts I define application as making relevant commentary about the state or future state of the world, while in the natural sciences I see application as making relevant and impactful changes to the natural world. For me, these applications are essential in determining the value of knowledge.
When we discuss whether knowledge is a means to an end or an end-in-itself, I tend to look to art, specifically visual art, as an example of the latter. Beauty is a vital part of the judgement of art, and many artists emphasise beauty and subjective appeal over all considerations, including application, in the judgement of an art piece’s value. In the early 19th century, the French phrase I’art pour I’art marked a movement to divorce art from any didactic, moral, or utilitarian function, but to see it as autotelic. The development of the ‘cult of beauty’ rejected the notion that art had a duty to make relevant commentary about the world. Although Russian, William Kandinsky’s Composition VII exemplified the I’art pour I’art1 movement as he believed he could ‘reduce his compositions to arrangements of colours, lines, and shapes… believing [they] could exist autonomously in a painting without any connection to recognizable objects’2. Kandinsky believed that no attempt should be made to extrapolate an external meaning from his work. Although a popular movement, it attracted many justified critiques, specifically from an English art critic John Ruskin, who saw art as having a duty to comment on the world, and viewed inapplicable but aesthetically pleasing art as having little to no value. This utilitarian belief led to the emergence of a counter movement: beauty for truth’s sake which emphasised the necessity of application in evaluating art. American playwright James A. Herne believed that beauty was not essential in art; instead truth and application played a more vital role.
3.6 Exemplar A
November 2018
Prescribed Title #3: Are disputes over knowledge claims within a discipline always resolvable? Answer this question by comparing and contrasting disciplines taken from two areas of knowledge. |
Unpacking PT
Interpret the Title:
•
Key terms: disputes, resolvable
◦
When and why are disputes over knowledge claims made?
◦
Can there be different types of disputes? If so, are certain types easier to resolve than others?
◦
How can we resolve disputes of knowledge?
Ask Yourself Key Questions:
•
Which AoKs immediately come to mind for this title?
◦
Natural Science and Human Science
•
What examples seem relevant?
◦
Natural Science
▪
Argument: theoretical dispute that was resolved with empirical research
▪
Counterargument: practical dispute that could not be resolved with empirical research
◦
Human Science
▪
Argument: theoretical dispute that was resolved with empirical research
▪
Counterargument: practical dispute that could not be resolved with empirical research
•
What TOK concepts (e.g., evidence, justification, or power) could connect with this?
◦
Evidence, certainty, interpretation, objectivity
Write a Draft Argument:
"While theoretical disputes occur from using prior theories and unsubstantiated by empirical evidence, practical disputes arise from claims that are formulated from empirical data. The resolvability of a dispute within a discipline largely depends on the nature of the dispute.”
Essay
Disputes over knowledge claims within disciplines constantly arise as man constantly pushes the boundaries of our knowledge. Disputes arise when facts within the domain are either unexplainable or contradictions exist between propositions. Discussing whether disputes over knowledge claims are always resolvable would shed more light on how to go about addressing future disputes, and important factors to consider when faced with contradictory claims. In this essay, theoretical and practical disputes will be discussed. Theoretical disputes are differing knowledge claims, arrived at using prior theories and unsubstantiated by empirical evidence. Practical disputes refer to contradictions between claims that are formulated from empirical data. 'Resolvable' is the act of dismissing or reconciling conflicting claims. In this essay, the discipline of Physics from the Natural Sciences and the discipline of Psychology from the Human Sciences will be compared and contrasted to justify the perspective that the resolvability of a dispute within a discipline largely depends on the nature of the dispute.
Theoretical disputes may be resolved using evidence obtained through experimentation. The implementation of the scientific method in both disciplines dictates that scientific knowledge claims are testable, which means they can be falsified through empirical evidence. The scientific method is a systematic process in which scientists make use of experimental and empirical data to substantiate their observations and support their hypothesis.9 This then leads to either the abolishment, strengthening or replacement of an existing theory.
3.7 Exemplar B
Gallery view
Search
Understanding the differences and overlaps between Exhibition and Essay assessments will help students approach each task strategically and make the most of their TOK learning journey. The table below highlights the key aspects of comparison:
Aspect | Exhibition | Essay |
Exploration | How TOK concepts manifest in real-world objects through a specific IA prompt | Broader philosophical knowledge questions via prescribed titles through AoKs and real-life situations |
Timing | Before the end of the first year | During the second year, typically before the winter break. |
Weightage | 33% | 67% |
Word Limit | Max. 950 words | Max. 1600 words |
Format | Includes three objects with concise commentaries | Structured with introduction, arguments, counterarguments, and conclusion |
Focus | Real-world, tangible objects and their contexts | Abstract and theoretical knowledge questions |
Areas of Knowledge (AoKs) | Optional, can link to AoKs but not required | Requires focus on exactly two AoKs |
TOK Concepts | Directly applies TOK concepts to analyze objects | Analyzes TOK concepts in the context of prescribed titles and broader implications |
Real-Life Examples | Tangible objects (e.g., artifacts, personal items) with clear contexts | From broader areas (e.g., historical events, scientific discoveries) |
Assessment | Internal by the teacher and moderated by IB | External by IB examiners |
Key Skills Assessed | - Object selection and justification.
- Linking objects to prompts and concepts.
- Clarity and conciseness in commentary. | - Critical thinking and argumentation.
- Balancing perspectives and implications.
- Sustained focus on PT. |
4.1 Exhibition vs. Essay
Citations are crucial as they enhance credibility, demonstrate academic integrity, and fulfill IB requirements. Proper citations also prevent plagiarism, ensuring credit is given to original authors, which the IB takes seriously.
Additionally, a clear citation page promotes transparency, enabling readers to verify information or explore sources further. Adhering to a consistent citation style, such as MLA or APA, is essential for meeting the IB’s presentation criteria. By balancing personal insights with external evidence, students validate their arguments and demonstrate thoughtful engagement with diverse perspectives, aligning with the TOK essay’s core objectives.
MLA
The MLA (Modern Language Association) format is commonly used in the humanities (e.g., literature, philosophy) and emphasizes simplicity, with in-text citations including only the author’s last name and page number (if applicable).
3 Step Guide to Structuring a “Works Cited” Page:
1.
Title Your Page "Works Cited"
•
The title "Works Cited" should be centered at the top of a new page.
•
Do not bold, italicize, or underline it.
2.
Format the Page
•
Use 1-inch margins on all sides.
•
Double-space all entries (no extra spaces between entries).
•
Use a legible 12-point font (like Times New Roman).
•
Alphabetize your sources by the first letter of each entry (ignore "A," "An," and "The" at the start of a title).
3.
Basic Format for Each Entry
4.2 Citations