In your introduction:
Have you reinterpreted the title in your own terms? You need to make it clear to us what the
PT means to you and then this should point toward the KQ you end up asking.
Have you clearly defined the key terms in the title and have they done so in a way that
brings clarity to the argument?
Have you considered whether the title is making any assumptions? If appropriate you
should mention these assumptions in the introduction. You don't have to challenge the
assumptions necessarily, but the marker will appreciate that you've noticed them.
Does your KQ directly relate to the title? Of course, it should.
Have you clearly stated your position in relation to the question (agree, disagree, agree to
some extent)? (This is your hypothesis.)
Does your introduction provide a roadmap --telling us which AOK’s and/or WoK’s you’re
going to use?
Have you eliminated unnecessary words in your introduction, so you have many words still
available for your main body section (for your analysis)? Make sure your intro is succinct,
while still ticking the boxes above. I know that's hard, but it is possible.
In the body of your essay
●
Are your claims always supporting your hypothesis?
●
Do your counterclaims always challenge (or show the limits of) your hypothesis?
●
Have you made use of relevant, unique, diverse, well researched and specific
examples?
●
Have you used a variety of evidence types (i.e. academic facts/research/theories,
quotations, uncommon examples, real personal examples from your IB subjects,
CAS, Extended essay, the media, and your own cultural and personal experiences)?
●
Are your examples are explicit, specific and precise? This will make them convincing
and compelling.
●
Have you used academic words and concepts at times to describe things and to
make careful distinctions? Show that you have read a ToK textbook.
●
]Is it easy to follow the logic of the argument you are developing? If you're using my
method your argument is probably well structured. Just make sure that the
mini-conclusions flow from the claims and counterclaims, etc.
●
Do you tend to focus on the interesting interactions between AoK's and WoK's in
your writing? The point here is that you should try to spend as much of your writing
as you can on really interesting ideas. If your writing is boring to you (or about things
that are boring to you) your reader is probably going to feel the same way and not
be excited by your writing. Try to develop and share really interesting ideas and
you'll be rewarded for it in your marks.
●
Are your counter-arguments as strong as your arguments? Fully develop each claim
and counterclaim. Often students (I'm not sure why) try to have stronger claims and
weaker counterclaims. Maybe they do this to make their hypothesis come out as
true. But it just comes across as lazy.
●
Have you clarified at times the similarities or differences between how different
disciplines know? This is a core concept of the course, so it's a useful thing to
mention at some point if it fits in with your essay.
●
Are your mini-conclusions interesting and not obvious? I know I've already given you
a point similar to this, but this is a bit different. In your mini-conclusions you need to
be taking your writing up a notch. Don't just say that evidence for the claim is higher,
try to really illuminate the limits of your claim, or find an interesting way to talk
about how the claim and counterclaim fit together.
●
Do you link your mini-conclusions back to the KQ?
In the end:
●
Has the essay come to a conclusion which is fully supported by the analysis in the
body? Again, if you're following the method this won't be a problem for you.
●
Is the conclusion of the essay at least a partial answer to the prescribed title? The
conclusion is a chance to link back to the prescribed title. Maybe your conclusion
isn't a full, final answer to the title, but it's should be at least a partial answer.
●
Do you show true, critical self-awareness/reflection? You should. Markers want to get
a sense that you've been really thoughtful (critical about your own perspective) as
you wrote, that this essay-writing process prompted you to realise something
--perhaps something about yourself.
●
Do you make an attempt to convince the markers that the insights of your essay
(and your conclusion especially) are important? You could discuss the implications
and significance of your conclusion. Try to make us really care about what
you've discovered.
In general:
●
Have you always cited your sources where they were used? Use in-text referencing
and a bibliography.
●
Have you checked the accuracy of the data you use in your essay? This includes
obvious things like academic theories you use for evidence, but also things like
definitions.
●
Have you tried to make sure that what you're saying something new and unique?
●
Have you defined all of your key terms? You do some of this in your introduction, but
it's often useful to clarify even basic terms like "human science."
●
]Is the word count between 1200-1600 words?
●
Have you had someone else read your essay to confirm it is clearly written, without
confusing passages? Ask this person if they understand all the arguments you're
making.
Some more notes on the word count
I wanted to quickly review the Word Count, in more depth because I've had a few questions
come in. Here are all of the details we get in the Theory of Knowledge Guide (mostly from p.
55):
●
The maximum length of the essay is 1,600 words.
●
The word count includes:
●
●
o
the main part of the essay
o
any quotations.
The word count DOES NOT INCLUDE:
o
any acknowledgments
o
the references (whether given in footnotes, endnotes or in-text)
o
any maps, charts, diagrams, annotated illustrations or tables
o
the bibliography.
Essays that exceed the word limit will be penalised in the following ways:
o
examiners are instructed to stop reading after 1,600 words and to base their
assessment on just the first 1,600 words.
o
And then (if you've gone beyond 1600 words) a 1 mark penalty will be applied
to the essay.
Administrative and Clerical
Procedures for the final essay
The following notes are taken directly from the subject reports for TOK. These are things
that IB examiners are always wishing students would do (but often they don't). Doing these
things will keep the markers happy about your work:
●
Make sure you have used DOUBLE spacing and a font size of 12. Double spacing
makes it a lot easier for the examiners to mark your work because they need to put
notes between the lines.
●
Make sure you haven't adjusted the margins at all and that you haven't added any
kind of border. Again this helps give the examiners room to put their comments.
●
Check that you've used a standard font such as Times New Roman, Calibri or Arial.
These are easy to read.
●
The prescribed title should be at the start of your essay as stated on the list and it
needs to be written exactly correctly.
●
Ensure that your essay is within the required word count (1200-1600 words), but also
take note of the actual word-count of your essay. You'll need to enter this into the
computer when your teacher has you upload your essay online.
●
Make sure your name is NOT on your essay. When you upload your essay (i.e. as a
Word document) your name will be included in a separate document, called "the
electronic coversheet." But your name should not be included on the actual essay
pages.