TOK Essay Advice and Comments from the 2011 Subject Report
Compiled/edited L. Jackson/SSIS
1.
Do not change prescribed title in any way! Paraphrasing the title sometimes results in a lack of
focus on knowledge issues.
2. Examples of good KIs for last year’s titles (just possibilities, not an exhaustive list):
Title
Consider the extent to which KIs in ethics are
similar to those in at least one other AoK.
How important are the opinions of experts in
the search for knowledge? (- Students limited
themselves to scientists and historians and failed to
address the question of who is an expert and what
expertise means. Role of experts in the production of
new knowledge was ignored. Few students understood
that the term expert may have diff. meanings in diff.
AoKs. + One good issue was how experts can be
undermined by venturing beyond the limits of their
domains, or being expected by other to do so.)
“Doubt is the key to knowledge” (Persian
Proverb). TWE is this true in 2 AoKs?
(- Not many students treated “when should you doubt
and why?” or “when should you stop doubting and start
believing?” Students didn’t distinguish between doubt
as a state of mind and uncertainty as the status of a KC.
Historical examples were used without recognizing that
the assertions were speculative. + comparing the role of
doubt in the acquisition of K with other possible
mechanisms like curiosity or serendipity. Popper’s
view’s and ideas of falsification in science.)
TWE do we need evidence to support our
beliefs in diff AoKs?
(- failed to distinguish between belief and K, so didn’t
show that evidence could support beliefs that are
wrong or irrational. Some struggled to describe the
nature of evidence. + characterized evidence and
beliefs as working hand in hand, or as opposing forces,
Knowledge Issues
1. How important is the role of value judgements
in different areas of knowledge?
2. How difficult is it to establish universal truths in
various AoKs?
3. How do moral judgements differ from other
types of judgement?
4. Is there an analog to the appeal to experiment
in the natural sciences by which ethical claims
can be tested? (ex. Appeals to ethical
intuitions?)
1. In what ways and areas would the absence of
experts most severely limit our K?
2. Under what circumstances(UWC) should we
ignore the opinions of experts in the various
AoKs?
3. On what basis might we decide between the
judgements of experts if they disagree?
4. To what extent is the K that experts possess
transferable?
1. TWE do diff AoKs incorporate doubt as part of
their methods?
2. UWC might doubt undermine the construction
or acquisition of K?
3. Why is the possibility of doubt needed for K?
4. Since doubt can be taken to be lack of
convincing support for a claim, how can this
lead to a situation in which the claim has
convincing support?
1. What counts as evidence in various AoKs?
2. TWE are we obliged as knowers to provide
evidence for our beliefs?
3. How can we know when we have sufficient
evidence?
4. What could be the value of an unsupported
eg. When experimental evidence conflicts with
established theory in sciences. Addressed amount
quality and origin of evidence as factors that influence
whether existing beliefs should be modified. Addressed
concept of paradigms in sciences and other AoKs.
“Art is a lie that brings us nearer to the truth”
(Pablo Picasso). Evaluate this claim in relation
to a specific art form (ex. Visual arts,
literature, theater).
(- Some students were drawn away from direct
engagement with TOK KIs because of their interest in
art, sounding more like lit essays or art commentaries.
Ignored focus on one particular art form. Ignored
possibilities for exploring deliberate deception on the
part of the artist. + Relationship of art to truth was
contrasted with that of other AoKs. Emphasis on
counter-claims: that art leads us further from the truth
to an apprehension of the value of artistic realism.)
Discuss the roles of language and reason in
history.
(- Short titles containing terms familiar to the TOK
course may not necessarily be the most straightforward
to answer, or may need careful unpacking. Students
mis-interpreted “history” to mean a sequence of events
in general. + Made useful distinctions between use of
language as the raw material for history and as the
medium for recording historical accounts. Examined
types of logic that could be usefully employed in the
historian’s professional activities.)
belief?
1. What kinds of truth are the arts capable of
expressing?
2. To what extent are the insights available from
the appreciation of an art work dependent
upon the intentions of the artist?
3. What is meant by artistic truth?
4. What might be meant by a “lie” in the context
of an artwork?
1. TWE should, or can, value-laden language be
avoided in the writing of history?
2. TWE can the use of reason bring us closer to
the truth in history?
3. TWE does the use of language in history
influence our understanding of the past?
4. TWE is historical reasoning dependent on the
language used by the historian?
3. Knowledge Issues: avoid using KIs to overshadow the title itself. Don’t reword the PT. But also,
don’t only present KIs that are reproductions of the PT. No need to limit yourself to
demonstrating the truth of the assertions made in the PT (at the risk of writing an essay which
doesn’t permit consideration of counterclaims).
4. Areas of Knowledge:
a. be careful with history: not just something that happened in the past, nor something
that’s totally subjective and biased. Examples are too general and hypothetical—should
write about specific historians.
b. mathematics: students say that mathematical statements are justified empirically, but
they should see from their own mathematical experiences that most things they know
cannot be justified this way, not even 1+1=2. If you understand the axiomatic nature of
the subject, state what is axiomatic and what isn’t.
5. Problems with examples:
a. They’re absent
b. They’re hypothetical and unconvincing (child touching hot stove, beggar stealing food,
etc.)
c. They don’t go beyond common TOK examples (earth is flat/round, Australian black
swans, Hitler/Jews/Holocaust) Try to avoid using the same examples you have heard in
class.
d. They’re not factually accurate (check your examples before you use them—include
references!)
e. They ignore the potential of student’s own heritage. Try to use local wisdom and
knowledge, your own Knower’s Perspective, to come up with personal examples. Show
your “global mindset.” Reflect on the applications of KIs in your own cultural context.
6. Quality of Analysis (criterion C)
a. Avoid being too descriptive or speculative
b. Be sure to include counterclaims that explore alternative viewpoints (not just
contradictions)
c. Be metacognitive! Take a step back from your arguments to grasp the implications of
what you’re asserting.
7. Definitions: Don’t use dictionaries to define terms found in PTs. Open up discussion and
conceptual analysis of terms, rather than pinning down definitive meanings. (If you do this at
the beginning of the essay, it could make the rest of the essay irrelevant.)
8. Quotations: Don’t sprinkle quotations from websites through your essay without showing how
they function in the essay (and citing their sources).
9. Acknowledgements/Works Cited: be sure to include accurate references for the sources you
used. Don’t forget online sources must include access dates.
10. Formatting:
a. Use spacing at least 1.5 and font (Times New Roman or Arial) 12pt.
b. Use default margins with no added border.
c. Write prescribed title at the start of the essay.
d. Do not exceed the word limit! (actual word count must be entered when essay is
submitted)
11. Grade boundaries:
a. Essay: E=0-9, D=10-16, C=17-22, B=23-29, A=30-40
b. Overall TOK: E=0-17, D=18-28, C=29-37, B=38-47, A=48-60