IB1 ToK Presentation Schedule
Your TOK presentation should deal with a knowledge issue. Knowledge issues are
questions concerning the nature of knowledge, such as what we know, how we know
it, how perspective affects knowledge, how the nature of knowledge and knowledge
claims differ between different areas of knowledge, how knowledge is represented
and so on.
In order to explore a knowledge issue, a successful TOK presentation will identify a
real-life situation which poses questions about the nature of knowledge. The
presentation could then proceed in the following manner:
1. Brief explanation of the real-life situation
2. Recognition of the main knowledge issue suggested by the real-life situation
3. Development and analysis of the knowledge issue and recognition of other
relevant knowledge issues. You should also contrast and compare with other
areas of knowledge (AOKs) or ways of knowing (WOKs).
It is important that the presenters consider the issue from different
perspectives, and it is also preferable to reach a personal conclusion – your
own stance on the knowledge issue you've analysed.
4. The presenters can then apply their analysis of the knowledge issue(s) back to
the real-life situation, and to other related real-life situations (related to the
knowledge issue, not necessarily to the original real-life situation).
Implications of the stance taken on the knowledge issue(s) should be
recognised and discussed here if they were not dealt with earlier.
You should aim for 20-30 minutes for your presentation (it's difficult to analyse in
sufficient depth in less time), and it should be followed by some class discussion (led
by the presenters). ToK presentations often work best when they are not conventional
presentations. You might want to (and are encouraged to) include a dramatic element
in the presentation, such as a discussion between 2 people about your knowledge
issue, or maybe a TV chat show or a court case. These dramatic elements often work
very well as they encourage you to consider and present different perspectives, but
they usually work best as only a part of your overall presentation.
These presentations are not assessed, and their purpose is not to test you. They are
intended instead as a chance to practise giving a TOK presentation, and also to
provide the group with an interesting and thought-provoking variation to the other
more teacher-centred lessons. If you do want feedback, ask me immediately after the
lesson in which you give your presentation.
THE PRESENTATIONS
1
EITHER:
Is maths based on faith?
Your real-life situation is the following Calvin and Hobbes cartoon. You should
consider what reasons we have for accepting the axioms of mathematics. What
similarities/differences are there to the acceptance of religious dogma? How does this
compare to other areas of knowledge?
OR:
Is maths really so different from the arts?
Paul Erdos is quoted as saying, "Why are numbers beautiful? It's like asking why
Beethoven's Ninth Symphony is beautiful. If you don't see why, someone can't tell
you. I know numbers are beautiful. If they aren't beautiful, nothing is." For your
presentation you should use this quote as your real-life situation, which should help
you to consider the similarities and differences between maths and the arts.
Date: April 19
Presented by: Otto, Sandra & Jonas
2 – How justified is the word knowledge in science?
Read this Guardian article
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2005/sep/30/highereducation.uk) and
evaluate Simon Singh's insistence on the existence of scientific knowledge. You
should also expand your analysis to consider other AOKs.
Date: April 26
Presented by: Susanna, Robin & Ville
3 – How does language influence our understanding of knowledge?
For this presentation you should find any example of scientific research being
reported in the mainstream media. Try to find several different reports of the same
research results, and use this as a platform to consider the ways in which knowledge
claims are represented, and the role that language plays in shaping our
understanding of knowledge in science and other AOKs.
Date: May 2
Presented by: Joan, Pihla & Laura
4 – In what ways do both psychology and literature provide us with
knowledge about the human condition (i.e. knowledge about humans)?
For a real-life situation, compare some psychological research (you could use the
Milgram experiment or the Stanford prison experiment, or find one yourselves) with
one of the novels you're studying in A1/A2. Consider how these two sources of
knowledge help us to understand the human condition, and use this to start a more
general comparison of human sciences and the arts.
Date: May 9
Presented by: Meri, Linus & Nadia
5 – How do our own perspectives affect our understanding of history?
Use historical films or TV series, or the new style of dramatised historical
documentary for your real-life situation (some clips would be excellent). If possible, I
recommend that you watch both Gladiator (2000) and Spartacus (1960). Comparing
how these two films represent the same historical story (fact?) should provide for a
fruitful discussion on how current perspectives can affect our understanding of
history, which you can then extend into other AoKs.
Date: May 16
Presented by: Kasper, Sofia & Sander
6 – Should knowledge claims be left to the experts?
1421: The Year China Discovered the World is a book by Gavin Menzies in which he
claims that Chinese fleets “discovered” the Americas before Columbus. But Menzies is
an amateur historian with no academic background, and his claims have been
rejected by the academic community. I'll lend you a copy of the book, which you
should use to familiarise yourself with why Menzies believes that his background
qualifies him to make these claims. You can also find evidence for his claims online.
Date: May 17
Presented by: Malin, Felicia & Johanna
Marking Criteria
A Identification of knowledge issue

Did the presentation identify a relevant knowledge issue involved, implicit or embedded in a real-life situation?
Achievement
level
0
1-2
3-4
5
Descriptor
Level 1 was not achieved.
The presentation referred to a knowledge issue but it was irrelevant to the real-life situation under
consideration.
The presentation identified a knowledge issue that was in some ways relevant to the real-life situation
under consideration.
The presentation identified a knowledge issue that was clearly relevant to the real-life situation under
consideration.
B Treatment of knowledge issues

Did the presentation show a good understanding of knowledge issues, in the context of the real-life situation?
Achievement
level
0
1-2
3-4
5
Descriptor
Level 1 was not achieved.
The presentation showed some understanding of knowledge issues.
The presentation showed an adequate understanding of knowledge issues.
The presentation showed a good understanding of knowledge issues.
C Knower's perspective

Did the presentation, particularly in the use of arguments and examples, show an individual approach and
demonstrate the significance of the topic?
Achievement
level
0
1-2
3-4
5
Descriptor
Level 1 was not achieved.
The presentation, in its use of arguments and examples or otherwise, showed limited personal
involvement and did not demonstrate the significance of the topic.
The presentation, in its use of arguments and examples or otherwise, showed some personal
involvement and adequately demonstrated the significance of the topic.
The presentation, in its distinctively personal use of arguments and examples or otherwise, showed
clear personal involvement and fully demonstrated the significance of the topic.
D Connections



Did the presentation give a balanced account of how the topic could be approached from different perspectives?
Did the presentation show how the positions taken on the knowledge issues would have implications in related
areas?
In awarding the higher achievement levels, the emphasis should be more on the quality of the consideration of
connections than on the quantity of connections mentioned.
Achievement
level
0
1-2
3-4
5
Descriptor
Level 1 was not achieved.
The presentation explored at least two different perspectives to some extent.
The presentation gave a satisfactory account of how the question could be approached from different
perspectives, and began to explore their similarities and differences.
The presentation gave a clear account of how the question could be approached from different
perspectives and considered their implications in related areas.