http://www.adastranet.net/forum/48/alchin48.htm
There is no general method or formula which is "correct." You can probably ignore some of this advice and still do a good presentation… but following these suggestions may help.
1. Familiarize yourself with the assessment criteria. Notice, for example that whatever your topic, the focus must be on knowledge issues and that you should choose a contemporary issue (or at least one that is contemporary to you: a historical event that you're studying in History class qualifies).
2. Choose a concrete topic that interests you and find the TOK in it. TOK can be found almost anywhere, so use the opportunity to do something that you will enjoy doing. Do not just choose, say, the death penalty just because you have a book on it. Your presentation will come across much better if you choose something which means something to you personally: your own school, recent events in the news, cartoons, books and films are often fertile ground for presentation topics. Some of the most effective presentations start with an everyday story and go on to draw out the TOK aspects.
3. You should be exploring an issue; this means that you should present different points of view, even if they contradict each other and even if you disagree with them. You can try to reconcile different points of view or explain precisely why they are incompatible.
You do not have to choose one point of view as "correct," but you should avoid the rather vacuous "so there are different points of view all of which are equally valid" approach.
Do not be afraid to give your own opinion; you can point out that there are problems with your opinion, but be honest and say what you really think!
4. Try to cover the facts quickly and get on to the abstract TOK principles . If you have chosen a topic where there are important facts that the audience needs to know, then you should get through these quickly--there are no marks for dissemination of information!
The focus of the presentation must be analysis, not description. If you can't summarize the facts in a couple of minutes then you should distribute to the audience a summary to be read beforehand.
5. Once you have drawn out the abstract TOK principles you should try to see what the implications of these principles are, and perhaps use these implications to reflect on the validity of the principles. For example, if you are considering the argument for the death penalty that states that murderers lose the right to life, the underlying principle seems to be "an eye for an eye." But what if you were to ask, "What do we do with a thief? Or a rapist? Or a kidnapper?" a different underlying principle might have to be used, possibly leading to a reformulation of the original principle.
6. Consider carefully how you communicate the structure of your presentation. The structure may be clear in your mind, but the audience may not find it so easy to follow.
Having one or two overheads with the main points in bullet form (using a large font for clarity) can keep both you and your audience on track.

7. Try to state explicitly the problems of knowledge that you are looking at. This will help you retain clarity and make it easier for an examiner to give you high marks in criterion A (Knowledge Issues). If you use an overhead, list the problems there.
8. If appropriate use a film clip, slides, photos, newspaper cutting or any other prop. Your presentation will probably be far more interesting if you can use something other than your voice! But make sure that the props serve a specific purpose, and that they don't replace the analysis that will earn you high marks in criterion B (Quality of Analysis).
9. In your conclusion try to summarize (briefly--only a few sentences) what you have said, and try to end with a forward-looking view. This might be a summary of the main principles you have identified or some issues which have arisen and which have not been answered. Do not just reiterate your arguments. The end should "feel" like a conclusion and not like "well, that's it." http://uwcac.org.uk/acad/thok/advice_p.htm
Advice on Your Theory of Knowledge Presentation by Alex Bird (Head of TOK, Atlantic College)
You can present your Oral Presentation either individually or in a group. At Atlantic
College, we limit the size of the group to just 2 people as any larger it becomes very difficult for the teacher to mark.
Your presentation only has to last for 20 minutes – that is 12 minutes of presenting your findings and ideas, followed by 8 minutes of discussion. You will find that your presentation will probably last longer than that, depending on what it is you are presenting, once you have explained the topic and shown how it is a problem to acquiring knowledge, and then heard the views of your class mates.
Your presentation will not take you that long to research and plan once you are clear what it is that you are required to do, and how to do it.
You are free to do your Oral Presentation on any topic you like – just keep in mind what the aim of the Theory of Knowledge course is, and how the objective of your presentation relates to it.
Cultural and Personal Sensitivity – obviously we do not know the complete personal background of all of our class members. We do know that certain images and words will cause offence, such as photographs of pornography or violence, bigoted language and propaganda. However, you are still able to critically examine and discuss issues that

involve things that we may all find unpleasant without having to show any images whatsoever. Please discuss topics with your teacher, and get a feel of what the mood is in your class, refrain from 'shock tactics' but focus on analysing what problems are involved in gaining knowledge in the topic under discussion.
Remember the Aim of the Theory of Knowledge Course:
Think Critically – question everything. The course revolves around two fundamental questions:
What it is I claim to know?
How valid are the methods used to establish what it is I claim to know?
In your presentation you must investigate, discuss and critically examine – that means to challenge and show the limitations as well as also showing the successes – the methods used to try and explain 'How we know what we claim to know?'
You must discuss the role of the Ways of Knowing, their strengths and limitations in the processes and methods used by the different Areas of Knowledge. You must highlight all of the 'controversies' (the Problems of Knowledge and Knowledge Issues), where assumptions and claims are made but whose basis is still questionable, or where something works in one Area of Knowledge but not in another.
Read the Assessment Criteria:
You'll find this in the Theory of Knowledge Booklet and Assessment Criteria given to you by all your teachers at the beginning of the course. It should be at the back of your journals. (A copy of this booklet is also available on this web page).
I've edited the document down to show you only the lowest, middle and highest mark band for each of the Assessment Criteria.
Remember the Theory of Knowledge Diagram:
When planning your presentation, have a copy of the Theory of Diagram to hand.
Whatever topic you choose, try and see what the role of the Ways of Knowing are within it, and which Areas of Knowledge your topic excels in and which ones it has problems in, or is completely irrelevant. Try and create a 'spider's web' across the diagram as you go back and forth relating different parts to your topic.

You will need:
Counter-examples – clear illustrations of where assumptions made in your presentation work in one Area of Knowledge but completely collapse, or are not relevant in another.
You need to evaluate your argument.
Cross-cultural examples – try and find examples which support the assumptions in your presentation, or challenge them and so become your counter-examples, from as
International a background as is possible. The results of an experiment, a historical event, a word or action, may all be interpreted differently by different ethnic cultures, religions and socio-economic political societies.
Personal examples – include examples that are from your own learning experience – if you've read a book, heard a song, seen a film, have a friend or relative whose views challenge the assumptions of your presentation – then quote and reference them.
You may choose a presentation on whether experimenting on animals is justified in the pursuit of scientific knowledge. You could firstly look at the Ways of Knowing:
Perception – see what images are presented by antivivisectionist pressure groups and the scientific laboratories doing this kind of thing.
Language – look at the style of language used by antivivisectionist pressure groups and the scientists – is it "torture/murder" or an "experiment"? How does this effect the presentation of the topic being investigated?
Emotion – how do the images or the language employed in the arguments influence your emotions, and in turn, what role does your emotions play supporting or opposing to such actions?
Look at two or three Areas of Knowledge – say in this case it could be the Natural
Sciences and Ethics to get examples to explore justification and objections to experimenting on animals.
Reason – what is the use of logic in arguments for and against experimentation on animals in both the Natural Sciences and Ethics? Explain the arguments and then critically assess them – try to find supportive examples and counter-examples.
Other Areas of Knowledge – you could look at History, Social Science or religion to see if there are any international examples of societies who treat animals differently, or if our behaviour has changed because of knowledge gained from another Area of Knowledge?

Finally, you do not have to arrive at a ground breaking conclusion. You can say here is the area I have investigated, here are the problem(s) that I have found, and here is my response to them. Then you can open the topic up to further discussion from your classmates to see what they think.
The Format of Your Presentation:
Always have:
An introduction – tell your audience what you are going to focus on and why?
A body – have some core information but move quickly onto core questions – 'analysing' the validity of the 'methods' of what we claim to know. Really focus on 'How do we know what we claim to know?', 'How trustworthy are those methods?'
A conclusion – briefly tell your audience what you investigated, what you found out, and what you now think/feel on the matter.
Have a selection of open-ended questions for the class debate – find out what they think, and why they think it, with regard to your topic of investigation.
The Style of Your Presentation:
What is really of importance is your critical analysis and addressing the two fundamental questions:
What it is I claim to know?
How valid are the methods used to establish what it is I claim to know?
As long as you are assessing and evaluating the success, controversy and failure of the methods used to try and explain 'How we know what we claim to know?' – you are free to use any of the methods listed below, or even invent your own:
Critical questions on a whiteboard;
Worksheet with critical questions;
Newspaper Article with critical questions;
Power Point presentation with critical questions;

Watch a section of a film/DVD followed with a critical analysis;
Perform a social experiment followed with a critical analysis;
Perform a role play to highlight a critical analysis;
Perform a good piece of music and then a bad piece to investigate what supposedly gives it its quality;
In pairs deliver and highlight the opposing views of debate.
If you are a pair – I advise that you break your presentation up into points – with one person speaking first, then the other, and alternating through your presentation so that your deliver it quite like a game of tennis. Always try and speak for equal amounts of time – as this will help the marker.
Remember – Always have you presentation planned, with the points you want to say on a piece of paper in front of you. Do not write an essay to read out in class, or read out points that you've already placed on a Power Point Presentation, as this waste time and is boring – tells us what we need to know and then lead us straight into the analysis.
Research:
Obviously you will need to know a certain amount on the topic – but don't do too much – sometimes reading one newspaper article can be enough – as the focus is on your analysis and the critical questions:
What is claimed?
What methods were used to reach that conclusion?
How valid are those methods?
Do these methods work in any/or other Areas of Knowledge?
What still puzzles you?
What methods/evidence would you need to accept their claim?

http://www.angelfire.com/journal2/gena/toknotessummary.html
TOK Notes Summary Page
General Class Notes:
-Humans record history
-Humans determine what is history
-Humans make history
-History=truth
-People understand history by patterns that are linear, in cycles, chronologies, etc.
-Every subject has a history when needs to be studied in and out of itself.
-methodology, verification, peer review, and historicalogy all must be present
Juliana
Topic: Teen Depression through Art
Areas/Ways of Knowing:
Perception: degree of understanding
*can someone make sad art without being depressed?
Language/Emotion: communication color art can depict depression in the ways of expression i.e. clenched fists, hiding in the corner
Georgia
Topic: Conflict in Values
Areas/Ways of Knowing
Language: Relgious/family values
Perception: visual difference, loss of identity
Examples: inter-racial marriages living in groups (diaspora) immigration-blending of cultures
1 0 . 4 . 0 2
Alex
Topic: Politics and History
*politics affects history; events influence history
Areas/Ways of Knowing
Reason: deciding when actions are more important than what is discussed
Language: use their language in order to manipulate the story to get what you want
*one is going to use another--always
Examples/Contemporary Issue: Democrats: their lack of support for the war on Iraq.
They have a more political view than basing it on history.
1 0 . 8 . 0 2

Blair
Topic: What is the relationship between the natural sciences and social responsibility?
Areas/Ways of Knowing:
Reason: new technology
Emotion: scientist's obligation to Biology (naturalistic)
Natural Sciences: moral: scientific truth-make things okay; setting method ethic: science is becoming more unnatural consenus-citizenship: religion- "be like God"
Example: Invitro fertilization (petri dishes babies)
Becky
Topic: Bipolar disease
Areas/Ways of Knowing:
Reason: certain behavior touching their lives
Language/Emotion: Human and Natural Sciences observations with emotion tests versus textbook notes about Bipolar: low to high mood swing anxiety misdiagnois to ADD and ADHD emotions are differed-effects 40% of ceretonin loss of neuron branches which leads to anxiety
Brittany
Topic: What is the social responsibility of the scientist?
Areas/Ways of Knowing
Emotion: Catholic religion versus the scientist
Catholics are against terminating conception (flows along with feeling) while the scientist finds not pursuing stem-cell research as an obstacle and disregards what is felt in order to advance science.
Logic: too much emotion input; finding the meaning; lives of the unborn; the living
Ethics: justify moral judgements
Human Sciences: behavior
*Where does the medium lie?
Notes about contemporary issue: stem-cell research transports without the surgery to create one's own organs testing of new drugs sources of the cell: embryos, fetus social conflicts: religion, specifically the Catholic view the morale to give life
United States is taken over by advanced research
Lizzie
Topic: Human cloning

Areas/Ways of Knowing:
Human Sciences: dealing with interactions of humans
Ethics: justification of morals-is it right?
Emotion: human versus scientist
Reason: decision of advancing science
Ted
Topic:History-The Method of Teaching
Areas/Ways of Knowing:
Ethics: is it unethical? purpose: why we study history? --to learn from our mistakes
Emotion: sugar-coating
*Why do we teach false facts?
*How do we teach history?
Notes: False facts (i.e. Paul Revere...The British are coming...)
Elena
Topic: History and Truth
Areas/Ways of Knowing:
Language: lack of to prove illness--not a concrete issue
*How do you pull mental truth and history for the future?
Example: mental and psychological history--the lady who drowned her childern
Truth: she was sick.
Catherine
Topic: Aesthics
Areas/Ways of Knowing:
Reason: "Painting is art because..."
Emotion: how the art is conveyed
Perception: (example: line, several lines=bars, stations of the Cross)
Notes of art appreciation of art mere knowledge
6th sense use of other senses to represent beauty
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TOK Notes Summary Commentary
In conclusion to the First Quarter ToK presentations, I felt most of them, clarified my views on both the areas and ways of knowing. Many of the examples took the areas of knowledge, expanding on its meaning in a practical sense, and then extended it to applying them to the ways of knowing with some type of justification for each topic. In general, I would say the presentations were clear in what they wanted to present in terms of a contemporary issue, but the problem arises in making the contemporary issue link to the ways and areas of knowledge. I found many of the ways of knowing, especially, were

thrown in the ToK presentation without fully explaining them in term of component B
(Quality of Analysis). The counterclaim component was not as strong and logical in term of presenting both sides of whichever topic presented. Also, it is not to say that no one came across their point vague, however, improvements can be made. A positive comment on the ToK presentation is to note the consistency of referring back to their contemporary issue and having that is their backbone to each particular presentation. Many of the ToK presentations were well thought-out ideas and could each be used as a topic to work as a
Theory of Knowledge issue. The individual comments made at the end of every presentation were indeed helpful for each student, in that, will enrich their 10-minute internal assessment component later on this year. Each suggestion either complimented on the success, however, the more critical comments were helpful and allowed the individual topic to be expressed with clarity. The ending commentaries then shed more light into the ways and areas of knowledge that I wouldn’t have noticed in my own individual interpretation of the ToK presentations.