What makes some ToK Essay Questions more difficult ?
and conversely, what makes some ToK Essay Questions easier than others ?
The May 2023 ToK Essay titles are out, students are choosing their preferred title, and teachers are giving their advice. We often implicitly know that some titles will be more difficult than others, I decided to try to articulate some of that 'implicit knowledge'.
The video about this post is linked here, and below.
The relativism bit.
I feel obligated to get the "relativist" bit out of the way at the beginning of this post:
how difficult a student finds a question will vary by student.
how difficult it is to support a student writing a particular question will vary by teacher & student.
more popular questions may be marked more stringently by some examiners
Terms such as 'easy', 'difficult', 'challenging' are relative.
OK, with the relativist bit out of the way, we're going to pretend that our world view is a close representation of other people's world view - just for the sake of simplifying(ish)the world.
NB - IB own the copyright to all PTs, and don't allow them to be reproduced without written permission. Therefore I have attenuated, or changed the PTs presented here. The points made about the original PTs remain the same despite this, but if you want the actual full PT you will need to see the TRM on the PRC.
6 Factors which influence the difficulty of a ToK Prescribed Title:
1. "Closed Ended" vs Open Ended.
We know that all the questions are open ended questions (the command term is usually "Discuss"), but the Knowledge Question, or Claim, upon which they are founded is not always open ended. For example May 2022 #3 "Is there solid justification for regarding knowledge in Natural Sciences more highly than knowledge in [another] AoK?". In this case the student can start thinking about the essay in terms of answering "yes there is...," or "no there isn't...,". This makes writing claims and counterclaims far more straightforward, especially for those students who struggle with ToK.
The most 'closed ended' PT's contain absolute statements (eg #3 Nov 21: “There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact” (Arthur Conan Doyle)). This absolute statement gives the student a fairly stable base on which to start developing their essay. For example with #3 Nov 21 students can start to think what Doyle meant by an "obvious fact", and therefore think about why it might be the most deceptive thing. It's a fairly solid base from which to develop the essay.
2. Assumptions.
Some of the PTs contain assumptions, sometimes these assumptions are explicit, sometimes they're implicit. Further some PTs contain both explicit and implicit assumptions. For example:
Explicit assumption: #3 May 2020: Does it matter that your personal circumstances influence how seriously your knowledge is taken?
Implicit assumption: #5 Nov 2021: “If all knowledge is provisional, when can we have confidence in what we claim to know?” (implicit assumption that we ever have confidence in what we know).
Both explicit & Implicit assumptions: #1 Nov 2021: "Why is it so difficult to identify a clear line between accepted and disputed knowledge within a discipline?"
OK, these dividing lines between explicit & implicit assumptions may not be as stark as shown here, but I assume that you get the idea.
The potential problem of assumptions is whether students should tackle them in the answer, and whether they NEED to tackle them to form their answer. The guidance is that students need to focus on the PT as given, and not change it. Therefore to spend too much time tackling the assumptions would be a diversion from the PT (as given), it's a loss of the required focus on the PT.
However, the higher marking bands of the assessment rubric also requires students to develop arguments pertaining to the KQ inherent in the PT. It is in this area that, with some PTs, students have the latitude to challenge the assumption(s) in the PT. The greater challenge comes when there are multiple assumptions in the PT. For example:
#3 May 2021: “Labels are needed* in the organization of knowledge, but they also constrain our understanding.”
Assumptions:
1. Labels are used in the organisation of knowledge.
2. Understanding can be constrained .
3. That there is organisation of knowledge.
In such circumstances I have advised my students to state which assumptions they are accepting as given, and which assumptions they will be critically interrogating. Further, if they have sufficient words they could give a rationale for their approach. This strategy has seemed to have worked well over the years.
Posing rhetorical questions within responses.
One of the particular holes that weaker students can fall into when dealing with a PT containing multiple assumptions is to write the assumption as a question in their response, and then to leave that question unanswered. For example, a student answering #3 May 21 (above) may pose the question "how do we even know that knowledge is organised, or is knowledge construction the organisation of disorganised data ?". In this instance we have a number of problems. The first being that PT isn't primarily about the organisation of knowledge (nor data), but about labels. As such the student is moving their focus off the PT. The student needs to directly link that question to the PT (about labels) for it to 'add' to the response. Secondly, by leaving a question hanging the essay reads like an incomplete, or incoherent, piece.
3. Quotes
Some of the questions contain a quote, often from a renowned writer. Eg #2 May 2022 "there’s a world of difference between truth and facts" May Angelou. Whilst this does not automatically make the question more difficult I have often found that it can introduce extra (confusing) variables into the process, particularly for students who find ToK difficult.
Obviously the student is required to interpret the quote in terms of ToK, and then to look at arguments pertaining to their ToK-interpretation of that quote. However, I have found that some students can get hung up on the author of the quote, and spend time trying to find a contextual meaning for the quote by investigating the life and works of the author. I assume that such students are bringing well learned skills and expectations from Grp 3 subjects such as History, or Global Politics, to their ToK. Of course, in some cases the quote can be a good platform for the student, but more often than not I have found it an added obstacle for students who are challenged by ToK.
4. Definitions.
Invariably the PTs require the student to develop definitions of concepts and key terms. Let's look at ToK Concepts first. ToK concepts should be easier for the student to define well (having studied the ToK course) than non-ToK concepts. Further some of the ToK Concepts will be easier to define than other ToK Concepts when they are readily apparent / clear in the corresponding AoK Knowledge Framework. For example in May 2022 #5 the concept of Interpretation in the Arts and one other AoK should have been relatively easy to draw from the Knowledge Framework. However, some ToK Concepts may not have been readily apparent to students even with interrogation of the corresponding knowledge framework eg #1 May 2022 the concept of Culture within AoK Maths will have required some further thought by many students.
However, this can become far more challenging when considering the need to define concepts/terms which are not included in the 12 ToK Concepts (which is not to say that they're not ToK concepts, it's just that they're not on the list on 12 defined by IB). A few examples: # 4 May 2022 - Stories. #6 May 2022 - Acceptable. #4 Nov 22- Indisputable. In these cases I often find that students will initially reach for a dictionary definition of the term, which usually takes them away from a ToK interpretation of the concept, and restricts the depth of their response. Further, weaker students find it difficult to apply the non-ToK concept to Knowledge Framework of the chosen AoK. The classic resent example was the concept of Story in #4 May 22. Many students found it difficult to interpret the idea of a story in Human Sciences, and to develop the notion of story in AoK History.
5. Clear claim or unclear claim?
All of the PTs include at least one 'claim', some PTs have multiple claims. Some PTs contain a single, clear, directional claim eg #5 Nov 2020: "Reliable Knowledge can lack certainty". In this case the student only has to deal with a single proposition, and the direction indicated by that proposition is clear. However, some PTs contain multiple claims Eg . #6 Nov 22: “If artists have freedom to interpret the past in ways that denied to historians, is this a benefit or barrier to our understanding of the past?" Discuss with reference to the arts and history (slightly changed to avoid copyright problems). With this PT the claim is a question in itself, that needs to be dealt with alongside the main thrust of the PT, namely the asset or obstacles to understanding the past. On top of this is the implicit assumption that an (the ?) aim of artistic knowledge is an understanding of the past.
Prescribed titles with a single, straightforward, claim tend to be easier for students to answer than those with multiple claims.
6. Freedom of Area of Knowledge.
Until May 2022 most Prescribed Titles give students a free choice as to which AoKs they want to write about, ostensibly this 'freedom' would seem to make it easier to answer these PTs than those that specify one (or sometimes both) PTs to be considered. However, in my opinion, the PTs which specify a PT are usually easier than those that give a free choice.
The Prescribed Essay Titles are actually asking students to engage in a discussion about The Knowledge Framework of the Areas of Knowledge. They are asking students to draw upon the knowledge issues arising from the Scope, Perspectives, Methodology and Ethics sections of the Knowledge Framework. Arguably, some knowledge issues are more 'obviously' relevant to certain AoKs than they are to others. When the Examiners are directing students towards a specific AoK they are , in effect, telling us that this knowledge issue is most pertinent in this specific AoK. It's directed guidance which makes it easier for the student to focus on the title, and make relevant links to the essay title. As such it makes it easier for students to access the higher marking bands, especially those students who struggle with ToK. Let's look at a couple of examples:
#5 May 2022: 5. In what ways* can we distinguish between good and bad interpretations? Discuss with reference to the arts and one other area of knowledge. (slightly altered for copyright reasons).
Obviously all AoKs involve interpretation of knowledge, however arguably interpretation is a more salient issue in AoK The Arts than in some other AoKs. In The Arts Interpretation of both the artist (the knowledge producer) and the audience (the knower) is it at the heart of the knowledge production process and knowing (the audience). By asking students to contrast AoK The Arts with one other AoK the examiners are giving students a big hint that they could write an essay contrasting an individualised approach to knowledge (The Arts) with a more standardised approach to knowledge (eg Mathematics, or Natural Sciences). The students could look at the function of the Area of Knowledge, or the acceptability of individualised interpretation within each AoK. They could look at standardised protocols of interpretation in an AoK such as Maths vs less standardised protocols in The Arts etc.
Prescribed Titles that direct students to at least one AoK for consideration give students a greater chance of focussing on salient issues. Therefore such PTs tend to be 'safer' (& maybe 'easier'), particularly for students who struggle with ToK.
A few side swinging Googlys (as in the cricketing sense of the word):
No explicit directive link to ToK:
In the past we used to see the occasional question that had no explicit directive link to ToK. These are becoming more rare in recent sessions, but I thought I'd include this warning here, just in case they reappear in future sessions. An explicit directive link to ToK is a phrase telling the students what to do with the stimulus, eg "Discuss this with reference to two Areas of Knowledge". Here are two examples of PTs that do not have an explicit directive link to ToK:
#2 Nov 2021
“Knowledge gained through direct experience is powerful but can be* problematic.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?
#2 Nov 2020
“Too much of our knowledge revolves around ourselves, as if we are the most important thing in the universe” (adapted from Carlo Rovelli). Why could* this be problematic?
Neither of the PTs above explicitly tell the students that they need to refer to the ToK framework, specifically the Knowledge Frameworks of the AoK. I know that teachers will make this clear to the students, but it's still very possible that students may write a more descriptive and anecdotal essay, particularly those students who find ToK more challenging.
Truth.
I used to have a general rule that students should avoid using the word "truth" in my ToK classroom, and in their ToK Essays / Presentations (as they then were). The concept of truth introduced so much complication, and would often be used interchangeably with objectivity or validity. Now that Truth is one of the twelve core concepts in the current guide the truth can no longer "be avoided".
In May 2022 PT #2 put the concept of truth at the heart of the essay title, and many of my students chose to write this title. I had to do some significant extra teaching to help them to develop a range of definitions for the word "truth", and to develop a set of critical approaches to truth. My caution about the concept of truth is that many students treat is an external fixed reality. May 2022 PT #2 was getting to the heart of that mistake, and asking them to interrogate the idea of a separation between external 'truths' ("facts") and internal knowledge ("truth"). Those that chose this essay title did fairly well.., but I remain cautious when it comes to the "truth" !
Existential-type questions
Some PTs refer to the Knower, as such these questions could be interpreted as asking the student to comment upon the Knower as well as the construction of knowledge within an AoK. Commenting upon The Knower is, of course, a laudable aim (The Knower is after all the Core Theme in the current guide). However, for some students who struggle with ToK discussions about The Knower can easily become self referential and anecdotal. They can also fall into being a commentary on relativism - which rarely helps students to achieve a good grade in ToK. In the most concerning incidents discussions about The Knower can lead to 'existential type' responses which question the nature of being, and our function in the universe.
Examples of PTs which invite discussion of the knower:
May 2016
3. “The knower’s perspective is essential in the pursuit of knowledge.” To what extent do you agree with this statement* ?
May 2020
3. Is it of concern* that your personal circumstances influence how seriously your knowledge is taken?
If you want to watch a video on questions which will help students to understand the ToK Essay title click here.
Students who are looking for more help on how to write the ToK Essay can check out this Ebook.
Summary.
These general observations about factors which make PTs more, or less, challenging for ToK students have been gathered over many years of teaching & supervising the Essay, and marking it for IB. They are very broad generalisations, and of course there are going to be PTs, and students, that don't conform to the observations above. However, I hope that these observations help ToK students and teachers a little more when making the judgment about which ToK PT to write.
Do you agree, or disagree, with my observations? I'd love to hear your thoughts in the comments section below.
Daniel, Lisbon, Portugal.
August 2022.
this is not the original word in the PT, it has been changed to ensure that we don't break IB copyright, however the substituted word has broadly the same meaning, arguably.