New to teaching ToK? (Part 2) Course Structure
Structuring the ToK Course
This blog is part of the New to teaching ToK? series. This is the second blog in the series, if you missed the first blog on what to do in the first couple of lessons you may want to click here and jump back to read that post first.
If you'd prefer to watch the video version of this post you can pick it up at this link
So, you've spent a couple of lessons getting to know your students, and developing the dynamics of your wonderful ToK class. Now you have to figure out what your journey is going to look like, and you have to know what your destination is. You need to work out how you are going to structure your ToK course.
Where are we going, and why are we going there?
As good ToK teachers we should, of course, start with a question - the question is what do we see as our function as teachers of ToK ? the sub question here is do we see our function as teaching the content of the course, or do we see our function as helping students to develop the skills and qualities required, to be successful ToK students?
The focus on skills may seem self evident, even obvious to experienced teachers. However, I recently watched DP Teachers introduce their subject to prospective DP students. Some of these teachers talked about the experiences and personal development that students would develop by taking their subject (ie skills based). However, other teachers just described the content of their subject without any reference to the students (ie content based). Many of these content focussed teachers are experienced subject teachers.
In 17 years of teaching ToK I think that I have tried 6-8 different approaches to course structure. My ideas about structure and teaching have changed as I've developed my understanding of the content and demands of the course.
Why expend time & energy considering the Structure of The ToK Course?
All of the reasons for having a clear course structure for Hexagon DP subjects s are far more important for ToK. The course aims to develop skills, personal competencies, a quasi-emotional framework, and attitudes/opinions rather than content knowledge. This type of course requires a clear, functional and rationalised structure even more than a content based course.
The course structure is the map to the destination
a wise ToK teacher
You could start by looking at the suggestions on structuring the ToK course on pg 49 of the ToK Guide, and those suggestions in The Teacher Support Materials in the Programme Resource Centre. Both contain good suggestions for how you might structure the course, and the time scheduling of the structure. However, they don't really deal with WHY you might decide to structure a course in a particular way. This blog post deals with the rationale for choosing one structure over another more than what the different structures actually are.
Context
First we need to look at context, both your context as a teacher and the student's context in which they are learning. In terms of your context, you must first consider your experience, are you an experienced teacher of the students in your ToK class, are you experienced with this level of education and T.O.K. itself? Secondly we must consider your teaching preferences, do you have a preferred way of teaching, or you better have a particular way of teaching? Finally we need to consider your confidence in teaching T.o.K. Some curriculum structures are better suited for more confident teachers, Lost other structures are best suited for more confident teachers of ToK.
Student Context
Let's come on to look at student context, and first of all consider the students preferred learning styles. Some students and some classes have learning styles, I've had a few classes who really enjoy doing drama in T.O.K. other classes who enjoy doing deep reading and debates. The ways in which your students like to learn, and how they learn best, influences the ways in which you will structure your course (more on that later).
We also need to consider your student's self efficacy in relation to ToK. I use the term Self Efficacy purposefully rather than 'ability', I strongly believe that if a student can achieve a grade 2 or above in Language A they can also achieve a pass in ToK, so what we're saying is that all students in the DP can at least pass TOK. The obstacle to passing T.O.K. is more about the students perception of their ability to access T.O.K., (self efficacy) rather than the actual ability to pass the subject. In recent years I have been very enthusiastic about teachers directly addressing this issue of Self Efficacy in their classrooms. You'll see that in the first video and blog for teachers new to ToK I talk about the ways in which learning can be designed to tackle emotional orientation to T.O.K., in this I am trying to improve or boost the students self efficacy towards ToK. Student's self efficacy, and its consequent effect on student self regulation, are the keys to solving the problem of not having enough time to deliver the ToK course. They are also the single most important factor in increasing attainment in ToK.
Ideally a T.O.K. course should be structured to develop student's self efficacy in ToK rather than focusing on subject content and skills.
This leads us neatly on to a discussion on the skills versus syllabus content debate. It shouldn't be such a debate in TK because there isn't defined, traditional, subject content. However, every year I see ToK textbooks being bought which contain real life situational content which some people interpret as being the subject content of ToK. I have attended IB workshops where teachers discuss the correct subject content of ToK, even physically contesting which content falls under which area of knowledge calling and discussing what constitutes good or bad T.O.K. content. It would seem to me that dismisses the very point of the course which is to look at the process of knowledge production and interpretation rather than the knowledge itself. The skills based approach must be more appropriate for, and evident in, T.O.K. than in any other diploma program course. There are some overriding aims outlined at the beginning of the ToK study guide which give us a very loose guide to the skills required in the ToK course. One of the aims of ToK Today is to operationalise those skills so that they become targeted, detailed and specific. In such a way that teachers can design T.O.K. lessons so that they develop a very specific skill. More on this in future blogs and videos.
Linked to this discussion around skills versus subject content in ToK is the model of bringing subject teachers into ToK to teach Areas of Knowledge, for example you bring the Maths teacher in to teach Maths AoK. This model seems to have become orthodoxy that this is good practice, and I have used myself in the past and it wasn't currently successful. However I have recently become much more concerned about this model, and have not used this model for the last four years. The reason for this is that the "specialist teacher model" prioritises subject content over T.O.K. skills (unless the specialist teacher also happens to be a teacher of ToK). What I have used, however, is a development of this model which I would call the integrated ToK Model.
The Integrated ToK Model, is a small, but subtle difference, to the specialist teacher model outlined above. In this model I attend the classroom of the specialist subject teacher during their lesson time, and I ask the students to explain what they are learning in that subject, at that time, in terms of T.O.K. I develop the student's responses through further questions, and asking for ToK extensions. Refocussing the responses on Knowledge should they stray into subject content. This has a number of important factors to it, first of all it places ToK in the territory of the subject teaching, there is a significance to the physical space of the subject being taught, and bringing T.O.K. into that physical space. Secondly, it places the onus on students to develop the subject content in terms of T.O.K., rather than asking the subject teacher to become a T.O.K specialist, this promotes student efficacy and deepens understanding. Finally it's a mini PD session for specialist teachers on how ToK operates in their subject. One of the problems of the subject specialist model, that I have encountered in the past, is that the subject specialist teacher doesn't understand the T.O.K. in the subject. Now, of course to fulfil Standards and Practices, and to be a good Diploma school, all DP teachers should also be trained to some degree in ToK. In reality, time is scarce, energy is limited, and often colleagues are spread too thinly for T.O.K to be a priority focus for colleagues. This integrated T.O.K. model allows you to deliver ToK PD in context with real students, and subject content, in real time so it saves teaching colleagues time, and promotes student's ToK thinking, and models for teaching colleagues that students should be taking the lead on ToK integration in their hexagon subject lessons.
There are some other issues to consider in terms of the context in which your chosen course structure is developed. The first of these issues are the group dynamics of your T.O.K class, some groups have very positive enthusiastic and proactive dynamics whilst other groups might be quiet, more reflective and calm. Developing a good understanding of the group dynamics of your class, and how are you can influence those dynamics, will give you a great insight into how to optimise learning TO.K class. Some activities work better in certain classes of the classes based upon the group dynamics of the class. The second issue to be considered are environmental concerns. In this category i put things like the time of the day of the class, the resources which are available to you, what the students have been doing prior to the lesson et cetera. I've taught ToK first thing Monday morning, and last thing on Friday afternoon, both lessons spots require a particular type of structure and pedagogy.
Teacher Context
Now let's look at the context of you, the ToK teacher. When designing your T.O.K. course you will want to consider both your confidence in delivering to UK and your experience as a teacher, obviously these things are interrelated but they're not necessarily the same thing. If you are an experienced teacher then you will know how to quickly adapt new syllabi to effective pedagogy in the classroom. Your experience will allow you to identify the essentials in the ToK course structure and translate them into lessons. Less experienced colleagues may want to take a more orthodox approach to delivery of the structure/handbook. This degree of experience will relate to your confidence in teaching T.O.K. Some T.O.K. teachers have not chosen to teach the subject but have had the subject "allocated" to them. For some the T.O.K. thinking model comes naturally, whilst for others it is a learning curve. All of these considerations should be taken into account when designing T.O.K. structure.
Mission.
The second big factor in deciding which course structure to adopt is Mission: what does success look like for you? Mission can be broken down into two factors, Firstly what is your objective (what are you trying to achieve?) and secondly what is your strategy? (How are you going to achieve this?).
Objective & Strategy
Objective may seem quite straightforward to begin with, we want everybody to pass don't we? Well, do we want everybody to pass with a high score?, Or do we just want everybody to at least not get an E grade ?, what do we want to inspire T.O.K. thinking when students have graduated from the course?, Do we want students to develop better critical thinking frameworks?, Do you want them to develop an ethical framework or skills?, other such objectives could include greater cross program integration of ToK thinking, or the challenging of preconceived notions that students might bring into the classroom. There are many many other valid objectives. When we start thinking about objectives it's not quite as clear as it may first seem. Obviously, the objectives that you have for your course will have an impact on how you structure your course.
Once you have a clearer idea of your objective then you can start to identify the strategy(ies) that you will use to achieve the objective. Strategy is how you're going to achieve your objective and obviously it is closely interlinked with course structure. Strategy is a more general term than approaches to teaching and learning. The sorts of strategies that we might be interested in here include mixed ability group work, promoting student autonomy, scaffolding language for EAL students etc. As such Strategy is a broad approach to the overall flavour of teaching in the course to achieve your objective. One of the key strategic decisions that the ToK teacher could consider is whether the course should be teacher led, subject specialist led, or a mixture of two? or alternatively, maybe the course could be based around co-construction with students. As an example of strategy - I was recently part of a discussion between T.O.K. teachers looking to introduce "rigour" into the ToK course. The thinking was that attainment would improve if there was a new and systemised focus on regular assessment in the ToK course. This was an interesting discussion about strategy, even though the teachers didn't use that to her. Personally I don't think that rigour is just more assessment and quantitative feedback, I really don't like the term 'rigour', but that's not a discussion for this blog, let's look at that in a future blog.
4 Broad Course Structures
So once you have considered student context, teacher context, objectives and strategy, you will have a clearer idea of how to structure your course to meet your needs. In this blog I will outline 4 broad, common, course structures, obviously these are ideal type models and are in no one prescribed by IB, myself, or anyone else.
#1 ToK Framework
This is structuring your course according to the areas of knowledge and themes of the T.O.K. framework. You simply spend a specified period of time teaching each of the five areas of knowledge and the two options, leaving time for also teaching the exhibition and the essay. This is probably the most common method of delivering the course because it is the is the clearest and most straightforward of the various course structures available.
This model has a number of advantages to it. First of all because it's so clear it is easy to plan for, and it's easy to ensure correct curriculum coverage. Further, it is easier to draw the links between the knowledge questions and the knowledge framework because the model is based within the areas of knowledge. This will have particular benefits when it comes to teaching the essay. The optional themes (such as knowledge and technology) are standalone, integrated, units of ToK. As such this model lends itself well to the teaching of those units. As such this model lens solve particularly well to teachers who are new to ToK, or less confident with the teaching of and T.O.K. This model could be used well to prepare students who lack confidence in the writing skills for the essay because it emphasises the link between the knowledge framework and the knowledge questions.
So what is the disadvantages of the this model? This model can easily become content focused, this is essentially a content not skills model. And therefore demotes the focus on skill development inherent to the other models. Because of the focus on AOKs this model can highlight/emphasise the situational context application of the knowledge questions. It is usually this model that we see implemented when people bring the subject teachers in to deliver parts of the ToK syllabus. As such I think that this model is the least likely to promote student autonomy, co-construction, and student engagement. The emphasis here is on the teacher as expert delivering expert subject specific knowledge. The design of this model is not primarily based around skill development, and whilst skill and development can be built in to the model, that is not the purpose of the model. The purpose of this model is curriculum framework delivery. It is this model which leads teachers to say things like "we don't have enough time to cover the ToK curriculum". It is usually this model which is in place when students are confused by, or disengaged with, ToK.
#2 ToK Concepts and Knowledge Questions
Focus on ToK Concepts not AoKs.
This model is structuring the course around the 12 T.O.K. concepts, and using the suggested knowledge questions as prompts to explore those T.O.K. concepts. Examples of units of work using this model can be found here. This particular unit takes the concepts of Truth, Justification and Perspective and looks at them through 2 Knowledge Questions, one from AoK The Arts and one from AoK History.
The first advantage of this model is that it draws on concepts, it is inherently interdisciplinary, and gives a far more coherent understanding of ToK. By focusing the planning around the concept this model enables a far clearer integration of, and transition between, the real world context and the more abstracted world of ToK.
Another advantage of this model is that it encourages teacher-student co-construction of the ToK course lends itself more easily to the inquiry approach to learning. Using concepts as the planning focus is far more open ended than using the ToK Framework, or even knowledge questions. By using concepts students are compelled to at least select relevant knowledge questions, and in many cases students will write their own knowledge questions. This then leads on to students identifying real world contexts for the exploration of their KQs, application of the Knowledge Framework and a greater range of perspectives in the answers produced than might be seen from the previous model. I like to use a rough approximation of Kolb's Learning Cycle when designing lessons using this model (more on this in later posts). Kolb's LC lends itself to an active enquiry approach which builds ToK Skills and IB Learner Profile Qualities.
The ToK classroom should be a busy place of movement, noise and activity. A marketplace, an ideas marketplace.
Daniel Trump
The disadvantages of this model become apparent if the model of inquiry is too loosely defined, or stage-posting is not clear enough for students. There is a danger with this model that students don't actually engage with ToK at all, it is very easy to get bogged down with the real world contexts being considered. This is particularly the case with a poorly designed model of inquiry which does not adequately 'guide' the student to consider knowledge claims, knowledge issues, nor the ToK framework. There are also potential problems with syllabus coverage arising from this model (students should learn 5 AoKs and a minimum of 2 optional themes). You will see how I have tried to avoid this problem below.
#3 Themes and Big Questions Approach
I have called the third model the Themes & Big Question Approach. This approach uses Themes or Big Questions to unpack the ToK Syllabus (both framework and concepts). I have seen various versions of this over the years (this used to be far more popular before ToK became a Diploma pass-fail component). A 'Themes' approach could be developed by taking some of the classic philosophical themes and placing ToK Knowledge Questions or ToK Structures within those themes for example:
Photo by Anete Lusina from Pexels
Theme: Justice
ToK Areas of Knowledge:
The Knower and Knowledge Communities
Human Sciences
History
Knowledge Questions for Consideration:
Is the truth what the majority of people accept?
How do empathy and imagination help us to understand other perspectives?
If moral claims conflict, does it follow that all views are equally acceptable?
Is it unfair to judge people and actions in the past by the standards of today?
Should terms such as “atrocity” or “hero” be used when writing about history, or should value judgments be avoided?
Do historians have a moral responsibility to try to ensure that history is not misused and distorted by people for their own ends?
Similarly the "Big Questions" approach can take classical philosophical, or liberal arts, questions and use them as a means for exploring ToK content - such as the knowledge framework, ToK concepts or knowledge questions. An example of the "big question" approach:
Question: Can we know things beyond our personal immediate experience ?
This question can then be broken down into learning experiences. Structured and scaffolded learning experiences could include text analysis, debates, presentations etc which can be linked to ToK. A guided inquiry could be formulated with relevant (ToK) concepts (eg Evidence, Certainty, Truth etc). The students could design their own solutions with clear success criteria (eg pull the success criteria from Exhibition & Essay criteria).
The first advantage of the Themes / Big Questions approach is obviously the open ended design of learning. This approach allows learners to bring their personal experiences, interests and knowledge to the inquiry. It gives learners a high degree of autonomy in the learning resources they use, and how they choose to utilise them. This approach encourages easy flows between different sized learning groups and individual learning / reflection.
The second advantage (of no less importance than the first) is that this approach is wholly holistic, it's intrinsically inter-disciplinary ! This approach makes it far easier for students to develop an integrated model of ToK by seeing the links across the AoKs, the core theme and the optional themes. When this approach is done well teachers, and students, will rarely refer to those ToK structures, but will be fully aware of them. Consequently this approach is by far the best at placing ToK in its real world context and for helping students to understand how to identify ToK issues in real world contexts.
This thematic-big questions approach is powerful and heady stuff ! This is by far the most powerful model of teaching ToK, so why doesn't everyone use it ? When this model is done well it's very powerful, but conversely when poorly executed this model is more detrimental than any other. This model removes the learner one step away from the ToK, and it takes the teacher (or able students) to make that connection with the ToK. If that connection is not effectively made the students are left with even less ToK knowledge (and probably more confusion) than with any other model. Therefore this model requires resources: competent and knowledgable teachers who have time to plan, ToK teaching time (at least the recommended time, probably more), either small mixed ability classes or mainly able students who are able to make conceptual leaps from various real world contexts to ToK content. This model is for able DP students who are taught by experienced & well trained teachers in a well resourced school - does this sound like your context ?
#4 The eclectic / hybrid approach.
In reality many ToK teachers, and ToK teams, will interchange between all of these approaches over time. Depending on the content of the lesson , the mood of the students, the teacher's capacity for planning and delivery etc different approaches will be used at different times. As stated earlier these are broad ideal type models rather than proscribed rigid structures. Changing between the models caters for classes with a broad range of preferred learning styles. Further, some material and ideas may lend itself better to a particular model than to other models. For example, when you are preparing the students for The Exhibition, or teaching essay writing skills then you may change model. Finally, there is much to be said for the Ecletic Approach when used by large teams, inevitably a large team will contain teachers who prefer one approach over another. ToK Coordinators should welcome such diversity, teachers using different approaches will develop different materials for the same unit or learning inquiry. Having a range of materials which are trying to achieve similar learning outcomes enriches both the subject and its learners.
My preferred ToK Learning Model & Course Structure.
My preferred ToK learning model has been developed over many years during which I've tried all of the above, and their various variations. I call my model "Skills + Inquiry/co-construction + Self Reflection", very catchy I know !
Tips & notes of caution (a few scars from the field)
"let's get the hexagon subject teachers into ToK to deliver sessions on AoKs."
This has been hegemonic "good practice" for as long as I've been involved in the DP (probably far longer). It makes sense right ? Subject teachers are specialists so they bring more knowledge to the AoK, every DP teacher is also a ToK teacher - so they should all be able to deliver the some ToK in ToK class. I've seen it work well, but I've also seen it be a flop. My note of caution here is checking that the subject teachers who are brought into the ToK class actually have a good understanding of the ToK aspects of their subject. Sometimes I've seen subject teachers teach aspects of their subject rather than the ToK - which can be slightly confusing for the students.
My approach is to go into the subject classroom alongside the subject teacher, and then ask the students to identify the ToK questions / issues in that particular subject. They can then explain to their subject teacher what the ToK issues are in that subject. This approach has a number of benefits: (i) the onus is on students to actively analyse their subject content (which has benefits for both the subject & ToK). (ii) It takes the onus off subject teachers to 'gen' up on ToK, whilst still ensuring that ToK is integrated into their subject. (iii) It meets the requirement of Standards & Practices. (iv) It helps students to develop the skills required to identify real world examples to use in their ToK Essay and Presentation.Death by TED Talk.
TED has lots of great videos which have lots of ToK(ish) content in them. Lots of teachers like to use them (so do I sometimes). My note of caution is about over-using them, or showing them unedited, without contextualisation, or without any follow up reflective practices. TED Talks engage those who want to be engaged, but students who either find ToK challenging, or are uninterested in ToK, can 'turn off' when shown a TED talk in 'receive mode'. So, if you do use them please use them in 'critical engagement mode'.The Carousel.
One of the ToK Teaching structures that I have seen (and briefly tried long ago) is 'The Carousel'. This is typically used when you have a largeish ToK teaching team with broad interests across the team, maybe a teacher with a specific interest in each of the AoKs. The teachers then rotate through the ToK classes (or the student's are on a 'carousel' through each teacher's class). So for example when Mrs Algebra teaches them AoK Maths, Ms Maps teaches them AoK Human Sciences etc etc.
My concern with The Carousel model is that the emphasis is on the ToK framework and content rather than on the students. My approach to ToK is that Mrs Algebra doesn't need to be an expert in AoK Maths, she needs to be an expert in the students in her class, whilst her students need to be the experts in AoK Maths.
I hope that this blog past has been of some use in giving you ideas on how to structure your ToK course. Please feel free to add comments that others may find useful below, and to contact me at Daniel@ToKtoday.com should you wish to discuss this further.
Daniel,
Lisbon, Portugal.