What is a Knowledge Argument?

Recently, whilst coaching a student on his Theory of Knowledge (ToK) essay, I realised he was unfamiliar with the term “knowledge argument.” He hadn’t encountered the term "knowledge claim" or "knowledge issue" either, which are often used interchangeably. His candid admission highlighted a common gap in understanding, so I thought it apposite to look at the essentials: what is a knowledge argument?

Understanding the Knowledge Argument

A knowledge argument is a statement about how knowledge is created, received, interpreted, or justified.

In ToK, a knowledge argument is a statement about how knowledge is created, received, interpreted, or justified. These arguments are also referred to as knowledge issues, knowledge questions, or knowledge claims. They all centre on the same concept: a statement about knowledge itself.

Examples in ToK Prompts

All ToK Exhibition and Essay prompts are essentially knowledge arguments or questions. For instance, consider Exhibition prompt #25: “How can we distinguish between knowledge, belief, and opinion?” This is a classic knowledge question. Similarly, Exhibition prompt #2: “Are some types of knowledge more useful than others?” also falls into this category. (This also happens to be the easiest ToK Exhibition prompt: click here for more details)

Essay titles follow the same pattern. For example:

• Q#5 May 2024: “Do we need Custodians of Knowledge?”

• Q#1 November 2023: “Are facts alone enough to prove a claim?”

These prompts are all questions about knowledge, even if they don’t explicitly mention the word "knowledge." They focus on exploring and understanding knowledge in various contexts.

The Importance of Knowledge Arguments

You might wonder why it’s crucial to understand and write knowledge arguments when the IB provides these questions anyway. The key is not just writing these arguments but also being able to explore and unpack them.

Example: Custodians of Knowledge

Take the question from May 2024: “Do we need Custodians of Knowledge?” To answer it, we need to break it down into smaller knowledge questions:

1. What is a Custodian of Knowledge?

2. What needs might they fulfil?

Focusing on the second question—what needs might Custodians of Knowledge fulfil?—we realise that in the context of ToK, these needs will be related to knowledge. Thus, we can derive several smaller knowledge questions:

• Do Custodians of Knowledge preserve and protect existing knowledge?

• Do Custodians of Knowledge identify and maintain knowledge gatekeepers?

• Do Custodians of Knowledge define and describe the methodology of knowledge production?

• Do Custodians of Knowledge define legitimate evidence of knowledge?

These smaller knowledge questions help us to explore and answer the broader question effectively.

Practical Application

By learning to write and explore knowledge questions, you can better address the big knowledge questions posed in the ToK Exhibition or Essay prompts. This skill is straightforward and invaluable, ensuring you don’t miss the centrality of knowledge questions in your work.

For more guidance on your ToK Essay click here, and for help with the ToK Exhibition click here.

Stay Toktastic, my friends!

Daniel, Lisbon, June 2024

What Makes a Good Object for the ToK Exhibition?

Students often ask me whether a particular object is a good object for the ToK Exhibition. To help you decide, I’m going to share three clear rules to determine whether your object is suitable for the Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Exhibition. These guidelines will ensure your object meets the criteria set by the International Baccalaureate (IB) and effectively demonstrates your understanding of ToK concepts.

This blogpost can also be watched on video at this link, or below.

Rule 1: Is Your Object Specific?

A common misconception is that ToK objects must be personal. While personal objects can be specific, they are not the only option. The key is specificity. A specific object has distinct characteristics or a unique story that ties directly to the ToK concepts you're exploring

Example: Personal & Specific Object

The IB's May 2023 ToK Subject report clarifies this with an example: a Bible is not specific, but your family Bible, inherited from your grandmother, is. This personal connection makes it specific because it carries particular significance and history.

Example: Non-Personal & Specific Object

In the 2023 Exhibition example C, a 19th-century water pump from London was used. This pump was integral to Dr John Snow’s identification of cholera's transmission in 1853. Although not personal to the student, its historical and scientific importance makes it a specific object.

However, specificity alone does not make an object good. It must also demonstrate a specific knowledge argument.

Rule 2: Does Your Object Demonstrate a Specific Knowledge Argument?

A specific object needs to illustrate a particular knowledge argument relevant to the ToK prompt you are addressing. This means the object should help you explore how knowledge is developed, shared, and understood.

Example: Family Bible

Selecting a family Bible isn’t enough by itself. You must explain how its specificity helps explore knowledge issues in the prompt. For instance, you could argue that the Bible helped you realise that new knowledge cannot always change established values and beliefs (prompt 11), or it highlights that some things are unknowable if they are metaphysical (prompt 18).

If you need help understanding what a knowledge argument is, check out the next blogpost, “What is a Knowledge Argument?”

Rule 3: Could Many Other Objects Demonstrate Your Specific Knowledge Argument as Well?

For your object to be excellent, it must demonstrate the specific knowledge argument better than other comparative objects. This distinction is essential for achieving the highest marks.

Example: Edison’s Light Bulb

Answering Prompt #8, "To what extent is certainty attainable?", you might argue that certainty is rarely attainable because much knowledge is serendipitous. You could choose Edison’s first light bulb to illustrate this point, as its creation involved accidental discovery. While this object is specific and demonstrates a knowledge argument, many other objects, such as Fleming’s penicillin, X-rays, or Heparin, could serve the same purpose, making it less unique.

Example: Dr John Snow’s Hand Pump

Consider the hand pump from which Dr John Snow discovered cholera’s transmission method. Answering prompt #33, "How is current knowledge shaped by its historical development?", this object exemplifies how current scientific knowledge is built on historical understanding of public health. While other objects could demonstrate this argument, the hand pump’s role in establishing epidemiology makes it uniquely effective.

Conclusion

To summarise, here are the three rules for selecting a good object for your ToK Exhibition:

1. Is your object specific?

2. Does your object demonstrate a specific knowledge argument?

3. Could many other objects demonstrate your specific knowledge argument as well?

By following these rules, you can select objects that not only fit the criteria but also enhance your understanding and presentation of ToK concepts. For more guidance, check out our free video series, "How to Do Your ToK Exhibition", or our e-book series on the ToK Exhibition, which provides examples of knowledge arguments and suitable objects.

Thank you for reading, and I hope this helps you create a fantastic ToK Exhibition. Stay toktastic, my friends!

Daniel, Lisbon, June 24

What is the Easiest ToK Exhibition Prompt?

Students often ask, "What is the easiest ToK Exhibition prompt?" And truth be told, it’s a bit like asking, "What's the best flavour of ice cream?" It really depends on your tastes, or in this case, your interests, knowledge, and experiences. But being the curious beings we are here at ToKToday, we thought, why not try to quantify the ease (or difficulty) of the Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Exhibition prompts?

The Quest for the Easiest ToK Exhibition Prompt

Today, we're diving into the deep end of ToK prompts to figure out which ones are a breeze and which ones are more like Maths AA HL P3 (IYKYK). To do this, we need a way to measure ease or difficulty. So, I’ve broken down the challenge of a ToK Exhibition prompt into three not-so-scientific but oh-so-fun criteria:

1. Closed-ended Three-part Structure:

2. Does the prompt lend itself to an easy, three-part structure? Since the Exhibition is based on three objects, prompts that naturally break down into three distinct parts are a gift from the examiners. For example, Prompt #2, "Are some types of knowledge more useful than others?" can be easily divided into three responses: Yes, No, and Sometimes. In contrast, Prompt #1, "What counts as knowledge?" is more open-ended and thus, more challenging to pigeonhole into a tidy three-part answer.

3. Abstract vs. Concrete:

4. Is the prompt asking you to wrestle with abstract ideas or more tangible, concrete ones? Generally, the more abstract the question, the harder it is to pin down. For instance, Prompt #7, "What are the implications of having or not having knowledge?" is quite abstract. In comparison, Prompt #10, "What challenges are raised by the dissemination/communication of knowledge?" is far more concrete and easier to tackle.

5. Complex (Abstruse) vs. Clear Wording:

6. Some prompts are written in a way that makes you feel like you need a degree in deciphering hieroglyphics, whilst others are as clear as a sunny day. The clearer the wording, the easier it is to grasp. For example, Prompt #13, "How can we know that current knowledge is an improvement upon past knowledge?" has complex wording. It involves multiple layers of inquiry, making it a tough nut to crack. On the other hand, Prompt #2, "Are some types of knowledge more useful than others?" is straightforward and direct.

Ranking the Prompts

Based on these three criteria, I’ve scored each ToK Exhibition prompt out of 10 in each category, giving us a total possible 'easiness' score out of 30. This highly subjective scoring system allows us to create a kind of league table, ranking the prompts from easiest to hardest.

The Five Hardest ToK Exhibition Prompts

Starting from the top (or bottom, depending on your perspective), here are the five toughest prompts to tackle:

1. Prompt #25: How can we distinguish between knowledge, belief, and opinion?

2. This tricky prompt asks not just for definitions but for the nuanced differences between these concepts. It’s the philosophical equivalent of herding cats.

3. Prompt #7: What are the implications of having or not having knowledge?

4. This one twists your brain into strange shapes as you try to grapple with the abstract implications of possessing or lacking knowledge. Read more about implications at this link.

5. Prompt #20: What is the relationship between personal experience and knowledge?

6. It’s a popular choice but beware – it’s abstract and asks you to explore the relationship between concepts rather than the concepts themselves. Read more about this prompt at this link.

7. Prompt #13: How can we know that current knowledge is an improvement upon past knowledge?

8. The wording here is a labyrinth. It requires you to untangle how we can assess improvements in knowledge and what constitutes past and current knowledge. Read more about this prompt at this link.

9. Prompt #38: To what extent is certainty attainable?

10. Low scores across all three criteria make this prompt a formidable challenge. Tackling it requires a solid understanding of the nature of certainty.

The Five Easiest ToK Exhibition Prompts

On the flip side, here are the prompts that are like the sweet smell of graduation for DP students:

1. Prompt #2: Are some types of knowledge more useful than others?

2. Scoring high across all our categories, this prompt is the champion of easiness. It’s clear, structured, and lends itself to a wealth of illustrative objects.

3. Prompt #11: Can new knowledge change established values and beliefs?

4. This prompt offers a nice, closed-ended structure and is straightforward in its wording. Plus, there are endless examples to support your argument.

5. Prompt #9: Are some types of knowledge less open to interpretation than others?

6. It’s easy to break this into a three-part structure, and the clear wording makes it accessible. You just need to consider different types of knowledge and their interpretability.

7. Prompt #10: What challenges are raised by the dissemination/communication of knowledge?

8. This is the most concrete of all the prompts, making it easier to grasp and explore in a structured way.

9. Prompt #12: Is bias inevitable in the production of knowledge?

10. While it does flirt with the tricky concept of inevitability, its clear wording and closed-ended structure make it a relatively easy prompt to tackle.

In Conclusion

There you have it! The easiest ToK Exhibition prompt, according to my rather subjective criteria, is Prompt #2: "Are some types of knowledge more useful than others?" But remember, these rankings are just for fun and based on my personal interpretation. Your experience might be different, and that's perfectly fine!

So, did I get it right? Have I unfairly marked a tricky prompt as easy or missed a deceptively difficult one? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.

If you need more help with your ToK Exhibition, check out the free & paid resources linked here.

Click here for the e-book Every ToK Exhibition Prompt explained.

Happy exhibiting, and may the easiest prompt be ever in your favour! Stay Tok-tastic !

Get the full table of prompts ranked by "easiness" at this link.

Daniel, Lisbon, June 2024

How I assess the ToK Exhibition Commentary

Introduction

May Session schools are currently deep into Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Exhibition time. Students are busy writing their commentaries, whilst teachers are occupied with assessing these commentaries. Some teachers have sought support and advice on evaluating the ToK exhibition, so I decided to share my approach to assessing the ToK Exhibition.

This blog post can also be watched as a video at this link, and below

Understanding Global Impression Marking

According to the International Baccalaureate (IB), Global Impression Marking should be used to assess the ToK Exhibition and Essay. But what exactly is Global Impression Marking? The ToK Subject Guide from the IB describes it as “a process of holistic or global judgement rather than an analytical process of totalling the assessment of separate criteria. The assessment instruments present five described levels of performance. These levels are to be seen as global and holistic descriptors rather than as a checklist of necessary characteristics. When marking, the aim is to find the descriptor that conveys most accurately the level attained by the student. It is not necessary for every single aspect of a level descriptor to be met for a mark in that level to be awarded.”

For more detailed information, you can refer to the ToK Subject Guide from the IB.

The Four-Part Structure for ToK Exhibition Commentary

The May 2023 ToK Subject Report outlines a four-part structure for the Exhibition commentary, which I find very useful. These sections are:

1. Identification of the object and its real-world context

2. Explanation of the link between the object and the prompt

3. Justification for the contribution of the object to the exhibition

4. Supporting evidence and references to the prompt

When assessing each object, I consider these four criteria, although I do not give them equal weighting. Generally, I believe that Criteria A-C are more important than D. If a student has adequately addressed A-C, they have likely covered D as well. Criterion C is particularly crucial because justification is necessary for awarding 5-10 marks. As a rough rule of thumb, I allocate approximately 25% of the marks to Criteria A and B, 40% to Criterion C, and 10% to Criterion D. However, I do not write down this weighting; I keep it as a nominal guide in my mind.

Assessing the Commentary

As I read through each commentary, I look for content that can be awarded marks under each of the four criteria. I might keep a rough scorecard for each object, though I do not average these scores. Instead, I use them as a guide to find the descriptor that best fits the commentary according to the marking bands. After applying the four-part structure, I place each object on the assessment rubric and try to find the midpoint between the descriptors to determine an overall marking band.

According to the IB’s instructions for placement within the band:

• Upper mark: Awarded if the student’s work demonstrates the qualities described in that level to a great extent, and may be close to achieving marks in the level above.

• Lower mark: Awarded if the student’s work demonstrates the qualities described to a lesser extent, and may be close to achieving marks in the level below.

Tips to Avoid Moderation Reductions

1. Consistency is Key: Consistency in assessment is almost as important as accuracy. Internal moderation of the commentaries is crucial. This process should involve all ToK teachers who taught the exhibition and, if possible, other ToK teachers who did not teach the exhibition to provide impartial assessments.

2. Teacher’s Comments: Every ToK Subject Report emphasises the importance of the teacher’s comments. They should not be mere cut-and-paste extracts from the assessment instrument but should use the language from it. I use the four-part structure for comments and combine these categories with the qualitative descriptors from the assessment instrument. Crafting detailed comments takes time (around 30-45 minutes per student), but it is worth it to avoid moderation of marks.

Conclusion

Assessing the ToK Exhibition is not rocket science; it is a meticulous process that requires attention to detail and consistency. I hope this guide has been useful for those less experienced in assessing the exhibition. If you have any more requests for content from ToKToday, please get in touch with me at Daniel@TokToday.com.

Stay toktastic, my friends!

Perspective, Power & Responsibility

This is a lesson designed to teach students the ToK Concepts of Perspective, Power and Responsibility. You can watch the video of this blog at this link, or below.

The lesson materials are linked here, reading the blog below will help ToK Teachers to tailor the materials so that they work for your students, and context.

We can think of these 3 concepts (perspective, power and responsibility) as being mutually inclusive, a change in any one of the concepts leads to changes in the other 2.

These three concepts are central to many areas of the course. They provide a good framework for knowledge & the knower, they underpin all five optional themes, and are super useful concepts for linking the systemic & structured nature of AoKs with the more individual and contextual characteristics of knowledge producers and knowers.

Polysemous Concepts

These 3 concepts not only provide a bridge between the knower & Areas of Knowledge, but they are also polysemous - they have more than one meaning:

Power can be both individual and systemic, or structural at the same time. Power can be explored in the production, acquisition or pursuit of knowledge. It could also be looked at in terms of access to, and application of, knowledge.

Responsibility often comes up in ToK Essay Prescribed Titles. Responsibility can apply to both the knowledge producer and the knower in different ways. It obviously provides us with an excellent route to the ethical section of the knowledge framework.

And last, but certainly not least, perspective could arguably be the most important concept in the ToK course. The challenge for ToK teachers is to help students to develop an appreciation of perspective without them sinking into the morass of relativism. 

"This lesson's too basic !"

I know that some ToK teachers are concerned that the materials shared here are "too basic". My aim is to produce resources that are accessible and effective for all ToK learners. Therefore, the lesson has to be accessible to the student that finds ToK highly challenging. The tasks are purposefully very open ended, therefore the complexity and challenge can be increased by the teacher depending upon the needs of the students.

The aims of the lesson:

• Students have the opportunity to explore the interconnectedness of the 3 concepts, and begin to understand that change in one of the concepts is likely to change in the other 2. 

• Students have the opportunity to see that not only are the concepts polysemous, but they can also have different meanings in different contexts at the same time.

The structure of the lesson:

The lesson presents 6 case studies, and students are asked 2 questions about each case study. The questions are firstly To whom, or to what, does this knowledge have power ?, and secondly to whom, or what, is the knowledge producer responsible?

By asking the questions in this way the students will have to form their own definitions of “power” and “responsibility”, just as they have to in the ToK Exhibition and Essay. The differing definitions that students develop, and the different consequences that flow from these various definitions, are the opportunity for the teacher to develop the concept of ‘perspective’ in the subsequent discussions.

As a teacher you know how best to structure the lesson for your students and classroom. Personally I would put students in groups, have each group look at 2 of the case studies, have each group lead feedback on 1 case study, and then ask students to write a reflection piece after the lesson.

The lesson comes out of the work that I have been doing on developing a skills framework for ToK, if you want to know more, or are interested in contributing to the ToK Skills Framework - click here.

Stay ToKtastic my friends.
Daniel, Lisbon May 2024

ToK Essay #4 N24: Hypothesis & Speculation - a significant difference ?

Is the Difference Between Hypothesis and Speculation Significant?

Today we're looking at ToK Essay #4 N24 "Is the difference between hypothesis and speculation significant?" Understanding the distinction between these terms is essential if you're writing this question. The previous blogpost (linked) focussed on defining the terms, as does the video linked here.

The video for this blog post is linked here, and below.

Defining Hypothesis and Speculation

Developing the definitions for hypothesis and speculation is obviously key to this essay. It is recommended that you develop these definitions within the knowledge arguments that are being used for each okay. This will allow for a more precise and talk focused exploration of these two central concepts.

The Significance of Their Differences

We might wonder, "What's the difference between hypothesis and speculation?" and more importantly, "Is the difference between hypothesis and speculation significant?". We could take the role of evidence as one of our measures of whether difference is significant or not. The role of evidence in the formulation of hypotheses is only one way to measure the significance of difference. There are many other ways, to approach the concept of significance.

Evidence and Knowledge Production

In AoK The Human Sciences, the distinction between hypothesis and speculation could be that hypotheses are formulated from evidence whilst speculation is based on more subjective sources such as experience, or intuition. Hypotheses are typically grounded in evidence, which allows for the development of knowledge that advances our understanding of human cognition and social interactions. For example, research by Bargh and Williams in 2006 on the priming of social distance demonstrates how hypotheses grounded in evidence can reveal insights that speculations could not achieve.

The Criteria for Significance

To evaluate whether the differences are significant, we can consider several factors:

• Impact on Knowledge Produced: If the use of speculation leads to different knowledge than the use of a hypothesis, this indicates a significant difference.

• Influence on the Subject or Object of Knowledge Production: Changes in who produces the knowledge or how it is produced can also signal significance.

• Alterations in Purpose or Intention: If a knowledge producer's intentions vary depending on whether they are speculating or hypothesising, this further underscores a significant difference.

These criteria offer us one (of many) way(s) understand and explore the significance of the differences between hypothesis and speculation.

Evaluating the knowledge argument and its Implications

Questioning the Premises

While it is often argued that hypotheses are grounded in evidence and speculation is not, this distinction may not always hold. The evidence underpinning hypotheses might still be subjective or based on prior assumptions, which could blur the lines between these two forms of reasoning.

The Role of Evidence

The use of a pre-existing evidence base to inform hypotheses tends to reinforce established knowledge. Therefore, one could argue that the significance of evidence in distinguishing between hypothesis and speculation may not be as profound, especially if the aim is to break away from established knowledge paradigms.

Conclusion

To determine if the difference between hypothesis and speculation is significant, one must consider how each affects the production, the nature of the knowledge being produced, the knowledge producer etc. This blog post is just an introduction into the many areas that could be explored using this essay question..

For a a wider, and deeper, exploration of this title pick up the ToKToday Essay Guidance Notes for Essay #4. These include more complex knowledge arguments and real-life examples, at 8,000 words long these notes serve as a mini-textbook focussed solely on this essay title.

Watch the accompanying video on YouTube:

What could "sever ties with its past" mean?

This blog post accompanies the video linked here, and below.

Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Essay #3 from the November 2024 sessions asks us to consider the phrase "Sever ties with its past", In this blog post, we will look at one way of understanding this term, and we'll also look at the phrase "benefit an area of knowledge".

Understanding the Knowledge Framework

At the heart of Essay #3 N24—and indeed central to our understanding of the terms for Essay #3—is the Knowledge Framework. This framework is an integral part of the ToK curriculum, outlining the structure of each Area of Knowledge (AoK). It comprises four main components: Scope, Perspectives, Methods & Tools, and Ethics. These elements collectively define what each AoK entails, including its objectives, methodologies, and ethical considerations.

Severing Ties with the Past

To "sever ties with its past" within an AoK can be broadly interpreted as making changes to some or all of the elements of the Knowledge Framework. This might involve altering the methodologies employed to produce knowledge or revising the foundational principles and laws outlined in the Scope. It's a phrase that suggests significant shifts in how an AoK is structured or understood. However, many other definitions of this term could be developed, it's very much open to a range of arguments.

For a comprehensive understanding of this concept, it's advisable to refer to additional resources such as the ToKToday Essay Guidance notes available from this link. These notes offer detailed explanations and examples that can help refine your definitions and approach to addressing this element in your essay.

Benefits to an Area of Knowledge

The second key phrase, "benefit an area of knowledge," invites you to consider what improvements or positive changes can occur within an AoK due to adjustments in the Knowledge Framework (if you take changes to the knowledge framework as your definition of "sever ties with its past"). Benefits might be direct enhancements to the methodologies or tools used within the AoK or they could involve broader ethical improvements stemming from shifts in perspective or approach.

Just as with understanding how ties can be severed, discussing the potential benefits requires a nuanced approach.

The beauty of the Knowledge Framework

The beauty of using the Knowledge Framework to address these questions lies in its structured approach to understanding and analysing Areas of Knowledge. By mapping out changes or benefits within this framework, you can more effectively articulate and support your arguments in the essay.

Conclusion

Both "sever ties with its past" and "benefit an area of knowledge" are terms that, once explained, can help your understanding and handling of this ToK essay. Through the lens of the Knowledge Framework, these terms gain clarity and depth. This will help in your writing of this essay. For further assistance, do not hesitate to explore additional resources such as the ToKToday Essay Guidance notes available from this link.

Ingenuity in the production of knowledge.

What Could Be Meant by Ingenuity in the Production of Knowledge?

ToK Essay #2 Nov 24 asks us to consider the role of ingenuity in the production of knowledge. This blog post introduces ways to consider both the definition of the term, and its use in ToK Essay #2 Nov 24. The development of ways to answer the question is linked in the next blog post (linked). Further, this blog post accompanies the YouTube video linked at the end.

Unpacking Ingenuity

To kick things off, let's consider ways of understanding the term "ingenuity". Whilst a stroll through the dictionary definitions of ingenuity reveals it as a capacity for invention or creativity, a knack for clever design or construction, these descriptions are insufficient when applied to the production of knowledge in a ToK Essay. For students Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Essay #2 Nov24, it's imperative to develop a definition of ingenuity that helps, or supports, the specific knowledge arguments being presented.

Ingenuity in the production of knowledge could be thought of in the following ways:

• Introducing new areas of study or focus within a particular Area of knowledge (AoK), broadening the areas of inquiry of the AoK.

• Employing innovative methods and tools for knowledge production, which could include using new technologies or methodologies.

• Offering fresh perspectives within a field of knowledge, consequently enriching debates or interpretations of existing knowledge.

• Adopting new ethical approaches to address previously unsolvable dilemmas within the AoK / disciplines .

These are just a few of the many possible ways to understand ingenuity.

Ingenuity: Always Needed, But Never Enough

The assertion that ingenuity is "always needed, but never enough" in the production of knowledge is the focus of the question rather than merely the definition of ingenuity. This idea suggests that whilst ingenuity is indispensable, it must be complemented by other elements to fully realize the production of knowledge. These additional components might include existing principles, methods, and tools of a particular field, insights from other domains of knowledge, or even the serendipitous sparks of coincidence and chance.

This leads us to develop various alternative conditions of the prescribed title (regarding the role of ingenuity in knowledge production):

• Can ingenuity alone suffice in the production of knowledge?

• Is the need for ingenuity conditional, perhaps depending on the purpose of the knowledge sought or the context in which it is produced?

• How do existing frameworks and principles within a field of knowledge influence the necessity for ingenuity?

Bridging the Gap with ToKToday

If you are writing ToK Essay #2 Nov24 the ToKToday Essay Guidance Notes provide structured support, detailed examples, and a comprehensive analysis to not only understand but also effectively articulate the various roles that ingenuity could play in the production of knowledge.

What Is the Responsibility to Acquire Knowledge?

ToK Essay #1 Nov 24 asks us to consider whether the responsibility to acquire knowledge varies by AoK. To answer this students need an understanding of the term "the responsibility to acquire knowledge". This post outlines 3 ways to approach the responsibility to acquire knowledge as a grounding for writing Essay #1 Nov 24.

The Basics of Acquiring Knowledge

Acquiring knowledge encompasses a range of methods through which knowers gather knowledge. These processes can be formal, such as through educational institutions, or informal, like personal experiences or social interactions. For instance, understanding economic theories might come from classroom learning, whilst knowing about cultural vibrancy could stem from personal experiences. The key aspect here is the focus on the individual—the knower—and the diverse paths they take to gain knowledge, rather than a focus on the knowledge producer.

The Tripartite Responsibility to Acquire Knowledge

1. Towards Oneself

First and foremost, there exists an ethical and practical responsibility to acquire knowledge for oneself. This responsibility emphasises the importance of seeking out the most useful, or valuable knowledge depending on context. In some contexts this could be accurate and reliable knowledge, in other contexts it could be more emotional or experiential. The rationale is straightforward: better knowledge leads to better decisions, minimising errors and enhancing the quality of our lives. This pursuit of knowledge is fundamentally about living to our fullest potential, guided by the best information at our disposal.

2. Towards Others

The responsibility to acquire knowledge extends beyond the individual to include others. In this context, it's about ensuring our interactions (in knowledge communities) are based on the most useful knowledge to the community (for example this could be credible and ethical knowledge). This aspect of responsibility highlights the role of individuals within their knowledge communities, stressing the importance of shared knowledge in fostering understanding and cooperation. It's about the ability to participate in a collextive process of shared meanings and understandings.

3. Towards the Global Community

Finally, there's a broader, ethical responsibility towards the global pool of knowledge. As DP learners and inhabitants of this planet, we are part of a larger ecosystem of knowledge and culture. Acquiring knowledge about the world is a way to contribute positively to this global community. This responsibility speaks to the ideals of global citizenship, where learning and understanding foster a more informed, compassionate, and interconnected world.

Do We Have a Responsibility to Acquire Knowledge?

Whilst it might seem like a matter of personal choice, the concept of a responsibility to acquire knowledge is rooted in a deeper understanding of our roles as individuals and members of various communities. It's not just about personal growth but also about contributing to the well-being and progress of society at large. This perspective opens up a rich vein of inquiry into how our responsibilities vary across different domains and contexts.

Conclusion

Understanding the responsibility to acquire knowledge is more than an academic exercise; it's a reflection on how we live, learn, and interact in a complex world. Whether it's towards ourselves, others, or the global community, this responsibility underscores the importance of seeking truth and understanding in all that we do. Ways to consider whether this responsibility varies by AoK is answered in the next blogpost in this series - click here for more.

For those writing ToK Essay #1 Nov 24 the ToKToday Essay Guidance notes offer structured help (incl knowledge arguments, evaluation points, real life examples etc).

Find out more from The Covering The Basics video for Essay #1 N24:

ToK Essay #1 N24: Responsibility to acquire knowledge: vary by AoK ?

In Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Essay# 1 Nov 24 students are asked to consider whether the responsibility to acquire knowledge varies by Area of Knowledge (AoK). This post explores some of the ways in which this responsibility might vary by AoK, and the possible reasons for such variance.

If you want help with the core terms "the acquisition of knowledge", and "the responsibility to acquire knowledge" see the CTB (Covering The Basics) blog for this title linked.

The Variable Nature of Knowledge Acquisition

The premise that the responsibility to acquire knowledge may differ according to the AoK could be approach using three broad concepts: the scope, purpose, and application of the AoK; the contextual responsibilities of the knower within this AoK; and the methods and tools used for knowledge acquisition.

1. Scope, Purpose, and Application of the AoK

Every AoK has its own defined scope, purpose, and application, as outlined in the Knowledge Framework. These elements dictate what constitutes valid knowledge within the AoK and how this knowledge should be applied. The diversity in these areas gives rise to distinct responsibilities for knowers, contingent on the particular AoK they are engaging with. For instance, the knowledge required in the sciences may be empirical and rigorously tested, while in the arts, subjective interpretation plays a more significant role. How and why a knower is acquiring knowledge will influence whether their responsibility to acquire knowledge varies according to the AoK.

2. Contextual Responsibilities of the Knower

The responsibility to acquire knowledge is also shaped by the knower's ethical and moral obligations, which are deeply influenced by their role within the AoK. A medical professional, for example, has a heightened responsibility to stay abreast of the latest medical knowledge, a duty stemming from their direct impact on others' health and well-being. This responsibility is not only ethical but also practical, as it ensures the knower can make informed decisions within their field.

3. Methods and Tools of Knowledge Acquisition

The validity and reliability of knowledge acquisition methods vary significantly across AoKs. Relying on a rumour from social media for scientific research, for example, is vastly different from engaging with peer-reviewed studies. Each AoK employs a set of tools and methodologies best suited to its nature, which, in turn, influences the knower's responsibility towards seeking out reliable sources of information.

A brief real world example

To illustrate these points, consider the AoK of History. The controversy stirred by the UK Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove, in 2014 over changes to the history curriculum underscores the responsibility to acquire knowledge. Gove's decisions impacted how history is taught, making the inclusion of black history optional. This scenario highlights a situation where the knower's context—namely, Gove's position of influence—amplifies his responsibility to acquire comprehensive historical knowledge.

Evaluation Points

• AoK-Specific Approach: The responsibility to acquire knowledge might not be confined to a single AoK but could encompass multiple areas, indicating the interconnectedness of knowledge.

• Universal Responsibility: Arguably, all knowers, regardless of their context or AoK, should engage critically with knowledge, reflecting the fluid and hybrid nature of modern identities.

Conclusion

The responsibility to acquire knowledge is linked to a range of ToK elements. It is deeply influenced by the AoK, the knower's context, and the methodologies employed in knowledge acquisition.

If you want more help with ToK Essay #1 check out ToKToday's Essay Guidance Notes for Essay #1, they offer comprehensive support, including detailed knowledge arguments and evaluation points tailored to this essay prompt.

Get more detailed help in the video for this title:

A Feminist Perspective of Science

ToK students often find it hard to evaluate the Natural Sciences beyond validity issues of the scientific method. The feminist perspective of science helps us to reconsider some issues of objectivity and knowledge production in the sciences. This blog post considers the influences of gender on the acquisition, production, and interpretation of scientific knowledge, we focus on the work of key feminist theorist Donna Haraway, and use the work of Sandra Harding, and Evelyn Fox Keller. For ToK (Theory of Knowledge) students, understanding the feminist approach to science helps to appreciate the nuances in the construction of scientific knowledge, and the role that gender plays in that process.

The Critique of Traditional Objectivity

Historically, the quest for scientific objectivity aimed to eliminate biases, believing in the existence of a 'natural light of truth.' (as put forward by Descartes). However, feminist and Marxist critiques challenge this notion, arguing that biases are inherent to the human condition, thus questioning the very possibility of absolute objectivity. Donna Haraway, in "Situated Knowledges," evaluates previous feminist attempts to undermine the scientific pretension to a 'view from nowhere.' She argues against the possibility of Baconian objectivity, advocating instead for a new form of objectivity that acknowledges the 'situatedness' of scientists.

Situated Knowledges and the Role of Gender in Science

Haraway's concept of 'situated knowledges' introduces the idea that all scientific knowledge is rooted in the specific contexts of its producers. This notion extends beyond the Marxist focus on class to include gender as a critical factor influencing scientific inquiry. Unlike earlier feminist philosophers who may have focused on a distinctly 'feminine' science, Haraway and others like Sandra Harding and Evelyn Fox Keller highlight the broader implications of gendered biases in the methodology and practice of science. They critique the dominance of 'toxic masculinity' in scientific methodologies, which often emphasize control and predictability, overlooking the diverse and interconnected nature of scientific phenomena.

Feminist Science: Beyond Bias

The feminist perspective on science seeks to move beyond simply identifying biases to proposing more inclusive and reflexive approaches to scientific research. This involves recognizing the value of diverse perspectives in enriching scientific inquiry and ensuring that scientific practices and policies are informed by a wide range of experiences and understandings. The involvement of individuals from various backgrounds—gender, nationality, class—in both research and policy-making is crucial for a more holistic and democratic approach to science.

The Interplay of Science and Technology: A Cyborg Manifesto

Haraway's "A Cyborg Manifesto" further explores the relationship between science, technology, and society, suggesting that our engagement with technology shapes our perceptions and interactions with the world. By embracing the cyborg as a metaphor for the complex interconnections between humans and technology, Haraway challenges traditional dichotomies and advocates for a more nuanced understanding of our technological entanglements. This perspective encourages us to reconsider the ways in which scientific and technological advancements are integrated into our lives and how they redefine our concepts of humanity and nature.

Rethinking Scientific Objectivity and Knowledge Production

The feminist critique of science calls for a reevaluation of what counts as objective knowledge and who gets to produce it. By emphasizing the importance of 'situated knowledges,' feminist theorists argue for a science that is more responsive to the social and ethical implications of its practices. This entails a shift from a singular, universal perspective to a multiplicity of viewpoints that reflect the complex realities of our world.

Conclusion: Towards a Feminist Science

The feminist perspective on science offers a powerful critique of traditional notions of objectivity and a pathway towards a more inclusive, ethical, and reflexive science. By acknowledging the influence of gender and other social factors on scientific inquiry, we can move towards a science that not only produces knowledge but also reflects the diverse realities and experiences of its global community. In doing so, we embrace a feminist science that values diversity, interconnection, and the responsible application of scientific knowledge for the betterment of society.

References

• Haraway, D. (1988). Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective.

• Haraway, D. (1985). A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century.

• Harding, S. (1991). Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Thinking from Women's Lives.

• Keller, E.F. (1985). Reflections on Gender and Science.

• Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society.

This exploration into the feminist perspective of science not only highlights the critical role of gender in shaping scientific knowledge but also calls for a reimagined approach to scientific inquiry—one that is inclusive, ethically conscious, and reflective of the diverse world it seeks to understand.

To find out (a lot) more about the feminist perspective of science head over to The Partially Examined Life blog and podcast.

3 easy ways to teach critical thinking in ToK

In Theory of Knowledge (ToK) critical thinking is not just a buzzword but a foundational skill that can significantly impact students' understanding and their ability to score well in ToK. But what exactly does it mean to "teach critical thinking"? Many of the teachers that I work with have asked for more help with this.

Understanding Critical Thinking in ToK

Critical thinking in ToK can be distilled into two primary elements:

1. Evaluation of Arguments: This involves identifying the strengths and weaknesses of an argument. It's about scrutinising the evidence, reasoning, and conclusions presented.

2. Development of Alternative Explanations: Beyond just critiquing, critical thinking also encompasses the ability to propose different explanations or viewpoints.

While there are numerous facets to critical thinking, focusing on these two skills can significantly aid students in excelling in ToK.

Teaching Critical Thinking Through Knowledge Issues

One of the most effective ways to cultivate these critical thinking skills is by engaging with knowledge issues. A knowledge issue refers to any factor that might influence knowledge - be it in its acquisition, development, production, or evaluation. Key knowledge issues relevant to ToK include reliability, validity, selectivity, predictability, hierarchy, inference, misrepresentation, and various biases.

These issues are intrinsically linked to the 12 core ToK concepts, with each concept potentially serving as a category under which specific knowledge issues can be grouped. For instance, the concept of culture could encompass knowledge issues like misrepresentation, inference, and confirmation bias.

Practical Approaches to Teaching Knowledge Issues

Here are three effective strategies for teaching knowledge issues in the ToK classroom:

1. Grouping Knowledge Issues Under ToK Concepts: Start by having students categorize knowledge issues under the 12 core ToK concepts. Provide them with a list to get started, and encourage them to add their own. This activity boosts familiarity with ToK concepts and deepens understanding of knowledge issues as students discuss and justify their categorizations. For lesson materials that could be used for this activity click here.

2. Applying Knowledge Issues to Real-World Examples: Introduce students to a selection of knowledge issues, then present a real-world case study. Ask students to identify relevant knowledge issues and explain their relevance. This approach helps develop key ToK skills necessary for both the Exhibition and the Essay. For lesson materials that could be used for this activity click here.

3. Using Edward DeBono’s Six Thinking Hats: Adapt this cognitive framework to encourage alternative thinking. Assign each student or group a "hat" that represents a specific way of thinking (e.g., "Facts" for the White hat, "New Ideas" for the Green hat). Present a real-world problem for analysis through the lens of their assigned thinking direction. This activity fosters an understanding of perspective, context, and the intentions of knowledge producers and knowers.

For more in depth thoughts, and further learning materials, on teaching critical thinking in ToK click here

Conclusion

Teaching critical thinking in ToK doesn't require endless watching of TED videos, nor extensive texts. By focusing on ToK skills and creating engaging, activity-based learning experiences, teachers can effectively impart critical thinking skills. For more ideas and resources, feel free to explore further or reach out with suggestions and inquiries.

If you have any content suggestions or questions, don't hesitate to contact us at Daniel@ToKToday.com.

Daniel, Lisbon, Feb 2024

Stages for Teaching the ToK Essay

Teaching the Theory of Knowledge (ToK) essay is a challenging yet rewarding endeavour that requires careful planning and thoughtful instruction. The ToK essay is a critical component of the International Baccalaureate (IB) Diploma Programme, demanding students to reflect on the nature of knowledge and how we know what we claim to know. Drawing on my experience of guiding students through the ToK essay in 22 exam sessions, I've distilled my approach into five key stages that have proven effective. These stages are designed to optimise the teaching process for the ToK essay, ensuring both teachers and students are well-prepared for this intellectual undertaking.

1. Planning Not Writing

The most crucial insight I've gained is the importance of prioritising planning over writing. Students should devote a significant portion of their time to unpacking the essay titles, exploring the concepts, and crafting knowledge arguments. This preparatory stage is vital for a successful essay, making the writing process smoother and more productive. I advocate for a planning-to-writing time ratio of roughly 80:20, encouraging students to engage deeply with their ideas before committing them to paper. This approach ensures that students are thoroughly thinking through their arguments and structuring their essays coherently before they begin the actual writing.

2. Delay Choosing Titles

A common mistake students make is rushing to select their essay title. Delaying this choice until later in the planning phase allows students to broaden their understanding of ToK concepts and apply these insights to various prescribed titles (PTs). This strategy enhances their conceptual flexibility, enabling them to craft more nuanced and comprehensive essays. By postponing the selection of essay titles, students can explore a wider range of ideas and approaches, ultimately choosing a title that resonates with their insights and understanding of ToK.

3. Problematizing Concepts, Knowledge Issues & Knowledge Arguments

To achieve high marks in the ToK essay, students must adopt an analytical, evaluative, and critical stance towards ToK concepts and the knowledge framework. Many students begin with a settled view of ToK, which can limit their ability to critically engage with the essay's demands. By problematising ToK concepts and encouraging critical examination of knowledge issues—such as reliability, validity, and falsifiability—students can develop a more sophisticated and questioning approach to knowledge. This critical engagement is essential for constructing compelling arguments and achieving excellence in the ToK essay.

4. Groupwork Teamwork

Given the typical class size for ToK, individualised teacher support for each student's essay can be challenging to provide. Leveraging the power of group work can offer peer support, advice, and guidance. Establishing writing groups for students tackling the same prescribed titles can foster a collaborative learning environment while adhering to academic integrity rules. Promoting the essay as a collaborative process can alleviate individual anxiety and ensure a supportive learning community where all students progress together.

5. The Draft Deadline Is the Big Deadline

Emphasising the draft deadline as the primary milestone can significantly impact the quality of the final essays. By treating the draft deadline with greater importance than the final submission deadline, most of the "heavy lifting" can be completed early on. Some schools celebrate this stage with a Draft Deadline party, highlighting its significance. A well-developed draft sets the stage for refining essays from middle to higher mark bands, focusing on enhancement rather than basic completion.

These five stages offer a comprehensive approach to teaching the ToK essay, providing a framework for students to develop their ideas thoughtfully and critically. For teachers embarking on this educational journey, these strategies can facilitate a more engaging and effective learning experience, helping students to navigate the complexities of the ToK essay with confidence.

Teachers can get a free teaching schedule overview at this link.

If you are a teacher who would like help with delivering the ToK Essay, or you're a student who would like help writing your ToK essay, please contact me: Daniel@TokToday.com

Stay ToKTastic,
Daniel, Lisbon, Feb 2024

Teaching Schedule for the ToK Essay

This is an overview schedule of foci and activities for teaching the ToK Essay, showing the monthly timing for both May and November Exam Sessions.

A few items of note:

• The schedule sets aside 5 months for the completion of the essay. I know that some teachers may dedicta eless time to the essay, but as a critical pass/fail component of the Diploma I dedicate substantial time to the essay.

• Students spend most of the time unpacking & exploring the prescribed titles. This is essential ToK learning, counting towards the 100 hours of time scheduled for ToK.

• The Draft Deadline is the effective end point of the process. If undertaken carefully there should be very little for students to do after the Draft submission.

For more information see this blogpost.

You can download a PDF version of the teaching schedule at this link.

What makes art arty?

It's useful to remember that "Art" and artistic knowledge includes music, literature, visual art, textiles, sculptor and film. In ToK a perennial debate is what defines art? Is it the subjective beauty perceived by an observer, or the underlying structures and theories that constitute its foundation? This discussion considers the complexities of aesthetic appreciation versus the structured knowledge that underpins artistic creation, with an aim to find ways to define art.

Aesthetics: The Subjective Experience

Aesthetics, derived from the Greek word "aisthesis," meaning perception, refers to the sensory experience or the beauty perceived in art. In music, literature, visual art, and film, aesthetics play a pivotal role in determining the audience's emotional response. Philosopher Immanuel Kant, in his work "Critique of Judgment," emphasised the importance of subjective beauty and its impact on the individual observer (Kant, 1790). For instance, the haunting melodies of Chopin's nocturnes or the stark, emotive lines of Picasso's Guernica strike chords of beauty and pain in listeners and viewers, transcending their technical composition.

Underlying Structures: The Foundation of Art

Conversely, artistic knowledge is rooted in established theories and structures. In music, this includes the understanding of chords, scales, and rhythm. The chromatic theory in visual art, and the rule of thirds in photography and painting, provide artists with guidelines to create balanced and harmonious compositions. In literature and film, narrative structures like Gustav Freytag’s pyramid and Joseph Campbell's "The Hero's Journey" are pivotal in crafting compelling stories. These structures are not just technicalities but are the backbone of artistic creation, offering a template for artists to innovate and express their ideas (Freytag, 1863; Campbell, 1949).

Music: Harmony and Melody

In music, the juxtaposition of aesthetics and structure is pronounced. The chord progressions in a piece by Bach or the innovative use of the tritone in Beethoven's compositions underpin the emotional response they evoke. Music theory is not just a set of rules; it's a language that enables composers to convey emotions and stories. For example, the use of minor keys to convey sadness or dissonance to express tension is a structured approach to creating an aesthetic experience (Rameau, 1722).

Visual Arts: Colour and Composition

In visual arts, the interplay of colours, lines, and shapes based on chromatic theory and compositional rules like the rule of thirds or the golden ratio, form the basis of aesthetic appeal. Monet's Impressionist works, though seemingly spontaneous, are underpinned by a deep understanding of light and colour theory. Similarly, the geometric precision in Mondrian's abstract works conveys beauty through structured form and colour (Gage, 1999).

Literature and Film: Narrative and Form

In literature and film, narrative structures guide the unfolding of stories. Shakespeare’s use of iambic pentameter in his plays provides rhythmic structure, enhancing the emotional impact of the words. The three-act structure, common in both literature and film, creates a framework within which stories are told, influencing how the audience perceives and engages with the narrative (McKee, 1997).

Balancing Aesthetics and Structures

The crux of the debate lies in finding a balance between these two aspects. Artistic knowledge and structures provide a foundation, but it's the artist's aesthetic choices that bring these elements to life. The tension between following rules and expressing subjective beauty is where art truly becomes 'arty'. This tension allows for innovation and creativity, leading to the evolution of art forms and artistic expression.

Conclusion

In conclusion, art is a complex amalgamation of aesthetics and underlying structures. While the aesthetic experience is subjective and varies with individual perception, the knowledge of underlying structures provides a framework for artists to express their creativity. The interplay of these elements is what gives art its depth, making it a continually evolving and dynamic field. Understanding this intricate balance is crucial for appreciating art in its entirety.

If you want help with your ToK Essay or ToK Exhibition contact me at Daniel@TokToday.com, or use the Messenger Chat icon on this website.

Stay arty my friends!
Daniel, Lisbon, Feb 2024

References

• Kant, I. (1790). *Critique of Judgment*.

• Freytag, G. (1863). *Die Technik des Dramas*.

• Campbell, J. (1949). *The Hero with a Thousand Faces*.

• Rameau, J. P. (1722). *Treatise on Harmony*.

• Gage, J. (1999). *Colour and Culture: Practice and Meaning from Antiquity to Abstraction*.

• McKee, R. (1997). *Story: Substance, Structure, Style, and the Principles of Screenwriting*.

What are the examiners thinking about the ToK Essay in 2023 ?

The Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Subject Report is written by examiners after each exam session, it is a reflection on what examiners have seen in the work submitted for the exam session. The report includes details on common mistakes made, and recommendations for avoiding those mistakes in the future. As such the ToK Subject Report is the most definitive document for understanding “what the examiners want”. I strongly recommend close reading of the TOK Subject Report for all ToK teachers. The ToK Subject Reports can be found in the Programme Resource Centre of MyIB.

In this blog post I summarise some of the pertinent and interesting points about the ToK Essay arising from the May 23 ToK Subject Report. I will publish a similar post about The Exhibition in a couple of days. I have written similar posts about previous ToK Subject Reports in the past (linked & linked). 

What do we learn about the ToK Essay from the May 23 ToK Subject Report ?

1. Students need to address all parts of the prescribed title. Don’t ignore parts of the question, this affects coherence of the answer (top of P5.)

2. Precise and direct reading of question is important (e.g Q2 M23 “For artists & natural scientists” many students did not consider artists & natural scientists, they just considered ‘for the general public’.).

3. A stepped approach to build an argument is most effective for complex essays that contain multiple elements (eg #4M23: "Do you agree that it is "astonishing that so little knowledge can give us so much power" (Russell)? Discuss with reference to the NS & one other AoK"). This essay requires students to deal with each element in turn, and to develop knowledge arguments relating to each. Contrasting claims / counterclaims / evaluation points are particularly important in complex essays (eg #4 M23, bottom of pg 6/top of 7).

4. Visual representations (eg charts & graphs) are now appropriate in ToK essays (Essay 5 M23).

5. Focus on writing a critical exploration of the PT (the driving question) rather than on a descriptive essay. A critical exploration includes: 

• Arguments supported by examples

• Implications

• Awareness of & evaluation of different points of view. 

• Limitations of arguments

6. Use of “points of view” rather than counterclaim. Points of view allows for a more nuanced range of points than a counterclaim. Points of view do not necessarily contradict, nor cancel out, the initial claim.

7. Examples should be explicitly connected to the knowledge argument and shown to justify a point.

8. Examples drawn from the student’s own studies, or own life, generally make better examples because it is easier for the student to analyse them and to understand the implication of the example (para 3, Pg 8).

9. AoK History should consider:

• The history of events that are at least 10 yrs old.

• The history of events that have been investigated by historians (rather than e.g. by journalists).

• The process of the production of historical knowledge rather than the event itself.

10, Geography & Economics are often used well as Human Science disciplines.

11. The Planning & Progress Form is of increasing importance as an academic integrity check given the growth of AI etc.

OK - this is just a very brief summary of some of the main points. Some of these points are included because they are surprising, or new, to me. If you want more details on the subject report I recommend downloading it from the Programme Resource Centre. A similar summary of points about the ToK Exhibition in the May 23 Subject Report will be out soon.

Stay ToKTastic,
Daniel, Lisbon Feb 24

Watch this post as a video:

Choosing Objects for the Exhibition: The big debate.

Should students choose their objects before the prompt, or should they choose the prompt before their objects, in the IB ToK Exhibition ?

Quote from many IB ToK Teachers !

IB has been quite clear that students should choose their objects before they choose the prompt for their ToK exhibition. However, I have always argued that students should choose the prompt, and write knowledge arguments, before they choose their object. In this blog post I will run through IB’s argument, explain my concerns with it. I will then explain why I recommend choosing the prompt before the  object.

IB’s recommended approach.

IB have always recommended that students choose their objects before they choose the prompt for their ToK Exhibition. The reason for this recommendation is the driving question of the ToK exhibition, namely that students ‘reflect upon how ToK manifests itself in the world’ around them. In theory, I totally agree with this approach. Of course, I hope that my students can identify knowledge issues, knowledge arguments, and knowledge problems arising from the physical world around them. If students see knowledge issues arising from the objects around them ,and use this for their ToK exhibition, they will develop more informed and holistic Tok discussions. As such, in theory, I am entirely in agreement with the IB’s recommendation. However, as we shall see later, even the IB acknowledges that there are problems with this approach.

Prompt & Knowledge arguments BEFORE objects.

I recommend that students both choose a prompt, and write three knowledge arguments, before they choose objects for their ToK Exhibition. My recommendation is the exact opposite of the IB’s recommendation, and is born from the experience of doing the exhibition with students in the past couple of years. My experience of letting students choose objects first is that when they come to write their commentary they often find that the objects don't fully link to, nor illustrate, the prompt and knowledge arguments. They then have to go back and change their objects to more appropriate ones. Now, of course, this could be a deficiency in my teaching, I'm clearly not able to develop the desired reflective capacity of my students. therefore, if you are in anyway like me, and wish to find the most effective way to optimise teaching time for Theory of Knowledge, then you may also want to front-end the process by fitting knowledge arguments to objects, as I do.

In order to access the higher marks in the ToK Exhibition students have to justify the inclusion of each specific object in the exhibition. The May 23 subject report says that this is a “stronger and more detailed explanation of the link between the object and the prompt” (pg 11). In reality this is a specific knowledge argument linking that specific object to the prompt. Therefore, a shortcut to getting into the higher Mark range is for students to identify these knowledge arguments at the beginning of the exhibition process. This is why I advocate writing knowledge arguments before choosing objects. 

Specificity is the real issue.

On page 15 of the May 2023 subject report IB do recognize that choosing the prompt first can also lead to valid and high scoring marks. they say students may start with a prompt which they find particularly interesting and have ideas about the objects that they will choose. entry points are equally valid what matters is the thinking that goes with them.

On reading successive subject reports and notes for examiners we find that the important issue to do with the objects chosen for the Tok exhibition is specificity. The IB are recommending choosing objects first because they think that if students choose the prompt first  they are more likely to choose generic objects and write generic commentaries. In the last few Subject Reports they have explained in some detail the difference between a generic use of an object and a specific use of an object. Just search for the words Family Bible in the May 2023 subject report to find this example, or click on this blog post for a full explanation of what is meant by a specific object.

Summary.

If your students can easily see the ToK issues manifest in the world around them ask them to choose objects before a prompt to write object specific commentaries.

If your students find it challenging to see the ToK issues manifest in the world around them, ask them to choose prompts and write knowledge arguments before  choosing specific objects to write specific commentaries.

The specifically important point is the specificity of the specific objects specific to the specific prompt.

Stay specific my friends,
Daniel, Lisbon, Feb 24

Implications in ToK Essay: What are they?

Implications in the ToK Essay: A Guide to Achieving High Marks

Understanding Implications in Theory of Knowledge Essays

Achieving high marks in your Theory of Knowledge (ToK) Essay is a significant milestone. A crucial element that can help you score between 9 and 10 marks is the inclusion of implications in your arguments. Many students struggle to understand what these implications are. This post aims to clarify 'Implications' and guide you on how to effectively incorporate implications into your ToK essays.

Defining Implications

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, an implication is defined as

"the action of implying; the fact of being implied or involved, without being plainly expressed; that which is involved or implied in something else."

Oxford English Dictionary

In simpler terms, think of an implication as the potential "so what?" outcome of an argument. It’s what could logically follow from the premises you have established.

Illustrating Implications with a Simple Example

To understand this better, let's consider a straightforward, non-ToK example:

• Argument: Abigail ALWAYS takes an umbrella with her when it is raining.

• Observation: Abigail has taken an umbrella with her.

• Implication: It is raining.

This example shows the direct implication. However, we can delve deeper and consider other implications such as:

• Abigail thinks that it is raining.

• It was raining when Abigail decided to take the umbrella, but it might not be now.

• Abigail believes it will rain before she returns.

These examples illustrate how a single observation can lead to multiple implications.

Applying Implications to a Real ToK Essay

Consider the ToK essay topic: "To what extent is the production of knowledge determined by methodologies?" (#6 May 23)

Suppose the essay concludes that methodologies have less influence on knowledge production than the context of the knowledge and the intentions of the producer. Several implications can be drawn from this conclusion:

1. Methodology Variability: The methodologies of knowledge production can be varied or altered according to the needs of the knowledge producer with little effect on the knowledge produced.

2. Defining Areas of Knowledge: Areas of knowledge and subject disciplines should not be defined solely by the methodology used to produce knowledge within that discipline or AoK.

3. Contextual Nature of Knowledge: Knowledge is primarily contextual, and when taken out of its context, it may lose its meaning, regardless of the methodology used to produce it.

The Importance of Exploring Implications

Exploring implications allows for a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the argument. It shows a critical engagement with the topic and can significantly enhance the quality of your ToK essay.

Further Resources and Assistance

If you need more help with your ToK essay, consider exploring other videos under the ToK Essay tab on the ToKToday YouTube channel, or purchase the e-book "How to Write the ToK Essay in 6 Easy Steps" for detailed guidance.

ToKToday is dedicated to helping you excel in your ToK essays. Remember to like, subscribe, and share for more insightful content on Theory of Knowledge.

Daniel, Lisbon, Feb 24

How can we know current knowledge is an improvement upon past knowledge? (Exhibition prompt 13)

Guidance notes for Prompt 13 are available from this link.

These notes include:

1. An overview explanation of the prompt.

2. Examples of three knowledge claims for the prompt.

3. Suggestions for the types of object that would be appropriate for each knowledge claim.

4. How to structure the ToK Exhibition Commentary.

Knowledge arguments before objects.

I recommend writing knowledge arguments BEFORE you choose objects. I know it’s tempting to choose objects first, but if you can write 3 knowledge arguments first not only will your objects be easier to choose, but it will be far easier to "access the higher mark bands, and we all want higher scores."justify the inclusion of each particular object in the exhibition" (required for the higher mark bands).

Unpacking the prompt

How can we know that current knowledge is an improvement upon past knowledge?

The first terms that jump out are current and past. When is current current and when does it become past ? So, current & past can be relative terms.  The next term that interests me is improvement. We could define an ‘improvement’ in knowledge in many different ways, for example:

• The current knowledge is more functional than past knowledge, that means it has more uses or usability.

• The current knowledge could be more effective than past knowledge.

• The current knowledge could be more ethical than past knowledge. That’s contentious, so I think we’ll come back to that one.

• The current knowledge might fulfil the intention of the knowledge producer better than past knowledge. This can also be contentious when we consider who produces knowledge & why. 

• The current knowledge could produce more unexpected benefits than previous knowledge. I like this idea, it gives us a window to serendipitous knowledge production.

• The current knowledge could allow for more synthesis across various Areas of Knowledge than past knowledge.

These are all various ways in which we could define improvement in knowledge, there are many other ways, you can devise your own measure of improvement.

The common mistake with prompt 13

A common mistake is interpret the prompt as asking whether current knowledge is an improvement over past knowledge. However, the prompt is actually asking how can we know whether current knowledge is an improvement over past knowledge. As such, we need to focus on ways in which we might know about improvement in knowledge. 

Ways in which we might "know" about improvements in knowledge.

A few ways in which we know things include:

• we have evidence for it

• we are able to measure it

• it is observable to us

• we have experienced it

• we are able to compare current knowledge with past knowledge

There are many many different ways to know things and I'm sure that some of you will be able to come up with better ways of knowing than I can.

Knowledge Arguments

To write the knowledge arguments we're just together the two important parts of the prompt: how we know things, and ways to define improvements.

Knowledge Argument 2 is slightly contentious because some would argue that we can only assess ethics by the standards of the time in which you live. One of the counter-arguments to this is to focus on the methodology of assessment rather than the context of assessment. So, I’ve written this KA to use reason as the means or methodology by which we know.

Knowledge Argument 3 may also be a little contentious by taking the line that we may not know something, this is a small risk that should be OK because we’ve already shown 2 ways in which we can know something, so now I’m taking a more critical approach to the question. I’m also drawing upon the core unit in ToK Knowledge and The Knower. 

Choosing Objects

IB strongly recommend that you choose things that are of significance to you. These could be things that you have studied in your DP, or things that you are personally interested in. I have chosen 3 things that I am interested in, but you will probably have different interests, so you should choose different objects to mine.

Knowledge Argument 1: We know that current knowledge is an improvement upon past knowledge when objective evidence demonstrates current knowledge to be more effective than past knowledge.

The object that I’ve chosen to demonstrate this KA is a scientific epidemiological report from the US Centre for Disease Control on the control of the viral disease Smallpox through the use of the Smallpox vaccine. The report gives quantitative objective statistical evidence of the vastly reduced incidence of smallpox arising from use of the vaccine.

Knowledge Argument 2: The second knowledge argument is that We know that current knowledge is an improvement upon past knowledge if it is reasoned to be more ethical by contemporary standards of ethics.

I’ve chosen The European Convention on Human Rights to demonstrate this. The convention arises from a contemporary understanding of ethics arising from the use of reason as a way of knowing during the 18th & 19th century period of European Enlightenment. My argument being that reason as a way of knowing allows us to know that current knowledge is an improvement over past knowledge. 

The third knowledge argument is  that we may not know that current knowledge is an improvement upon past knowledge if our knowledge of improvement is mainly derived from the experience of the knower.

The object that I’ve chosen to illustrate this argument is a modern documentary film made about Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre. The documentary compares the experience of current forms of entertainment with the experience of watching plays at Shakespeare’s Globe in the sixteenth century. My argument being that if we measure improvement of knowledge in terms of the experience of the knower then we can’t be certain that the experience of contemporary forms of entertainment are necessarily an improvement of past forms of entertainment. Experience is an individual phenomenon which cannot be satisfactorily compared across time, place, nor other contexts. 

Make it personal and specific

You will probably develop different knowledge arguments, and use different objects to mine. But I just wanted to show you how to unpack this prompt, some different ways to think about the prompt, and ways in which to move from knowledge arguments to objects. Making the objects relevant and significant to you is an important part of the ToK Exhibition

Stay Toktastic my friends.
Daniel, Lisbon, Jan 2024

Help! Urgent help needed - ToK Essay!

 I am receiving lots of messages from students across the world at the moment saying things like "Help! I need urgent help with my ToK Essay! My deadline is very soon, and I’m finding it really difficult". Please keep reaching out, I love to help you, that’s what I’m here for.

Today, on ToKToday we're going to look at what you can do if you’re worried about completing your ToK essay. Maybe you don’t know where to start, or you may have left it a little late. Here’s the ToKToday guide to saving your ToK life:

1. Planning.

No matter how little time you have left, spending some time Planning will help you to write a better essay. You have 1600 words, so think of it as an 8 paragraph essay, each para is 200 words long. A basic essay structure that will deliver for most titles is shown below:

Generic ToK Essay Structure

This is a super rough & ready essay structure designed to get you out of a last minute hole. Of course  there are many other essay structures that you could use, many better essay structures, but if you’re down to the last 36 hrs before hand in time this essay structure can deliver you an essay that will pass. If you need more help with how to structure the essay see the video linked here.

In the introduction you can explain your interpretation of the prescribed title, and explain how you intend to answer the prescribed title, if there are assumptions in the title  you may want to explain whether you intend to address these and why. Many students define key concepts in the Introduction, however I would recommend putting your definitions in the knowledge arguments in each AoK.

2. Knowledge Arguments

Knowledge Arguments are the central focus of your essay, these are what you will get most of your marks for. So spend time working these out before you start writing. You need at least one central knowledge argument for each AoK. You can then develop other knowledge arguments as the evaluation points for the main knowledge argument in each AoK.

If you’re struggling to find knowledge arguments then use your ToK Notes, your ToK textbook (if you have one), blogs on this site, and the ToKToday videos on YouTube.

3. Real World Examples

Lots of people get hung up on which real world examples to use. You can draw on your other DP subjects for real world examples, pull them from the things that you have studied in other DP subjects. How you use the real world example to illustrate the knowledge argument  is more important than the real world example used.

4. Evaluation Points.

If you want to score more than 5 out of 10 you need to evaluate your knowledge arguments. These are best thought of as “other points of view”. Good evaluation points will constitute further knowledge arguments in your essay. If you are struggling to identify evaluation points then watch the video linked above .

5. Filling in the paragraphs.

Once you know what you are putting in each of your 8 paragraphs you have your structure. Now all that you have to do is to fill in the words around the main points in each paragraph. This is how you both speed up the writing process and improve the quality of you what you write. 

6. Implications & Conclusions.

Finally you need to include a concluding paragraph that ties all of the arguments across both AoKs together. The conclusion must directly and unequivocally address the original prescribed title, this will probably require using the words from the prescribed title in your conclusion. You could also include the implications of your conclusion in this final paragraph. 

More help with ToK Essay

We have lots of resources & support for you to help you to write your ToK Essay:.

• We have at least 3 videos on YouTube explaining, and giving examples for, EACH ToK Essay title.

• We have blog posts explaining possible different approaches for each essay title.

• We have detailed Guidance Notes for each ToK Essay title.

We can also provide online coaching sessions to support you every step of the way in writing your essay.

Finally, once you have a first draft in place we can provide detailed written feedback to help you to refine your thinking and writing.

If you need help then please feel free to reach out, the more time we have to work together before your submission deadline the better we can develop your essay so please don’t leave it too late. 

If you have any questions or suggestions please feel free to email me at Daniel@ToKToday.com, or use the Messenger icon on this website.

Daniel, Lisbon,
January 2024

Don't want to read? Watch the video instead: