THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE EXTERNAL ASSESSMENT KEY DATES September 19, 2017

- Pick up EA prescribed titles, packets, and instructions - First Interaction on the TK/PPF form.

October 06, 2017 - Submit your title and essay outline to valencia.managebac.com. - Second Interaction on the TK/PPF form. - If you would like my feedback on your outline (highly recommended!), submit a

printed paper copy to me in Room 401. I will return your outline in your English class.

December 01, 2017 – Rough Draft due – Third Interaction on the TK/PPF form. – Submit a rough draft of your TOK essay to valencia.managebac.com AND on

paper in room 401. I will provide written comments on the bottom of your printed draft only if you have submitted BOTH online and on paper. I will return your outline in your English class.

January 29, 2018 --Deadline – Final Draft Due to valencia.managebac.com – TK/PPF due to valencia.managebac.com – updated TK/PPD due to valencia.managebac.com

Please, if you have any concerns or questions, email me (dnchung@pylusd.org) to set up an appointment. I would love to support you in any part of the process of completing this EA. Don’t wait, finish this EA early.

Assessment instruments

Theory of knowledge guide62

TOK

essa

y as

sess

men

t ins

trum

ent

Doe

s the

stud

ent p

rese

nt a

n ap

prop

riat

e an

d co

gent

ana

lysi

s of k

now

ledg

e qu

esti

ons i

n di

scus

sing

the

titl

e?

Aspe

ctLe

vel 5

Exce

llent

9–10

Leve

l 4Ve

ry g

ood

7–8

Leve

l 3Sa

tisfa

ctor

y5–

6

Leve

l 2Ba

sic

3–4

Leve

l 1El

emen

tary

1–2

Irrel

evan

t0

Und

erst

andi

ng

know

ledg

e qu

estio

ns

Ther

e is

a su

stai

ned

focu

s on

know

ledg

e qu

esti

ons c

onne

cted

to

the

pres

crib

ed

title

and

are

wel

l ch

osen

—de

velo

ped

with

inve

stig

atio

n of

dif

fere

nt

pers

pect

ives

and

lin

ked

effe

ctiv

ely

to

area

s of k

now

ledg

e an

d/or

way

s of

know

ing.

Ther

e is

a fo

cus

on k

now

ledg

e qu

esti

ons c

onne

cted

to

the

pres

crib

ed

title

—de

velo

ped

with

ack

now

ledg

men

t of

dif

fere

nt

pers

pect

ives

and

lin

ked

to a

reas

of

know

ledg

e an

d/or

w

ays o

f kno

win

g.

Ther

e is

a fo

cus o

n so

me

know

ledg

e qu

esti

ons c

onne

cted

to

the

pres

crib

ed

title

—w

ith so

me

deve

lopm

ent a

nd

linki

ng to

are

as o

f kn

owle

dge

and/

or

way

s of k

now

ing.

Som

e kn

owle

dge

ques

tion

s tha

t are

co

nnec

ted

to th

e pr

escr

ibed

title

are

co

nsid

ered

, but

th

e es

say

is la

rgel

y de

scrip

tive,

with

su

perf

icia

l or l

imite

d lin

ks to

are

as o

f kn

owle

dge

and/

or

way

s of k

now

ing.

The

essa

y ha

s onl

y ve

ry li

mite

d re

leva

nce

to th

e pr

escr

ibed

tit

le—

rele

vant

poi

nts

are

desc

riptiv

e.

The

essa

y do

es n

ot

reac

h a

stan

dard

de

scrib

ed b

y le

vels

1–5

or is

not

a

resp

onse

to o

ne o

f the

pr

escr

ibed

title

s on

the

list f

or th

e cu

rren

t se

ssio

n.

Qua

lity

of a

naly

sis o

f kn

owle

dge

ques

tions

A

rgum

ents

are

cle

ar,

supp

orte

d by

real

-life

ex

ampl

es a

nd a

re

effe

ctiv

ely e

valu

ated

; co

unte

rcla

ims a

re

exte

nsiv

ely

expl

ored

; im

plic

atio

ns a

re

draw

n.

Argu

men

ts a

re cl

ear,

supp

orte

d by

real

-lif

e ex

ampl

es a

nd

are

eval

uate

d; so

me

coun

terc

laim

s are

id

entif

ied

and

expl

ored

.

Som

e ar

gum

ents

are

cl

ear a

nd su

ppor

ted

by e

xam

ples

; som

e co

unte

rcla

ims a

re

iden

tifie

d.

Argu

men

ts a

re o

ffere

d bu

t are

unc

lear

and

/or

not

supp

orte

d by

ef

fect

ive

exam

ples

.

Ass

erti

ons a

re

offe

red

but a

re n

ot

supp

orte

d.

Som

e po

ssib

le c

hara

cter

isti

cs

Coge

ntAc

com

plish

edD

isce

rnin

gIn

divi

dual

Luci

dIn

sigh

tful

Com

pelli

ng

Pert

inen

tRe

leva

ntTh

ough

tful

Anal

ytic

alO

rgan

ized

Cred

ible

Cohe

rent

Typi

cal

Acce

ptab

leM

ains

trea

mAd

equa

teCo

mpe

tent

Und

erde

velo

ped

Basi

cSu

perf

icia

lD

eriv

ativ

eRu

dim

enta

ryLi

mite

d

Inef

fect

ive

Des

crip

tive

Inco

here

ntFo

rmle

ss

Theory of knowledge prescribed titles

© International Baccalaureate Organization 20172 pages

Instructions to candidates

Your theory of knowledge essay for examination must be submitted to your teacher for authentication. It must be written on one of the six titles (questions) provided overleaf. You may choose any title, but are recommended to consult with your teacher. Your essay will be marked according to the assessment instrument published in the theory of knowledge guide. The focus of your essay should be on knowledge questions. Where appropriate, refer to other parts of your IB programme and to your experiences as a knower. Always justify your statements and provide relevant examples to illustrate your arguments. Pay attention to the implications of your arguments, and remember to consider what can be said against them. If you use external sources, cite them according to a recognized convention.

Note that statements in quotations in these titles are not necessarily authentic: they present a real point of view but may not be direct quotes. It is appropriate to analyse them but it is unnecessary, even unwise, to spend time on researching a context for them.

Examiners mark essays against the title as set. Respond to the title exactly as given; do not alter it in any way.

Your essay must have a maximum of 1600 words.

May 2018 examination session

– 2 –

1. “Thefieldsofstudyofacademicdisciplinescanoverlap,butadoptinginterdisciplinaryapproachestotheproductionofknowledgeleadsonlytoconfusion.”Discussthisclaim.

2. “Weknowwithconfidenceonlywhenweknowlittle;withknowledgedoubtincreases”(adaptedfromJWvonGoethe).Discussthisstatementwithreferencetotwoareasofknowledge.

3. “Withouttheassumptionoftheexistenceofuniformitiestherecanbenoknowledge.”Discussthisclaimwithreferencetotwoareasofknowledge.

4. “Suspensionofdisbelief”isanessentialfeatureoftheatre.Isitessentialinotherareasofknowledge?Developyouranswerwithreferencetotwoareasofknowledge.

5. “Thequalityofknowledgeproducedbyanacademicdisciplineisdirectlyproportionaltothedurationofhistoricaldevelopmentofthatdiscipline.”Explorethisclaimwithreferencetotwodisciplines.

6. “Robustknowledgerequiresbothconsensusanddisagreement.”Discussthisclaimwithreferencetotwoareasofknowledge.

Page 1 / 2

© International Baccalaureate Organization 2016 International Baccalaureate® | Baccalauréat International® | Bachillerato Internacional®

PDF forms are not compatible with the Google Chrome PDF viewer plug-in. Chrome users should save the form, then reopen and complete with Adobe reader.

TK/PPFFor first assessment in 2017

Candidate personal code: Session:

Theory of knowledge - Planning and progress form Completion of this form The completion of this form by each candidate and their teacher for theory of knowledge is a mandatory requirement. This will strengthen the process of writing the essay and support the authenticity of a candidate's work. Each completed form must be submitted to the IB, but will not be marked.

Candidate This form must be completed during the planning and progress of your essay. It is a record of three interactions with your teacher. The first interaction should focus on discussing the prescribed titles and choosing the title for your essay. In your second interaction you should discuss the development of your ideas in relation to your chosen title, and you may present to your teacher an exploration of those ideas in some written form. This will allow you to create a plan for the structure of your essay. For your final interaction you are encouraged to present to your teacher a full draft of your essay. The teacher is permitted to provide written comments on your draft, but will not mark or edit your draft.

Teacher You must have at least three interactions with each candidate; one early on in the process to discuss the prescribed titles, an interim session to discuss progress and a final session at which the candidate should present a full draft. Other interactions are permitted, but only these three should be recorded on this form.

Prescribed title:

Planning and progress

Candidate's comments You are advised to include your comments soon after each interaction Date

First interaction:

Second interaction:

Third interaction:

nglish

Page 2 / 2

© International Baccalaureate Organization 2016

TK/PPFTeacher's comments:

Completed declarations: I confirm that my comments above are accurate

Candidate's name:

Candidate session number: Date:

Teacher's name: Date:

School name: School number:

Theory of knowledge guide 5959

Assessment

Assessment instruments

Using global impression markingThe method of assessing the essay on a prescribed title and the presentation in TOK judges each piece of work in relation to written descriptions of performance and not in relation to the work of other students.

The assessment of both tasks is envisaged as a process of holistic or global judgment rather than an analytical process of totalling the assessment of separate criteria. Although in the essay the assessment is presented as two aspects, they are integrated into five described levels of performance, allowing for variation in student performance across different parts of the overall assessment. Because of the requirement for a reasonable mark range along which to differentiate student performance, each markband level descriptor corresponds to a range of two different marks.

Assessment judgments should in the first instance be made with reference to the level descriptors for typical characteristics. The possible characteristics underneath are intended as starting prompts for discussion and development of a shared vocabulary among examiners, moderators, teachers and students as to how work at each level might be described.

The possible characteristics corresponding to a level of performance should not be thought of as a checklist of attributes; they are intended to function only as tentative descriptions, some of which may seem appropriate to apply to work at that level.

The achievement level descriptors concentrate on positive achievement, although for the lower levels (zero is the lowest level of achievement) failure to achieve is included in the description.

These level descriptors are designed to be used as a whole, and operate at a global level. It is to be understood that:

the described levels are not a checklist or necessary minimum

the different levels of performance are not discrete, and differences of degree are involved

different levels suggest typical performance, and there are always exceptions requiring individual or case by case judgments

the performance of students can be uneven across different aspects, but it is the overall impression that is most important.

Examiners and moderators will use the levels of performance as the terms on which they make a judgment that draws on their knowledge of what students at this level can do with tasks of this kind. How examiners and moderators will make a judgement about the level of performance attained in a particular student response will vary.

Essay examiners may make a decision in the course of reading the piece, and then review it and make a final judgment after completing a reading. Or they may register the comments and arguments of a student, read the essay as a whole and make a decision in retrospect. In either case the described levels are to be seen as global and holistic rather than a checklist of necessary characteristics. Examiners will make judgments about individual pieces of work by taking into account and evaluating the distinctive characteristics of a particular script.

Assessment instruments

Theory of knowledge guide60

Presentation moderators will similarly endeavour to reach a holistic judgment based on the responses of the student(s) and teacher on the TK/PPD form.

The markbands for each assessment task in effect represent a single holistic criterion applied to the piece of work, which is judged as a whole. The highest descriptor levels do not imply faultless performance and examiners and teachers should not hesitate to use the extremes if they are appropriate descriptions of the work being assessed.

Part 1: Essay on a prescribed titleThe following diagram shows the question underpinning a global impression judgment of the TOK essay. This question is to shape the reading and assessing of TOK essays.

Does the student present an appropriate and cogent analysis of knowledge questions in discussing the title?

Has the student:

understood the proposition?understood the knowledge questions that are explicit and implicit in the title, and/or linked the proposition to knowledge questions?developed a comprehensive and cogent point of view about the topic and appropriate knowledge questions?

Figure 20The judgment about the TOK essay is to be made on the basis of the following two aspects:

1. Understanding knowledge questionsThis aspect is concerned with the extent to which the essay focuses on knowledge questions relevant to the prescribed title, and with the depth and breadth of the understanding demonstrated in the essay.

Knowledge questions addressed in the essay should be shown to have a direct connection to the chosen prescribed title, or to be important in relation to it.

Depth of understanding is often indicated by drawing distinctions within WOKs and AOKs, or by connecting several facets of knowledge questions to these.

Breadth of understanding is often indicated by making comparisons between WOKs and AOKs. Since not all prescribed titles lend themselves to an extensive treatment of an equal range of AOKs or WOKs, this element in the descriptors should be applied with concern for the particularity of the title.

Assessment instruments

Theory of knowledge guide 61

Relevant questions to be considered include the following.

Does the essay demonstrate understanding of knowledge questions that are relevant to the prescribed title?

Does the essay demonstrate an awareness of the connections between knowledge questions, AOKs and WOKs?

Does the student show an awareness of his or her own perspective as a knower in relation to other perspectives, such as those that may arise, for example, from academic and philosophical traditions, culture or position in society (gender, age, and so on)?

2. Quality of analysis of knowledge questionsThis aspect is concerned only with knowledge questions that are relevant to the prescribed title.

Relevant questions to be considered include the following.

What is the quality of the inquiry into knowledge questions?

Are the main points in the essay justified?

Are the arguments coherent and compelling?

Have counterclaims been considered?

Are the implications and underlying assumptions of the essay’s argument identified?

Are the arguments effectively evaluated?

Analysis of a knowledge question that is not relevant to the prescribed title will not be assessed.

Note: The TOK essay is not an assessment of first or second language literacy. Students should have properly edited their work, but whether they have done so is not in itself a matter for assessment. While the two are usually highly correlated, assessors will be wary of taking linguistic fluency for substantive understanding and analysis of knowledge questions. A fluent and stylish rendition of different knowledge questions does not in itself amount to analysis or argument. Discussion of knowledge questions must be clearly related and appropriately linked to a set title. Equally, an essay written with minor mechanical and grammatical errors can still be an excellent essay and examiners will not take these errors into consideration when marking the essay. It is only when these errors become major and impede the comprehension of the essay that they will be taken into account.

Name:

SCAFFOLDED TOK ESSAY PLANNING TEMPLATE

TOK prescribed title: What does this title ask you to discuss? How will you go about approaching the question?

Possible knowledge claims and knowledge questions:

Which knowledge questions have you selected and why? Explain/show how they will contribute to the development of the discussion.

Which areas of knowledge/ways of knowing will be included in your discussion? Explain how they will contribute to the development of the discussion.

List and explain your real-life examples. How and why have you selected them? How will they contribute to the development of the discussion?

What are the counter-claims and different perspectives to your discussion? Show how you will consider these in your discussion.

What conclusions have you reached about your knowledge question(s)? What are the implications of this conclusion?

What are my academic honesty requirements for this essay? List the references below that require citation or checking.

COMMAND TERMS FOR TOK ESSAYS Discuss = Apply this idea and come up with your own answer. Consider = Essentially, the same as “Discuss”) Evaluate = Form a judgment about. To what extent is this true = Essentially the same as “Evaluate.” On what grounds= explain the criteria

NAME:

TOKEA ESSAY PREPARATION: SELECT & INTERPRET A “PRESCRIBED TITLE” Read through the “prescribed titles.” Be sure to note the “instructions to candidates.” It makes the important point that students must “respond to the title exactly as given; do not alter it in anyway.” Given that, a critical step in preparing to write the TOK Essay is determining exactly what your title is requiring you to do. 1. Your title # _____. Write it out exactly: ________________________________________________________________________

2. Define command terms and key concepts. Command terms tell you what to do in relation to the core idea in the prompt. Key concepts are ideas that relate to knowledge in some way and that will become the focus of your essay. In the 2016 titles, we find the following concepts: #1: “gaining knowledge”; “area of knowledge”; “a network of ways of knowing” #2: development of knowledge; “the principles of natural selection” #3: “knower’s perspective”; “essential”; “pursuit of knowledge” #4: “application in the world”; “value of knowledge” #5: “concepts”; “shape conclusions” #6: “trade-off’; “accuracy”; “simplicity”

a. Command term

Command term What am I supposed to do?

b. Content concepts. DO NOT USE dictionary definitions. DO NOT use unauthorized TOK websites such as theoryofknowledge.net. Instead, consult class handouts, the TOK Course Companion, and, especially, your own brain!

Key concept(s)

Now, re-write/paraphrase the title, using your own words, making as clear as possible exactly what this title is asking you to explore.

3. Areas of Knowledge / Ways of Knowing: How does this title relate to the Ways of Knowing and/or Areas of Knowledge? Tip: You are expected to show connections among/between Areas of Knowledge and Ways of Knowing. Several of the titles explicitly ask you to incorporate two Areas of Knowledge. The other titles don’t specify the number of Areas – but you should think in terms of two for sure – and perhaps three. In title #5, Ways of Knowing are the target rather than Areas. Consider including at least three – and remember that you need to do so in the context of real-life examples that are likely linked to Areas of Knowledge.

a. Which TOK Areas of Knowledge could be relevant to this title? Circle all that could reasonably apply.

NATURAL SCIENCES HUMAN SCIENCE MATHEMATICS ARTS HISTORY ETHICS List the ones that you think would be best to use: _________________________________________________________________

Explain: _____________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ b. Which TOK Ways of Knowing could be relevant to this title? Circle all that could reasonably apply.

SENSORY PERCEPTION REASON EMOTION LANGUAGE FAITH IMAGINATION MEMORY INTUITION

List two or three that you think would be best to use: _______________________________________________________________

Explain: ______________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________

4. Without doing formal research at this point, brainstorm potential examples from various sources. For now, simply jot down a few possibilities from the following categories: From TOK units: ________________________________________________________________________________________________ From other IB courses/subjects/activities: _______________________________________________________________________________ From personal experience: ________________________________________________________________________________________

THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE: THE EXTERNAL ASSESSMENT TAKEN FROM IB Publishing, IBO

dnchung@pylusd.org 1

COMMON MISTAKES AND HOW TO AVOID THEM

THE ESSAY

Many of the mistakes that are made by weaker students result from poorly developed understanding of the objectives combined with following a weak process. Some of the common mistakes seen in TOK essays are identified below, along with advice on how they can be avoided. MISUNDERSTANDING THE NATURE OF THE ESSAY

The goal of the TOK essay is not to evaluate the personal values of students, to explore conspiracy theories or to debate moral issues and themes. The essay invites students to consider the factors that influence our willingness to accept or reject information as knowledge. Students who do not appreciate this will often produce essays that fail to address the task and the criteria. Students should also remember that the TOK essay is not a research essay and so is not subject to the same requirements as the extended essay (apart from the requirements associated with academic honesty). THE SCOPE OF THE ESSAY

It is important that students are realistic about how much they can cover in a TOK essay which can be a maximum of 1,600 words. They are not being asked to consider all of the points that could potentially be made; indeed they should recognize that doing so will limit their ability to explore the points that they do raise in sufficient depth. Students need to be guided to reflect on, evaluate and select the most relevant ideas from the many that they have generated in the planning of their essay. UNFOCUSED INTRODUCTION

Successful introductions tend to be dedicated to three main goals: • establishing some clarity about the key terms and concepts used in the title • stating a position, that is, agree, disagree, agree with reservations, disagree with reservations • identifying the WOKs and AOKs that the essay will focus on. Essays that open with generalized observations about mankind’s eternal quest for knowledge tend to set the scene for a descriptive essay, and often cause the student to digress. These introductions also tend to cause readers to quickly lose faith in the purpose of the essay.

THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE: THE EXTERNAL ASSESSMENT TAKEN FROM IB Publishing, IBO

dnchung@pylusd.org 2

Strong essay introductions ensure that they address all aspects of the title, and that they consider any assumptions that are written into the title. They do not assume that the title can only ever be addressed from one position. INEFFECTIVE USE OF EXAMPLES

Strong essays will seek to employ a range of specific examples (contemporary, drawn from personal experience, cross-cultural, from multiple eras, drawn from the course) and will make relevant use of them. When we refer to specific examples we mean making reference to a particular artist/artwork or scientist/scientific theory, rather than making a generic reference to “artists” or “scientists”. Effective examples invariably seek to relate the example back to the title, and to extend, fairly directly, from the example to the knowledge question that it was employed to illustrate. Students should avoid using hypothetical examples. Students who base their arguments on hypothetical examples that are invariably vague, unconvincing and anecdotal usually produce essays that fail to arrive at clear knowledge conclusions. Students should also avoid using too many examples. Students who approach the essay from a content perspective tend often to make the mistake of filling the essay with large numbers of examples, skipping from one to the other without unpacking the significance of each. This tends to make the essay more descriptive than analytical. FAILURE TO REFER TO WOKS AND AOKS

Students should identify which WOKs and AOKs their essay will focus on in their opening statements. It is crucial that students use the language of TOK appropriately, making explicit reference to the terms “ways of knowing” and “areas of knowledge.” CLAIMS ARE NOT FULLY EXPLORED AND EVALUATED

Strong students often fail to achieve full return for their efforts because they fail to fully develop the claims that they incorporate into their discussion, and fail to justify and evaluate those claims. COUNTERCLAIMS ARE IGNORED

Essays that explore counterclaims are more likely to approach the title as a debate about knowledge and are therefore less likely to make the mistake of treating the essay simply as one-sided statements of the student’s own viewpoint or opinion. FAILURE TO CONSIDER IMPLICATIONS

Many students fail to achieve the highest marks because although they make sound arguments, they fail to consider the implications of their arguments.

DCC PATHWAYS // davidnchung@gmail.com // gatepathways.blogspot.org // jtayloreducation.com

1

HOW DO I/WE KNOW?

WAYS OF KNOWING

AREAS OF KNOWLEDGE

LINKING CONCEPTS

sense perception reason

emotion language

Ethics

intuition imagination

faith memory

Mathematics

Human Sciences

Natural Sciences

Indigenous Knowledge Systems

Religious Knowledge Systems

History

The Arts

certainty

evidence

justification

perspective

limitations

value connections

meaning

verification

experience

belief

bias

explanation

nature

correlation

credibility

authority

causality

absolutism

relativism

subjectivity

validity

reliability

worldview

paradigms

uncertainty

nurture

REAL LIFE SITUATION: SCOPE & METHODOLOGY:

KNOWLEDGE QUESTION/S: KNOWLEDGE CLAIMS:

THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE MAP We know too much to be skeptics and too little to be dogmatists.

Blaise Pascal, 1623-62

VALENCIA HS EXTENDED ESSAY TIMELINE-CLASS OF 2018

dnchung@pylusd.org Created by Doreen Chonko/Palm Harbor University High School, FLORIDA

ACTIVITY COMPLETION DATE

Student subject area choices (1, 2, & 3) April 2017

EE topic due on MB April 2017

EE Research Question April 2017

Plan of Investigation April 2017

Supervisor/student assignments April 2017

Library research: May 2017

First meeting with supervisor May 2017

Library research: Annotated Bibliography June 2017

Final semester meeting with supervisor June 2017

Contract signed by both you and your parent due on MB June 2017

First reflection (RPPF) due on MB Sept 29

Writing process June/July/August

2 paper copies of first draft extended essay submitted to • (one paper copy to) Mr. Chung • (one paper copy to) your supervisor; • Essay uploaded to MB

October 13, 2017

References and Citations (via HL English teachers) October 2017

• Meeting with supervisor to discuss EE o Review Turnitin originality report (To be determined)

November-December7, 2017

• 2nd reflection (RPPF) due on MB December 8-15, 2017

Time for revisions, if needed Winter Vacation, 2017

1 paper copy of revised extended essay submitted to supervisor January 12, 2018

• Viva Voce (supervisor and student); • 3rd reflection (RPPF) due on MB; • supervisor fills out comments

February 2, 2018

• Chung uploads extended essay to the IBO Candidates website • Supervisor uploads the completed RPPF form to IBIS • Supervisor submits predicted grade to Mr. Chung

February 2018