SUGGESTIONS: Things I Must Do To Ace My ToK Essay And Avoid More Work
These are the details of the numbered mistakes as appear on your essay. All of them are critically important for your essay’s success.
1. Everything must relate to the essay topic.
Everything means no nebulous tangents that you think tells me how much you know.
No long stories or extended telling what the xyxy theory is (the way you use your ideas will explain if you know what it is).
2. The essay must be about the ‘Knowledge Issues
It must be central to how you answer the question.
Ask yourself:What problems will I encounter when trying to answer this question?
You need to use the statement 'Knowledge Issues’ at least four times in the essay.
Knowledge issues =
a. Difficulties finding, verifying, justifying information,
b. Limitations of how much we can know across different areas,
c. Biases in approach to knowledge,
d. Possible uncertainty/ incommensurability, implications.
3. Examples and ideas must link across different areas and ways .
Try not to make specific reference to the areas of knowledge or ways of knowing as a way to categorize your response. Work it more seamlessly into your writing.
Your examples should be interesting / original and exactly support the point you are making.
Don’t have examples which overgeneralize.
4. Counterclaims must be examined.
This is the biggest loss of marks every year. You must use the word “counterclaims” at least three times in the essay.
It is worth 25% of the essay and few do it first time around.
Counterclaims means that each major point you make must itself be examined.
Find an example of where the point you just made may be weak or limited.
You must do this for each major point you make. See number 11. below.
5. No citation of ToK notes allowed.
Use the original source in footnotes and Works Cited.
Then put the website URL as the location (date when referenced)
6. Do not use dictionary definitions. Do not cite the dictionary. Do not use Wikipedia!!
7. Everything you say must be supported by an example. Two of these examples MUST be personal in nature, but not hypothetical or made up. Maybe make it an example which links across ways or areas of knowing….
8. Proof required from a citation. Use a footnote and put all sources in a Works Cited.
Four or five different sources would be good. Do not cite a single source more than twice.
Use good sources.
9. This example is overused and boring. Find a better example. See #3 above.
10. Factual inaccuracy or Overgeneralization.
Use words like 'suggest’ or 'seems to prove’ rather than 'proved’ or 'all’ or 'none.’
This is a sample of our (approximately) 6 page long Tok Essay 2014 Grade A Level 7 Student notes, which we sell as part of the TOK Outlines collection, a A package written at International School Of DüSseldorf in 2014 that contains (approximately) 21 pages of notes across 5 different documents.
Tok Essay 2014 Grade A Level 7 Student Revision
The following is a plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our TOK Outlines. This text version has had its formatting removed so pay attention to its contents alone rather than its presentation. The version you download will have its original formatting intact and so will be much prettier to look at.
"That which is accepted as knowledge today is sometimes discarded tomorrow." Consider knowledge issues raised by this statement in two areas of knowledge.
To what extent can knowledge progress over time and does the nature of knowledge influence its progression? For instance, across Areas of Knowledge (AOKs) like the natural sciences and the ethics knowledge may progress differently. This is partially because in each of these AOKs the definition of knowledge slightly differs. The quote by using the word "sometimes" takes into account different possibilities, yet implies that knowledge is not always discarded. To explore whether knowledge accepted today is discarded tomorrow it is important to specify what "knowledge" means in the context of specific AOKs. In the natural sciences "scientific knowledge" may be defined as information that has been found to be valid through empirical evidence and rational deduction and has not yet been disproven. The nature of knowledge may be described by its establishment: It is established through various ways of knowing (WOK). First the scientist uses sense perception to observe his natural surroundings, then using creativity and imagination he could question how a specific natural phenomenon occurs. The natural scientist then aims to find an answer to the question through inductive and deductive logical reasoning, by setting up a hypothesis and finding supporting evidence. Other natural scientists may then come to know those findings through language and replicate them to strengthen prior knowledge or research may result in opposing evidence, potentially leading to the replacement of the old theory with a new one. Thus, the nature of the natural sciences influences its progression. Knowledge in the natural sciences aims to discover permanently valid objective laws of nature. Yet, can a theory be permanently valid? For instance humankind has learned long ago how to make fire and this knowledge has remained permanently valid. However, we have used this knowledge to develop new inventions like fuel, factories, or the Bunsen burner that we use in biology class. Thus, the natural sciences aim to make valid discoveries but since research is ongoing knowledge in the natural sciences changes over time instead of being "discarded".
It is the provisional nature of scientific knowledge that sets up the basis for the way that it progresses: previous knowledge is questioned and shaped, rather than "discarded", to form new scientific knowledge. The latest findings of natural sciences are then regarded as scientific knowledge accepted today while the older findings are one step in the process of acquiring this knowledge. For example in my science class I learned about Leucippus and Democritus, 5th century BC (Timeline of the Atomic Bomb), who were the first to develop theories on atomism, forming the foundations for knowledge developed by Newton in the 17th century and following various scientists that again developed this knowledge further (History of the Atomic Bomb). In such cases, knowledge may still be accepted as being valid, yet is perceived as limited since more extensive knowledge has been built upon it. However, this is assuming that scientists knew about the previous scientists' work. It may have been unlikely such knowledge existed when we consider scientific research in a time before communication between scientists around the world was possible. Oftentimes the buildup of knowledge is possible by enhancing WOK, as with the stethoscope that enhances auditory sense perception. From the above it can be seen that in the natural sciences knowledge accepted "today" is modified rather than discarded - even if a previous scientist found knowledge that could be falsified, it may have led later scientists closer towards a valid model. In contrast, it could be claimed that a paradigm shift, where a former valid theory was totally abandoned and replaced by a different theory, shows that knowledge in the natural sciences can be discarded. An example of an old theory being replaced by another, since contrary evidence was found, can be taken from my IB biology class where we learn about Mendel's law of independent assortment that widely changed the understanding of genetics. He proposed that alleles of genes located on different chromosomes assort independently from one another, creating genetic variety. Before Mendel, people often believed that the characteristics of parents were equally blended in the offspring. However, the paradigm shift may require some time to be accepted by the general public, as this depends on factors like perspectives, culture and beliefs of people, as well as pre-existing assumptions that had
****************************End Of Sample*****************************
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our TOK Outlines.