The TOK Exhibition is a new assessment in the revised TOK syllabus for first examination in 2022. Since it is a new format, there is quite a bit of confusion on how to do well on it. The best way to learn is to look at what the IB considers to be a 10/10 full mark TOK Exhibition. So let's deconstruct the below perfect scoring exhibition and find out what merits it has to do so well in the eyes of the IB.
Criteria
The key to any assessment is to look at the grading criteria. Straight from the TOK guide, the summary of the criteria includes:
Has three objects with clear real-world context;
The connection between each of the three objects and the prompt chosen is clear;
Each object's place in the exhibition is justified;
Every point you make is directly related to the prompt and explained with evidence from the object.
The Example
So let's take a look at this 10/10 TOK Essay example:
Here is what the IB said about this piece of work:
This is an example of an excellent exhibition. It was awarded a mark of 10/10. The student has clearly identified three specific objects and has effectively linked each one to the selected prompt. There is also a strong justification for the selection of each object. This student has included an introduction to their work. It should be noted that this is not required, but students are free to include a short introduction if they wish to do so. In this case the introduction is helpful as the student clearly identifies their selected prompt and theme, and explains why they have focused particularly on issues around subtext and connotation. The student then makes explicit references to the prompt throughout the response. In their discussion of the third object, the student makes a comparison between the dictionary and the song. It should be noted that there is no requirement that students make connections or comparisons between their objects. They may choose to do so, but it is also perfectly acceptable to discuss each of the three objects entirely individually. The piece of work should be judged holistically using the marking instrument, which means that, for example, the discussion of the dictionary should be rewarded wherever it appears in the response, not just where it appears under the section labelled object two.
Keys to success
After looking at the exhibition, you can see a few properties within this assessment example that clearly connects with the criteria as the IB has pointed out.
Objects and their real world contexts
There is a lot of confusion between students about what constitutes an object, and what it means by the real world context of objects. Almost anything can be objects from tweets to textbooks to songs. However, you must be specific as to where and how this object exists and is used in the real world. In this particular example, the three objects they have chosen are:
Starbucks cup used in 2017 during the holiday season
The author's personal translation dictionary which they use to translate between English and Chinese
The song 'Strange Fruit' by Billie Holliday.
In each case, you will see that they aren't TOO specific as to every single detail of their object, but only the ones relevant to their exhibition. Often, students interpret having to convey a clear real world example as listing irrelevant details like publisher or author or date of publishing, etc. Sometimes, it is simply unnecessary as this real world context means the object's 'place in the world'. If it is clear where the object would be seen, when it would be seen, and how it would be used or interacted with, there is no need to add any additional frivolous details.
For the first object - the Starbucks cup, for example, the student didn't really go into detail about the specific designer, locations or even the season in which this cup was introduced. However, their introduction was already quite clear that this was an object which existed in the world during a particular time (2017) in a particular place (Starbucks) and interacted with in a particular way (to hold a drink obviously, but also to communicate a message).
Similarly, the second object doesn't really go into detail about when and who published the dictionary, et cetera, but the key here is the focus on how the author uses the object (as a translation tool) as that is relevant to the whole knowledge and language theme of the exhibition.
So the guidance for how to introduce the real-world contexts of an object is very clear: you don't need to list anything and everything about the object itself, but only the key details that establishes the object's place in the world. If that still isn't quite clear to you, you can check if you have done the real-world contexts well if your introduction can answer the following questions:
What is the object used for?
How does it exist in the world - physical or digital, personal to you or something you found, how people perceive the object (whether it is how you see it if it is a personal object, or how the wider public sees it)?
As to the issue of researched vs personal objects, there is no clear answer. This example uses two 'researched' objects and one object which has a clear personal connection. In the TOK Guide, the IB recommends that you derive your objects from personal experience, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the object has to belong to you. However, I do recommend having at least one personal object just like the example, which can really demonstrate your 'connection' with the object and your experience with the issue presented in the TOK IA Prompt.
An interesting comment made by the examiners is that the exhibition is viewed as a whole rather than as each individual object's commentary. So you can draw links between each other, or not, and both should be equally rewarded. But the bigger picture here is that you must ensure each object tells a 'unique' story, and contribute equally to the exhibition in revealing a different perspective or a variation on your overall answer to the IA prompt. This is something I have talked about more extensively in my article on structuring your exhibition.
Finally, each object is justified within the exhibition as required by the criteria. You can see that the overall theme of the exhibition is how subtexts and the hidden connotations of language can present challenges to how knowledge is communicated. However, each object tells a slightly unique aspect towards this point. The Starbucks cup focuses on how vague language can promote all sorts of different connotations that may be positive or negative, while the second object - the dictionary, convinces us the challenge of communicating knowledge due to different languages, and finally, the song reveals that these subtexts which are so key to communicating knowledge can often change based on personal experiences and cultural differences that presents yet another challenge to knowledge communication. The result is a cohesive answer to prompt, and yet a nuanced one, as each object is justified by introducing a unique perspective to the prompt.
Discussing the IA Prompt
This particular exhibition closely resembles the structure that I have proposed to use for a good exhibition. As the IB Examiner noted, it is not necessary to have an introduction at the very beginning of your exhibition. In fact, there is no requirement to even seperate the discussion of each object as the whole exhibition is marked together, not as a commentary of each object. However, what I do think is important to take away from this is that it is very important to outline the particular theme you will be focusing on, the prompt that you are using and the angle you will be tackling the prompt from. It is actually not necessary to have a single theme to your exhibition, but I highly recommend that you do as it provides the necessary focus for your exhibition. You can do this through an exhibition, or alternatively, integrate this theme clearly into the rest of your discussion to save a little on the tight word count.
The example does make comparisons between objects, but this is not expected nor is it needed to score good marks. I personally believe that you should use those extra words to elaborate on the discussion of the object instead to boost their relevance to the prompt.
So how is the discussion done? You can see that it is in very simple language. Unlike the TOK Essay, this is a less 'academic' piece of work. It is meant to be more like a personal reflection on the manifestations of TOK in your life which you have noticed. So the ideal tone for the task would be one that is formal, yet personal rather than academic. I encourage you to use first person for the exhibition as it really drives home this idea that this is a non-academic piece of writing. At the same time though, there are still standards of academic integrity, so anything that you got from the internet must still be cited and referenced.
You can see that the example doesn't waste any words going around the prompt but tackles it head on - pointing out the immediate challenges with communicating knowledge in each of the three objects. The Starbucks cup for example centres around the many different interpretations of subtexts, and their effects on different communities. If you are having trouble finding things to say for your object, I recommend that you focus on the different communities of knowers that may interact with your object and how their interactions differ. I also urge you to read the TOK Guide in depth, particularly on the various themes as it already prompts several questions and discussion points for you to use within the exhibition. The language they use is also exactly the type of terms they expect from your exhibition. Treat the TOK Guide as the TOK Bible and never deviate from it!
One final thing: word count is truly very constrained in this task. You must be concise, and every sentence you use must be clear, reflective and actually useful. There is no room for fluff or rambling (unlike the TOK Essay). So this means that for many, there won't be enough words within the 950 word requirement for an introduction or conclusion, or another idea that you wish to discuss. When it comes to prioritising your ideas, you should place utmost importance on your object's discussion as it contributes to most of the criteria, and then all the accessories like introductions and conclusions.
Conclusion
Hopefully, by deconstructing a 10/10 example of a TOK Exhibition, you had a few takeaways as to what makes a good exhibition and know what you need to do to improve! Any questions, chuck it in the comments!
Comentários