|
Essay P - Level 5: Excellent (9) | ||
This is a mature, discerning treatment of the title. The candidate focuses on areas of knowledge, as the question demands, and starts with a measured evaluation of the extent to which words might have agency in what we know.
A range of examples is deployed – most of which are effective in supporting points made about how vocabulary does influence what we do know and our perspective in relation to it. The candidate does not directly consider whether words can expressly prevent us from knowing things, but prefers to take a more nuanced view as to “what we can know” might mean.
The section on mathematics is arguably weaker than that on history, but, in the end, the candidate finds space to reflect on the relative importance of the question in different areas, and what a workable meaning might be.
A range of examples is deployed – most of which are effective in supporting points made about how vocabulary does influence what we do know and our perspective in relation to it. The candidate does not directly consider whether words can expressly prevent us from knowing things, but prefers to take a more nuanced view as to “what we can know” might mean.
The section on mathematics is arguably weaker than that on history, but, in the end, the candidate finds space to reflect on the relative importance of the question in different areas, and what a workable meaning might be.
|
Essay B - Level 3: Satisfactory (6) | ||
There is a demonstrable focus on knowledge questions in this essay to do with the connection between doubt and curiosity, the possibility that doubt might impede knowledge, the necessity for doubt in science due to the nature of its subject matter, etc.
Links are made to history, science and religion, and the essay shows some coherent development in revisiting these areas of knowledge.
Some arguments are well supported by examples, such as the treatment of the American Revolution as a situation in which knowers need to cope with bias. The attempt of using religion as a counter claim is not as effective, though.
The essay amply displays the features of a level 3 performance, because it is adequate and focused. However, since examples were clear, but not fully evaluated and counter claims were just mentioned, and not explored, the highest mark that could be awarded was 6.
Links are made to history, science and religion, and the essay shows some coherent development in revisiting these areas of knowledge.
Some arguments are well supported by examples, such as the treatment of the American Revolution as a situation in which knowers need to cope with bias. The attempt of using religion as a counter claim is not as effective, though.
The essay amply displays the features of a level 3 performance, because it is adequate and focused. However, since examples were clear, but not fully evaluated and counter claims were just mentioned, and not explored, the highest mark that could be awarded was 6.
|
Essay C—Level 4: Very good (7)
| ||
There is a consistent focus on knowledge questions concerned with the relationship between doubt and knowledge as the prescribed title asks.
The essay is well organized with paragraphs devoted to claims and counterclaims with respect to whether doubt has a role in knowledge acquisition, and, if so, whether that role is positive or negative.
The arguments are clear, supported by good examples, and some effective links to the history and arts. Regarding personal examples (doubt about the origin of life, the origin of the Swedish wooden plate), some were more effective than others. Also the use of psychology to counter claim that doubt is the origin of knowledge was pertinent and coherent.
It is a thoughtful and intelligent piece of work, clearly showing the candidate’s engagement with the knowledge questions.
This essay displays the characteristic typical of level 4, however, since some of the examples, in spite of being pertinent and coherent, were not original and thoroughly evaluated, the mark awarded was 7.
The essay is well organized with paragraphs devoted to claims and counterclaims with respect to whether doubt has a role in knowledge acquisition, and, if so, whether that role is positive or negative.
The arguments are clear, supported by good examples, and some effective links to the history and arts. Regarding personal examples (doubt about the origin of life, the origin of the Swedish wooden plate), some were more effective than others. Also the use of psychology to counter claim that doubt is the origin of knowledge was pertinent and coherent.
It is a thoughtful and intelligent piece of work, clearly showing the candidate’s engagement with the knowledge questions.
This essay displays the characteristic typical of level 4, however, since some of the examples, in spite of being pertinent and coherent, were not original and thoroughly evaluated, the mark awarded was 7.
|
Essay D—Level 5: Excellent (9) | ||
There is a sustained focus on knowledge questions confirming and contradicting that “doubt is the key to knowledge”, as the prescribed title demands. A clear approach using different perspectives shown in real-life examples related to different areas of knowledge can be easily identified.
The first examples, regarding mathematics move from a personal example on how the student visualizes her own learning in class to a more sophisticated topic like the way conjectures are dealt with, emphasizing effective links to ways of knowing, especially reason.
Then there is an insightful investigation about religion, viewing it from different perspectives, focusing on Christianity, Islam and a way of proving that God exists, showing how doubting in that context might be a key to knowledge and how not.
Arguments are carefully and clearly developed. Every assertion is effectively evaluated giving a proper place to authority, experience, the search of truth, among other relevant TOK issues. The student definitely acknowledges the implications drawn in each of the examples.
It is worth pointing out that in spite of the effective and well-supported examples, the fact that they were not fully evaluated resulted in a mark of 9 being awarded instead of the highest possible mark of 10.
The first examples, regarding mathematics move from a personal example on how the student visualizes her own learning in class to a more sophisticated topic like the way conjectures are dealt with, emphasizing effective links to ways of knowing, especially reason.
Then there is an insightful investigation about religion, viewing it from different perspectives, focusing on Christianity, Islam and a way of proving that God exists, showing how doubting in that context might be a key to knowledge and how not.
Arguments are carefully and clearly developed. Every assertion is effectively evaluated giving a proper place to authority, experience, the search of truth, among other relevant TOK issues. The student definitely acknowledges the implications drawn in each of the examples.
It is worth pointing out that in spite of the effective and well-supported examples, the fact that they were not fully evaluated resulted in a mark of 9 being awarded instead of the highest possible mark of 10.
