The Tok Exhibition

Explained
 The exhibition clearly identifies three objects and their specific real-world contexts. Links between each of the three objects and the selected IA prompt are
clearly made and well explained. There is strong justification of the particular contribution that each individual object makes to the exhibition. All, or nearly all, of
the points are well supported by appropriate evidence and explicit references to the selected IA prompt.

• Objects serve to show how TOK is manifested in the world and the candidate • The prompt is one of the 35 knowledge questions listed in the guide.
will aim to explain how their selected objects are interesting in light of their The guide states that the prompt should be used as the title of the
chosen prompt. Objects are something tangible in the real world and can be exhibition and that candidates should not change the wording at all. If
physical (including people or animals) or digital. The IB takes quite an open
they do and it is evident which prompt they selected, they should be
view about what is an object and examiners should avoid making judgements
marked as if the candidate were responding to the original unchanged
about the appropriateness of the objects themselves. The assessment
instrument guides examiners’ response to vague or generic objects or to prompt. If they write their own question, a mark of 0 is to be given as
objects used to represent an idea symbolically. Candidates will find it difficult is made clear in the assessment instrument.
to place such objects in a real-world context, thus greatly limiting the success • Explained – links are well explained when it is possible to see how
of their exhibition. an object illuminates an aspect of the prompt.
• Real-world contexts – the real-world context is the time and place where the
• Justification refers to the explanation given regarding how the object
object exists and could refer to where and when the candidate first saw or held
and the prompt are connected and what it is about the object that
the object or where it is to be found and, if pertinent, its moment in time.
Contextualizing includes what matters (according to the candidate’s makes one think about the prompt.
interpretation) for the reader to be able to situate the object. • Evidence is required and refers to how the points are supported.
• Links demonstrate how the objects help us explore the prompt. The link Evidence can be of different types such as the candidate’s own
between the object and the prompt illustrates how TOK manifests in the experience (their studies or other personal experience), clearly
world. These links could be seen in multiple forms including viewpoints, constructed arguments or outside sources.
perspectives, and personal positions.
General Tips
• The central theme, optional themes and areas of knowledge (AOKs): The guide recommends that candidates base their exhibitions on one of
the themes because the themes lend themselves to a focused exploration of the world. However, it is a recommendation only. Examiners must
not look for a theme in the commentaries and should note that there is no mention of the themes in the assessment instrument. Therefore,
examiners must not penalize candidates for not including a theme or for not doing so consistently across the objects. Ultimately, the
consideration of how a theme structures the exhibition is important for teachers when advising candidates but plays no part in the assessment of
the exhibition commentary. It is also important for examiners to note that no mention is made of areas of knowledge and there is no expectation
for any to be discussed; their appearance or non-appearance in the exhibition is not assessed.
• Introductions and conclusions: Examiners may find that candidates include an introduction and/or a conclusion in their commentaries but
neither is required. The candidate must decide whether or not an introduction is desirable for their exhibition commentary but on its own it will
not change the mark awarded. Providing a conclusion suggests a task where there is an answer but, in the exhibition commentary, candidates
are required to discuss the links between their chosen objects and the prompt, not to answer the prompt. What they need to do is to say how
each object helps us think about the prompt, showing how that particular object is interesting for the exhibition and effective in exploring the
driving question. The exhibition is different from the essay, which asks candidates to answer the prescribed title. Hence there is the possibility
that including a conclusion shows a misunderstanding of the task, although on its own its inclusion is unlikely to change the overall mark.
• Word count: The maximum total number of words permitted is 950 and examiners are instructed to stop reading after 950 words. The title,
labels on the images, references and footnotes are not included in the word count.
FAQ
• What if the three objects are very similar? 
• The important feature here is what it is about each specific object which manifests TOK in the world, rather than whether or not the objects are similar. In that sense, more than the object
itself, the driving question asks about aspects of the object which make the link to the prompt interesting. Similarity on its own is neither a requirement for success nor a reason for failure.

• What if the candidate has written about the three objects in one continuous 950-word piece of writing rather than in three separate commentaries? 
• Examiners must assess what is said about each object and the prompt as if the writing were in three distinct sections. It should be possible to discern where one commentary ends and the
next begins.

• What if there is no referencing? 

• Candidates are required to reference sources they have used as indicated in the guide. However, examiners must not penalize candidates for not doing so. Examiners must moderate the
sample as normal and if there are any concerns about academic integrity, it should be raised as an exception.

• What if the quality of writing is poor? 

• Grammar and syntax are not mentioned in the assessment instrument and only matter when it is not possible to understand what the candidate is trying to express (so the expression is
self-penalizing). It is the content that is being assessed, not the quality of writing. Many of the candidates are writing in a language that is not their first language.

• What if two commentaries are good and the third one is weak? 
• It is possible that the quality of the commentaries for each object might not be of similar standard. Examiners must remember that the mark is awarded for the entire exhibition, the three
commentaries combined, so examiners will need to exercise judgment regarding which level is most representative of the commentary as a whole using the best-fit principle.

• What if the images are blurred? 

• The quality of the images is not part of the assessment instrument and only matters if it is not possible to ascertain what the object is. In that case, examiners should raise an exception.
ToK Exhibition
Sample
Prompt: On what basis should differing points of view
be judged?
The object is a Huffington Post entertainment
article that is critical of ethical decision- Object 1
making that led to ten tragic deaths from
“compression asphyxia” at the recent
Astroworld concert performance by Travis
Scott.

Real-World Context

Wanshel, E. (2021, November 9). Videos of Adele, Dave

Grohl stopping shows to help fans go viral after
astroworld tragedy. HuffPost.
The article presents many different perspectives of how other
musical artists deal with potentially harmful situations that their
fans can find themselves in during their crowded concert
productions. This stands in contrast with how Travis Scott
chose to continue with his performance. The artists mentioned
in the article tend to stop performing immediately after noticing
a problem to make sure that the audience members are okay.
Therefore, this object demonstrates that not all artists take such
ethical responsibility upon themselves when they know that
their audience members are in distress and may need assistance
since it juxtaposes the deadly consequences of Astroworld with
the better decisions of other well-known artists. Since the article
is a conglomeration of many social media users’ uploads of their
concert experiences that contrast with the ethical decision of
Travis Scott, we can consider the different perspectives to be
their collective judgment of how his decision was the wrong
one. Clearly, this object demonstrates that different points of
view can be judged by the amount of real-world harm that ethical
decision-making directly leads to.

Link to the Prompt

Justification for Inclusion

While pondering the object I wonder the extent to which it is

possible to judge at what point a law is being broken versus
innocent artistic production happening.

The object forces us to consider the scope of the arts in terms of

how artists intend to push boundaries of acceptability while
expressing themselves—and urging the audience to do the same.

Relatedly, the object makes me consider how far and in what ways
reason (and laws and norms of social acceptability) in the arts
must triumph over the expression of emotion.