IB Theory of Knowledge (TOK) Essay Grader

1. Lots of students struggle to decode their Theory of Knowledge Essay grade and assessment.
2. This is a free grading tool that breaks down the IB TOK Essay rubric into plain English, so you understand exactly where your 1,600-word philosophical essay stands based on the single holistic assessment.
3. The embedded grader makes self-evaluation faster and more accurate than manual rubric checking, so you're never left guessing.

Quick Start Checklist

1. Before using the grader, ensure you understand these key elements ready:
   1. Prescribed Title - Clear selection of one prescribed title from the official IB list
   2. Title Connection - Sustained focus on the prescribed title with effective links to areas of knowledge
   3. Real-Life Examples - Specific, detailed examples that support arguments effectively
   4. Knowledge Claims - Clear, coherent arguments with proper justification
   5. Multiple Perspectives - Awareness and evaluation of different points of view
   6. Word Count Management - 1,600 words maximum with proper structure
   7. Complete Development - Sustained exploration of the essay title throughout
   8. Critical Thinking - Clear, coherent, and critical exploration of knowledge questions

Rubric Breakdown

The single assessment question is: Does the student provide a clear, coherent and critical exploration of the essay title?

1. This single driving question underpins the entire assessment of your TOK Essay.
2. The assessment uses five performance levels as holistic descriptors rather than separate criteria.

How to Interpret Your Grade from the Tool

1. The embedded grader calculates your total score out of 10 marks based on the single holistic assessment.
2. Here's how to interpret your results:
   1. 9-10 marks (Excellent): Outstanding work with sophisticated philosophical exploration. Sustained focus and insightful analysis.
   2. 7-8 marks (Good): Strong essay with clear TOK understanding. Focused discussion with effective examples.
   3. 5-6 marks (Satisfactory): Competent work meeting basic requirements. Some development needed for deeper analysis.
   4. 3-4 marks (Basic): Limited exploration with superficial connections. Significant improvement needed in focus and argumentation.
   5. 1-2 marks (Rudimentary): Weak connection to title with minimal TOK understanding. Major revision required.
   6. 0 marks: Does not meet basic standards or not responding to prescribed title.

Subject-Specific Tips

Natural Sciences Focus

1. Investigate scientific method, peer review, paradigm shifts, empirical evidence, or scientific consensus.
2. Include specific experiments, scientific controversies, replication issues, and theory development.

History Focus

1. Examine historical evidence, source reliability, perspective bias, historiography, or collective memory.
2. Use primary sources, historian disagreements, cultural interpretation, and temporal distance.

Human Sciences Focus

1. Study research methods, cultural bias, prediction limitations, ethical considerations, or interdisciplinary approaches.
2. Include psychological studies, social research, statistical interpretation, and cultural variations.

Arts Focus

1. Analyze aesthetic judgment, cultural interpretation, artistic truth, creative expression, or subjective experience.
2. Use specific artworks, cultural context, artistic movements, and personal response.

Mathematics Focus

1. Investigate mathematical certainty, proof validity, axiom systems, mathematical discovery, or cultural mathematics.
2. Include mathematical examples, proof methods, historical development, and cross-cultural approaches.

Ethics Focus

1. Examine moral knowledge, ethical reasoning, cultural relativism, universal principles, or moral intuition.
2. Use ethical dilemmas, cultural practices, philosophical frameworks, and practical applications.

Critical Exploration Framework

1. Title Engagement: Consistent focus → Deep analysis → Multiple angles → Sustained development → Clear connections
2. Argumentation Quality: Clear claims → Supporting evidence → Specific examples → Counter-arguments → Evaluation
3. Perspective Awareness: Multiple viewpoints → Cultural differences → Disciplinary approaches → Alternative interpretations → Balanced assessment

FAQs

1. How do I choose a prescribed title?
   1. Select title that genuinely interests you and allows for sustained philosophical exploration.
2. What does 'sustained focus' mean?
   1. Consistent engagement with prescribed title throughout entire essay rather than brief mentions.
3. How many examples should I include?
   1. Quality over quantity - 2-4 detailed examples that directly support your exploration.
4. Should examples be personal?
   1. Personal examples are valuable if they illustrate philosophical points and support arguments.
5. What are 'areas of knowledge'?
   1. Natural sciences, history, human sciences, arts, mathematics, ethics - academic disciplines.
6. How do I show 'different points of view'?
   1. Present multiple perspectives fairly, evaluate strengths/weaknesses, consider alternatives.
7. What makes arguments 'coherent'?
   1. Logical connections between ideas, clear reasoning, consistent development of themes.
8. How specific should examples be?
   1. Detailed enough to support arguments effectively while maintaining focus on philosophical exploration.
9. Should I take a definitive position?
   1. Nuanced exploration acknowledging complexity often stronger than absolute claims.
10. What makes a TOK Essay excellent?
    1. Sustained title focus, sophisticated reasoning, effective examples, multiple perspectives, and critical evaluation.

Use the Free TOK Essay Grader Now

1. Stop guessing about your grade.
2. The comprehensive grading tool evaluates your essay against the official holistic assessment, giving instant feedback on strengths and improvement areas.
3. Input your essay details and get a preliminary grade calculation that helps you focus revision efforts where they matter most.
4. TOK-specific analysis helps you master the sustained exploration and critical thinking that separate excellent from average Theory of Knowledge Essays.