IB Theory of Knowledge 2.3 Choosing a Prompt: Narrowing 35 to 1 Notes

2.3 Choosing a prompt: narrowing 35 to 1

The prompt is fixed text and cannot be reworded

1. Your selected IA prompt must be reproduced exactly, including its wording and punctuation. Keep the complete question even if one part is harder to connect to your objects.
2. If an object and a prompt do not fit, reconsider the object or choose a different official prompt. You cannot rewrite the question to make the match work.
3. If you modify a prompt but the intended official prompt remains identifiable, the exhibition is assessed against that original prompt. Any loss of relevance caused by the change affects the assessment.
4. If the exhibition is not based on any of the 35 official prompts, the 0 level applies. Check the prompt before developing the commentary.
5. The 35 prompts remain the same across examination sessions under the current course. Unlike essay titles, they are not issued as a new set for each session.
6. Your file needs a title identifying the selected prompt. Copying the complete official wording into the title helps keep the question in view while you draft.

Reading a prompt for what it asks

1. Each prompt is a knowledge question that can be explored through more than one plausible answer. Your objects should help you investigate the question, including the reasons or conditions behind an answer.
2. Read words that set the question's scope. “Some types of knowledge” invites distinctions between types rather than an unsupported claim about all knowledge. Explain which comparison your objects help you make.
3. Then read the verb. “What counts as” invites you to examine standards; “To what extent” invites you to judge how far something holds. A qualified answer may be useful, but you should follow the evidence rather than assume a middle position is required.
4. IA prompt 9 asks “Are some types of knowledge less open to interpretation than others?” Address the comparison it raises. A particular object may help you explore that comparison without being assigned one fixed side of it.
5. The prompt's terms help focus your links. If it asks about reliability, explain what a feature of the object shows about reliability. Being interesting for another reason is not enough to establish that link.
6. A prompt you can restate in your own words without losing anything is one you have understood. Do that restatement on scrap paper before you go object-hunting, and keep the original wording for the file.

Finding concrete objects for different prompts

1. IA prompt 23, “How important are material tools in the production or acquisition of knowledge?”, suggests instruments or devices you could investigate. A particular tool still needs a specific context and an explanation of how it matters to knowledge.
2. IA prompt 29, “Who owns knowledge?”, can be explored through a copyright page, patent, credit, licence or paywall. Identify a particular document or instance, then explain what it shows about ownership rather than assuming its presence settles the question.
3. IA prompt 18, “Are some things unknowable?”, may tempt you into speculation before you have objects. Start by investigating what a particular object can support about a limit to knowledge, and distinguish that limit from something merely unknown at present.
4. Watch for objects added only to decorate a position you have already taken. Ask what each contributes to your exploration of the prompt and which details the discussion depends on.
5. When a particular object comes to mind as you read a prompt, record it. If none does, you can investigate possible objects before deciding; immediate recall is not a test of whether a prompt is suitable.
6. A demanding prompt is not a better prompt. Nothing in the descriptors rewards ambition in the choice of question: what they describe is objects, contexts, links, justification and support.

Testing a shortlist of three against your own life

1. Try shortlisting three prompts and testing each against possible objects. Three is a manageable planning choice, not a required number of candidates.
2. Look for objects that interest you in your DP subjects or life outside the classroom. You can also find an object through research, provided you establish its particular context and can explain its contribution.
3. For this exercise, make one column per prompt and list possible objects with relevant dates, sources or circumstances. Mark details you need to verify rather than inventing them from memory.
4. Compare the columns once you have candidates. A prompt with three supportable, distinct contributions is more promising than one with a single strong object and two whose links you cannot explain.
5. Classmates may use the same prompt, but students in the same TOK class may not use any of the same objects. Check your actual object choices with your teacher rather than avoiding a prompt because it is popular.
6. Basing the exhibition on the core theme or an optional theme is strongly recommended. A theme can narrow your search to a set of questions you have already explored.

The commitment point: when changing prompt costs more than it saves

1. Changing prompt means checking all three objects again, because all three must link to the same question. Some evidence may remain useful, but the links and justifications may need revision.
2. It is often easier to switch before you have drafted the commentaries. Use that early stage to test candidate objects rather than committing on the strength of a prompt's wording alone.
3. Once you have drafted, a change of prompt may require substantial rewriting. Keep material that supports the new question and reconsider explanations aimed at a different issue.
4. Consider switching when you cannot explain a supported link. Phrases such as “in a sense” may conceal a gap, but they can also express a legitimate qualification. Identify which before deciding the object or prompt is wrong.
5. A thin link may be developed through better reasoning or evidence. Give it a fair test before changing prompt, without assuming that a fixed number of extra sentences will solve the problem.
6. Discuss uncertainty about your prompt during planning. Your teacher may advise on one draft but may not edit it, so aim to use that draft for a coherent exhibition and leave time to act on the advice.

Reasons to test your first choice

1. Starting with one object can work. The risk is treating its fit as enough reason to choose the prompt before checking what two further objects can contribute.
2. A grand-sounding prompt can encourage general discussion. Check that your chosen objects give you evidence to explore it, rather than serving as pictures beside an essay about the topic.
3. A familiar classroom prompt can also work. Develop your own explanations from the details of your objects rather than reproducing a class discussion as though it were your analysis.
4. A subject you know well can provide useful objects. Three objects from one laboratory or text are permitted; examine whether they offer particular contributions instead of repeating one point.
5. An easily defined term does not by itself make a prompt suitable. Test what your objects show about the question before giving space to definitions.
6. Review these risks while the objects are provisional. Ask why you chose each candidate and what a different object would add or lose.

An optional twenty-minute shortlisting exercise

1. Minutes one to eight: read the 35 prompts and mark those that bring a particular object to mind. Record other questions that interest you too; you can research objects for them later.
2. Minutes eight to twelve: inspect the objects you recalled. Replace a category such as newspapers with one issue of one paper where possible. Minutes twelve to seventeen: add further candidates and test what each would contribute to its prompt.
3. Minutes seventeen to twenty: choose a provisional prompt with promising candidates and copy its exact official wording into your planning file. Continue researching if you do not yet have three objects you can justify.
4. If two prompts look promising, compare the contributions and evidence you could develop for each. Objects from different places can still repeat a point, while objects from one room can offer different insights.
5. If none has three usable candidates yet, investigate the gaps. A category on your list may lead to a specific member of it with a traceable context.