IB Theory of Knowledge 2.4 Objects That Work: Specific Real-world Context Notes

2.4 Objects that work: specific real-world context

What 'specific real-world context' rules in and rules out

1. Specific real-world context identifies a particular object and the circumstances relevant to your discussion. The object can exist in a physical location or a virtual space; the reader need not be able to visit it.
2. Your objects must be particular things with specific real-world contexts. Identify enough about their time, place, source or use to distinguish them from generic examples.
3. Consider the tap outside your chemistry corridor, the copy of a novel issued to your class at the start of a term or the notice pinned to one door of one building. Explain the circumstances that matter to the link you make.
4. A currency, phone model, school uniform or language named in general leaves the object unspecified. A particular banknote, device, garment or document may give you a context you can investigate.
5. Context is a claim, which is why it can be checked. Calling an object something from your childhood states nothing a reader could test; identifying it as the reading book your primary school issued, in the class and the year you were issued it, does.
6. Precision on exactly this is what the described levels track. In the Excellent band, 9–10, the exhibition “clearly identifies three objects and their specific real-world contexts”; in the Satisfactory band, 5–6, those contexts “may be vaguely or imprecisely stated”.

A particular object, not a type of object

1. Naming a type of object leaves the particular instance unspecified. A basketball is a type of thing; the basketball used in your physical education lessons gives you a particular object whose use and setting you can describe.
2. An ordinary object can work: a refillable water bottle supplied to a student through a school's sustainability initiative, for example. Its context gives you a particular decision or use to investigate.
3. The object does not need to be rare or famous. You need enough information to identify it and explain why its details matter to the selected prompt.
4. If your draft names a type, look for a particular instance whose context you can establish. It may be something you own, something you have encountered or something you investigate through sources.
5. A particular object can be famous. Pablo Picasso's Guernica has an identifiable history and context that you can research. You can use an image of the painting without owning it or having seen it in person.
6. If the same commentary would fit any member of a category, check what the particular object contributes. The link may need details from its context rather than a different photograph alone.

Objects you own, objects you can photograph, objects you can only cite

1. You can use objects you own, objects you can photograph where they stand and objects you know through somebody else's image. In each case, establish the object's context and reference the image you use.
2. For an object you own, begin with what you know about its use and history. State the relevant details for the reader and verify any claims that go beyond your own experience.
3. An image can represent an object that you cannot bring to school, such as a historical treaty. Identify the particular treaty and the source of the image.
4. If you use someone else's photograph, reference its source. The image reference helps identify where the picture came from; your commentary still needs to establish the object's relevant context.
5. An object you made can be used if it already exists independently of this exhibition. Identify and acknowledge it as your own work so its origin is clear.
6. Objects must already exist independently of being created specifically for the exhibition. A diagram made only to illustrate your prompt would not qualify. You may take a new photograph of an existing object; you do not have to have encountered it before learning about the task.

Digital objects and where their context lives

1. Digital objects are permitted, including a particular post by a political leader. Identify the post and its context with the same care you would give a physical object.
2. A digital object can have a specific virtual location, publication date and history of use. Include the details that establish which object you are discussing and support your link to the prompt.
3. For a post, identify the account, date and relevant setting. For a page, identify the site and version. Claims about who saw it or how they reacted need evidence beyond its being online.
4. Be clear about what your chosen object is. A screenshot may represent a post, in which case identify and reference the post, or it may itself be the digital record you are analysing. Establish the context of the thing your argument depends on.
5. Digital objects fail the same way physical ones do, by being types. A meme format is a type; one posting of it, from one account, on one day, with the replies it drew, is an object.
6. A particular news article from BuzzFeed can be an object. Record the title, author if available, date and source, then explain the feature or use that connects it to the prompt.

Why generic objects weaken an explanation

1. A sentence about how technology shapes knowledge may be readable but still leave the link unexplained. Identify the feature of this object that supports the claim.
2. A claim about a whole category can overlook differences among its members. Use the particular object's details to explain its contribution instead of assuming that every object of its type works the same way.
3. In the Rudimentary band, 1–2, the instrument describes images that “may be highly generic images of types of object rather than of specific real-world objects”. That description is of the object, not of the prose around it.
4. Fluent writing can make an unsupported generalisation easy to overlook. During revision, check whether the paragraph identifies a particular thing and uses evidence about it.
5. If you have only a category, find a specific instance and establish its context. Then check the argument again: the evidence may require you to qualify or change what you first wanted to claim.

Giving each of the three objects a contribution

1. Each object needs a justified contribution to the exhibition. The objects can support a shared line of inquiry while showing different aspects, conditions or consequences of the prompt.
2. Three objects from one subject, month or room may work. Check what each contributes instead of using their shared source as a reason to reject them or their different appearances as proof of variety.
3. Objects may complicate or challenge one another, but they do not have to disagree. The question is whether the second adds something you can explain rather than repeating the first object's justification.
4. The descriptors locate that collapse in the justifications. In the Basic band, 3–4, there “may be significant repetition across the justifications of the different objects”, so a reader meets the repetition in your reasons before your images.
5. Different kinds of object may suggest different questions: a document records something differently from a tool or a photograph. Variety is useful only when you explain how it contributes to the selected prompt.
6. If two objects appear to do the same work, investigate whether a neglected feature supports a different contribution. If it does not, consider another object rather than inventing a role for the one you have.

An object audit you can run alone

1. For each object, ask which particular thing it is, what context you can establish, how you know those details and which ones your argument uses. Write down gaps you need to research.
2. State relevant details of place and time precisely enough that a reader can identify the object and understand the setting. Do not invent an exact date where the available evidence gives only an approximate one.
3. An object does not become generic because another person could describe it too. What matters is whether your description identifies the particular thing and connects its context to the discussion.
4. Compare the three contexts and contributions. A shared place, date or source is allowed; repeated justifications are the concern. Check whether each object adds something supported by its details.
5. If the audit reveals missing information, research it before committing to a full commentary. If you cannot establish an object's context or contribution, reconsider the choice while there is time.