IB May 2026 (M26) TOK Title #6 Model Response
To what extent is interpretation a reliable tool in the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to history and one other area of knowledge.
- The essay below is written as a teaching draft to illustrate the structure, tone, and depth of analysis expected in a high-scoring Theory of Knowledge essay.
- It includes call-outs after each paragraph that explain why particular choices were made and how they align with the IB assessment criteria.
- In a formal submission, you would need to provide proper references and citations (using MLA, APA, or the referencing style your school/IB requires).
Introduction
Interpretation is everywhere in knowledge production. Historians interpret fragmentary records, scientists interpret experimental data, and even students interpret exam questions. The issue isn’t whether interpretation happens, it’s whether it can be trusted. Reliability implies consistency and trustworthiness, yet interpretation is often associated with subjectivity. My position is that interpretation is reliable to a considerable extent when it functions as a disciplined tool, guided by evidence and method. But when it slips into free invention, projecting meaning without constraints, it becomes unreliable.
Note- The intro immediately defines the key tension: unavoidable interpretation vs. reliability.
- I stake a clear stance (“considerable extent”) and introduce the tool vs. invention distinction that will frame the essay.
History I: Interpretation As A Tool
History cannot be written without interpretation. Sources are incomplete and often contradictory, so historians must reconstruct narratives. For instance, the Partition of India (1947) looks very different when interpreted through British colonial records, Indian oral testimonies, and Pakistani newspapers. A historian’s job is not to pick one but to triangulate across them, weighing reliability, context, and corroboration. The American Historical Association stresses these standards: interpretation is not a free-for-all, but a methodical practice. Here, interpretation is reliable because it is evidence-based and self-correcting within the discipline.
Hint- This paragraph uses a non-Eurocentric case (Partition) that IB students encounter.
- It shows interpretation as necessary but reliable when constrained by method.
History II: Interpretation As Free Invention
But interpretation can also drift into propaganda. Some nationalist textbooks reframe colonial history to glorify their country, omitting inconvenient sources. For example, certain Japanese history textbooks present the Nanjing Massacre as exaggerated, despite evidence from survivors, photographs, and foreign observers. This is not disciplined interpretation but selective storytelling. Reliability collapses here because interpretation has left the framework of evidence. In History, then, interpretation is essential, but its reliability depends on whether it is a tool or an invention.
