IB Theory of Knowledge (TOK) SL Theory of Knowledge Example

Three specific, real-world objects are clearly chosen and each one contributes a different angle to the same central idea, which gives the exhibition coherence without repetition.

The student's commentary shows strong TOK analysis rather than description: they examine how incentives, trust, and purpose affect what counts as convincing evidence.

The links to the prompt are explicit and well-developed, and the discussion is generally supported by context and clear reasoning.

The student shows nuance and self-awareness by avoiding a simplistic conclusion that evidence is either entirely valid or entirely invalid.

At a few points, the claims are a little too categorical, so the analysis would be even stronger with more precise language about degrees of reliability and interpretation.

The second object’s evidential force is less secure than the others, so it would benefit from a clearer explanation of why that object itself is strong evidence rather than just a plausible personal connection.

Some distinctions could be sharpened, especially useful vs accurate and bias vs total invalidity, to make the argument fully precise throughout.