The TOK essay is an opportunity for students to engage in a formal, sustained piece of writing in response to a prescribed title focused on the areas of knowledge. The assessment of this task is underpinned by the following single driving question.
Does the student provide a clear, coherent and critical exploration of the essay title?
The TOK essay is marked using a global impression marking approach. This means that the assessment of the essay is envisaged as a process of holistic or global judgment rather than an analytical process of totalling the assessment of separate criteria.
The assessment instruments present five described levels of performance. These levels are to be seen as global and holistic descriptors rather than as a checklist of necessary characteristics. When marking, the aim is to find the descriptor that conveys most accurately the level attained by the student. It is not necessary for every single aspect of a level descriptor to be met for a mark in that level to be awarded.
When using the TOK assessment instrument, it is to be understood that:
the described levels are not a checklist; it is the overall impression that is most important
only whole numbers will be recorded; partial marks are not acceptable
the highest level of the instrument does not imply faultless performance
Excellent (9-10)
The discussion has a sustained focus on the title and is linked effectively to areas of knowledge.
Arguments are clear, coherent and effectively supported by specific examples. The implications of arguments are considered.
There is clear awareness and evaluation of different points of view.
Possible characteristics: Insightful, Convincing, Accomplished, and Lucid.
Good (7-8)
The discussion is focused on the title and is linked effectively to areas of knowledge.
Arguments are clear, coherent and supported by examples.
There is awareness and some evaluation of different points of view.
Possible characteristics: Pertinent, Relevant, Analytical, and Organized.
Satisfactory (5-6)
The discussion is focused on the title and is developed with some links to areas of knowledge.
Arguments are offered and are supported by examples.
There is some awareness of different points of view.
Possible characteristics: Acceptable, Mainstream, Adequate, and Competent.
Basic (3-4)
The discussion is connected to the title and makes superficial or limited links to areas of knowledge.
The discussion is largely descriptive.
Limited arguments are offered but they are unclear and are not supported by effective examples.
Possible characteristics: Underdeveloped, Basic, Superficial, and Limited.
Rudimentary (1-2)
The discussion is weakly connected to the title.
While there may be links to the areas of knowledge, any relevant points are descriptive or consist only of unsupported assertions.
Possible characteristics: Ineffective, Descriptive, Incoherent, and Formless.
Note: A score of 0 (zero) will be given if the discussion does not reach the standard described by the other levels or is not a response to one of the prescribed titles for the correct examination session.