= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
My school doesn't offer IB, but there's an ToK equivalent under our CIE (Cambridge International Examinations) course called Thinking Skills. It's a bit more focused than ToK - it doesn't try to teach students how to think, but instead focuses more on specific thinking techniques. For example, there's an emphasis on deconstructing arguments, analysing essays, and identifying logical reasoning. While that's not quite as useful as what well-applied ToK sounds like, it's probably a bit more realistic in terms of ability to convey information to pupils - it's still very much an assessed subject. There's also a multichoice problem-solving section, although I'm not sure to what extent this can be taught - it seems to measure inherent logical skills and IQ as much as anything else.
The Role of ToK is NOT to "try to teach students how to think".
Deciding where to focus the blame doesn't solve problems or explain their origin (it could do so incidentally, but that's not blame-assignment's primary concern).
Sure. But without identification of where the problem lies how can we even begin to address the issue?
It appears that students are coming out of the Diploma programme without a basic understanding of what ToK is, let alone a good grounding in it. The IBO could not be any clearer on what ToK is, what the aims and objectives are and how it should be approached.
As an IB teacher (of 15 years) and examiner I can confidently say that the problems identified in this thread have two points of origin: 1) Schools don't care about the implementation of ToK in relation to the major subject areas and 2)in general teachers don't know (and don't care to find out) how to teach it.
Theory of Knowledge can (and should be) great. The fact that many schools force apathetic teachers to "teach" it is where the problem lies.
It's where you place the blame.
The IBO is very clear about what ToK should be. The blame lies at the feet of institutions who don't value ToK and treat it as a barely acknowledged addition to the diploma.
Theory of Knowledge can (and should be) great. The fact that many schools force apathetic teachers to "teach" it is where the problem lies. All IB teachers are REQUIRED to integrate ToK into their subjects and almost none do. Most IB teachers do not have the first clue what ToK is and they are not motivated to find out.
I have noticed that few commenters here seem to be aware of the actual aims and objectives of the course (based on their comments here). Perhaps reading page 5 of the ToK guide would be pertinent for those who think ToK is "pointless" or for those who thought that "ToK sucks".
ToK is NOT about "solving problems" - it is to encourage thinking critically about knowledge, expressing ones own views, sharing ideas and developing ideas about "knowledge as a human construction".
That is all.
EDIT: What's the deal with downvotes? As a new member of the community what's the protocol?
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
This sounds really easy to fix. Most instructors are used to having a curriculum handed to them in textbook form. A list of good articles (whether from Less Wrong or elsewhere) would fill that role. Read a post as homework, discuss in class, repeat. Throw in an occasional writing assignment for writing practice and grading. This would be dramatically more valuable than most high school classes, and easy to run.
"Most instructors are used to having a curriculum handed to them in textbook form." What evidence do you have to back up this assertion? This is most definitely not my (or my colleagues) experience over the last 15 years.
Limiting a ToK class to one source would be utterly disastrous and totally against the entire aims of the programme.