FAQs

General

What are the main differences between the Exhibition Game and the Internal Assessment (IA) itself?

The three most important differences are:

The IA task is an individual task, but in the Exhibition Game, students work together in teams.

The Objects chosen for the IA should be Objects with authentic real-world contexts that exist in a time and place (physical or digital). The “real-world context” in the Exhibition Game is hypothetical.

The IA is assessed according to the TOK Exhibition Assessment Instrument, using global impression marking, out of 10 points. The Exhibition Game is scored according to a Scorecard which identifies three aspects worth 10 points each, with a possible total score of 30 points.

How can The Exhibition Game be used to help students create strong links between the Prompt and the Object?

By playing The Exhibition Game, and scoring according to the Scorecard (by peers or by themselves), students can check if they think their links between the Prompt and their Objects are coherent. Using the Scorecard will get students more used to thinking in those terms, making it easier for them to read the rubric (which they might find scarier than a Scorecard).

Do you recommend beginning from the Prompt? Both in the Exhibition Game and in the IA?

The IA Guide and the TSM is very clear that there isn’t a right answer to this question. Sometimes you get a student that already has an Object in mind. They can start from the Object and look at the Prompts. In my personal experience, students start from the Prompt, but it is fine either way. The Game Instructions start from the Prompt, but there is flexibility.

What age group can these kinds of TOK questions be asked?

Objects

Does having limited Objects in the Exhibition Game limit students’ imagination in choosing them for their task?

How do I ensure students are making links with real-world contexts for their Objects?

The more practice the better. For example, telling stories in the classroom about things that have happened that have made you think about TOK, or students bringing in e.g., news stories. Students are then constantly making connections between TOK and the real world. Then the Exhibition Game is just that in physical form.

We want students to be constantly asking questions about things in their world, then the more ready they will be to take on the IA task.

Does adding a personal connection, in describing the Object, improve the quality and grade of the Exhibition?

Are there any Objects that you wouldn’t recommend?

There are three kinds of Objects to be aware of:

Keys: this would be fine for the Prompt ‘Are some types of knowledge more useful than others?’ (for example) if I talk about getting my driver’s license and suddenly these are my keys as this gives them a real-life context, they exist in the world. But, keys wouldn’t be valid as symbolising keys to knowledge. Metaphors should be avoided.

Photograph of an astronaut on the moon: if a student were to choose this, they would have to make it clear that the Object they are talking about is e.g., the backpack the astronaut is wearing, or the person themselves, or the image (which is quite controversial – were men really walking on the moon?). They need to be clear.

iPhone: a phone itself will not fulfil the criteria, but an online course a student is taking on their phone would be acceptable as an Object.

How would Pi work as an object as it doesn't exist in a particular place and time?

How far away can the Object be from the point? In the Bible example from the video, it was used, by the student, to link to the printing press which then linked to dissemination of knowledge. This seems like a number of steps to reach the point, is that ever a problem for linking the Object to the Prompt?

Game mechanics

Is there an emphasis on using TOK Concepts through the Exhibition Game?

Many Objects included in the Exhibition Game seem generic to me. Is that true?

Are there any issues with dealing with cliches in the Exhibition Game? I tend to attempt to lead my students away from the Bible, electron microscope, Galileo's telescope etc.

In your experience, do you have students who simply default to wanting to use Objects represented in the Exhibition Game cards for their actual IA?

Has a student ever chosen as their Object a card from the Exhibition Game?

Is there an issue if a student, later on, decides to pick an Object that closely resembles what is on the cards for their IA? I ask this bearing in mind that the object has been discussed in class.

When playing the Exhibition Game, how many students would you assign to a group, and how many groups can be accommodated with one box of the Exhibition Game?

How many cards are there in total?

Assessment

What are some best practices for marking and standardising the IA within schools, e.g., blind marking, anonymising, marking each IA twice, etc? What practices are out there that my school might not have considered?

If you have more than one TOK teacher at your school, I would recommend departmental moderation. You could partner up with another school to moderate each other. There tends to be samples from the IB that you can look at, do some blind-marking, and then look at the examiner commentary and marks for comparison with your own.

Marking twice and blind-marking are a good idea, also marking – leaving it a couple of days – and coming back to it. The more you mark, the better you get at doing it. The most important thing is to keep returning to the criteria/rubric.

FAQs

Discover how to effectively prepare your learners for the IB TOK Internal Assessment (IA) and learn how the Pearson TOK Exhibition Game can provide valuable support. Get all your questions answered here!

General

Objects

Game mechanics

Assessment

International Baccalaureate

Discipline

Grade Level

Topics

Implementation

TO PLACE AN ORDER BY PHONE: 1(800) 361-6128

Customers