Today you write two short assessed pieces about the same object: Part 1 before lunch and Part 2 after lunch. Everything you need is on this page. Read section 1 first, then work only in the column for the part you are writing.

⏱️ 1. How today works

Part	When	Length	Writing time
Part 1: Your object	Before lunch	300 to 400 words	33 minutes. With extra time: until lunch.
Part 2: Other knowers	After lunch	250 to 350 words	33 minutes. With extra time: until the end of the lesson.

Rules for both parts

Your photograph must be of a real object from your home, taken by you, not an image from online. Use the same photograph in both parts.
Open book: you may use your plans from last lesson, your notes and your Notion pages.
No AI: every word must be your own. Do not use any AI tool to write, rewrite, plan or check any part of either piece.
Stay in the room for the whole lesson, even when you have finished, because others are still writing.

Each part runs like this

Set up a new Google Doc. Give it the title shown at the top of that part. Put in your question, word for word, and your photograph. Nothing else yet.
Wait for the start. Your 33 minutes start when everyone's Doc is ready. Your teacher will tell you when time starts and when it is up.
Write, then check. Your writing time includes checking your piece against the "Before you submit" list and submitting it.
Submit your Doc to that part's task on ManageBac when your time is up. If you have extra time, keep writing and submit before lunch (Part 1) or before the end of the lesson (Part 2).
Then close your TOK Doc and work quietly on something else on your laptop, not TOK.

📦 2. Before lunch: Your object

Part 1 · 300 to 400 words · 33 minutes

Your Doc's title: your name, then "kk.11 Part 1 Your object". For example: Maya Chen kk.11 Part 1 Your object

Answer one of these questions, using your object:

Can a representation that leaves things out still be true?
How do we acquire knowledge?
Why are the criteria for what counts as knowledge not obvious?

🧱 What your piece must do

Show your object: start with your question and your photograph.
Explain the object and its context: what it is, and its story: who, what, when, where.
Justify your choice: say why you chose this object for the question you are answering.
Explain the knowledge: what knowledge the object connects to, and how it connects to you as a knower.
Answer the question: using what you have said about the object and the knowledge.
Use at least three of the twelve TOK concepts: certainty, truth, evidence, explanation, interpretation, power, justification, objectivity, perspective, culture, values, responsibility.

Your piece links three things together, with you at the centre:

flowchart TD
    Q["Your question"] --- Y(("YOU"))
    Y --- O["Your object"]
    Y --- K["Knowledge<br/>connected to<br/>the object"]

📏 How it will be marked

Part 1 is marked out of 7.

Marks	What the piece does
7	A unique and interesting object is chosen, and its context is fully detailed. The choice is fully and explicitly justified. There are clear links between the chosen object, knowledge and the author. The question is explicitly addressed and answered. The piece is clearly written, well argued and accurately punctuated.
5	An interesting object is chosen, and its context is clearly stated. Some justification is given for the choice of object. Links between the chosen object, knowledge and the author are made, but these are not always clear. The question is addressed, but arguments are not always clear. There are improvements to be made in writing style, but any errors do not hamper understanding.
3	An object is chosen, but the choice lacks originality or little context is given. The justification for the choice of object is superficial. Few links are made between the object, the author and knowledge. An answer to the question is implied but not directly given. Significant improvement in writing style is needed, or there are noticeable errors in punctuation.
1	A dull, everyday or overly general object is chosen, or no context is given. Very little justification is given for the choice of object. Few links are made between the object, the author and knowledge. The question is not answered. The piece is very poorly written.

✅ Before you submit

Is your question at the top, word for word, with your photograph?
Have you said why you chose this object for this question?
Could your piece have been written about any other object of the same kind? If so, add specific detail.
Does every paragraph say something about knowledge, not just about the object?
Have you given a clear answer to the question, not just implied one?
Have you used at least three of the twelve TOK concepts?
Is it 300 to 400 words, and is every word your own?
Have you submitted it to the Part 1 task on ManageBac?

👥 3. After lunch: Other knowers

Part 2 · 250 to 350 words · 33 minutes

Your Doc's title: your name, then "kk.11 Part 2 Other knowers". For example: Maya Chen kk.11 Part 2 Other knowers

Answer one of these questions, using the same object:

How much of our knowledge depends on our interactions with other knowers?
What shapes my perspective as a knower?

🧱 What your piece must do

Show your object: start with your question and the same photograph.
Introduce the object briefly: one or two sentences. You described it fully before lunch.
Introduce the other knower: who they are, and how they are connected to the object. Be specific: a name or a relationship, not "my family" or "people".
Explain what they know: what they know about the object, how they came to know it, and how that differs from what you know.
Answer the question: using what you have said about the other knower and about yourself.
Use at least three of the twelve TOK concepts. Try to use at least one you did not use before lunch.

This time there are two knowers around the object:

flowchart TD
    Q["Your question"] --- Y(("YOU"))
    Y --- O["Your object"]
    O --- K(("THE OTHER<br/>KNOWER"))
    Y --- K

📏 How it will be marked

Part 2 is marked out of 7.

Marks	What the piece does
7	The other knower is specific, and their connection to the object is fully explained. How their knowledge of the object differs from the author's, and how they came to it, is clearly explained. There are clear links between the object, the other knower, knowledge and the author. The question is explicitly addressed and answered. The piece is clearly written, well argued and accurately punctuated.
5	The other knower is identified, and their connection to the object is clearly stated. Some explanation is given of how their knowledge of the object differs from the author's. Links between the object, the other knower, knowledge and the author are made, but these are not always clear. The question is addressed, but arguments are not always clear. There are improvements to be made in writing style, but any errors do not hamper understanding.
3	The other knower is general ("my family", "people"), or their connection to the object is unclear. Little is said about how their knowledge differs from the author's. Few links are made between the object, the other knower, knowledge and the author. An answer to the question is implied but not directly given. Significant improvement in writing style is needed, or there are noticeable errors in punctuation.
1	No other knower is identified, or the piece only describes the object. Few links are made between the object, the author and knowledge. The question is not answered. The piece is very poorly written.

✅ Before you submit

Is your question at the top, word for word, with your photograph?
Have you named a specific other knower, not "my family" or "people"?
Have you said how their knowledge of the object differs from yours, and how they came to it?
Does every paragraph say something about knowledge, not just about the object or the person?
Have you given a clear answer to the question, not just implied one?
Have you used at least three of the twelve TOK concepts?
Is it 250 to 350 words, and is every word your own?
Have you submitted it to the Part 2 task on ManageBac?

This lesson, like the rest of this course, is made in collaboration with AI. The judgement is mine, built on many years of teaching this course: what belongs here, what is true, what order it comes in, and what is worth your time. AI helps me draft, question, and keep hundreds of pages consistent; anything wrong is my responsibility, not the machine's. I ask my students to be honest about how they work with AI, and this is me doing the same. And in TOK terms, that division of labour between a knower and a tool is itself a knowledge question worth asking. More on how we think about that: Using AI in your learning.