Here is where you’ll find Links to documents and resources for TOK as a whole For more specific resources, use the page links at the top of this page embedded within the TOK heading as well as seeing all my TOK related posts by clicking on the menu heading titled, “tok posts.”
TOK Course GUIDE NEW : Great resource for knowledge ?s !!!!!
Link to Shared AIS TOK Site: https://ais.learning.powerschool.com/do/share/eclass/6803721?k=0dc537cf1a769e48c0e88362bb255434fcb853f6
TOK Assessment Categories
Questioning (40%): Students are able to identify knowledge claims as well as counter-claims. Students are also able to construct Knowledge Questions that are both level 1 and level 2 in nature.
Argumentation (40%): Students are able to support arguments, claims, counter-claims, contentions and knowledge questions with sound argumentation. Sound argumentation includes but is not limited to:
- Use of appropriate evidence wedded to specific examples
- Logical reasoning
- Lucid writing
Independent Response + Engagement (20%): Students are consistently engaged as demonstrated by completed course work and activities. Additionally, students are productive and frequent contributors during class discussions. Their comments serve to move discussions forward and add value. Independent response refers to the uniqueness of ideas and insight. Students who demonstrate a high level of independent response come up with ideas that are creative and unique in nature and yet build on the insights of others.
Journal Writing Rubric!
|Advice and Guidelines||An excellent journal incorporates TOK vocabulary in a useful and insightful way while addressing multiple perspectives in a lucid, insightful and compelling manner and acknowledges the implications of the analysis.||A good, but not excellent, journal includes some TOK vocabulary however not enough to be fully accomplished. There is insightful analysis but only one perspective is addressed. Alternatively, multiple perspectives are addressed but lacking in depth.||A journal that needs improvement lacks TOK vocabulary or the TOK language included is used erroneously. Additionally, the analysis lacks depth and insight resulting in a superficial response.|
|Descriptors||Accomplished, lucid, compelling, insightful, discerning||Thoughtful, organized, credible||Superficial, derivative, mainstream,|