This week the IBEN team released this document, and all of a sudden there was a flurry of activity and responses on social media IB sites (formal and informal)
Any changes to such a controversial practice surely need discussion, clarification and support from all those involved?
As a global learning community that has different requirements, pressures and agendas I feel all those in the PYP need a shared understanding of what these changes mean and an awareness of how they could be interpreted considering underlying pressures and agendas.
I have begun the conversation through a google doc and welcome perspectives, thoughts, disagreements and those who wish to help me change my own perspective.
I do have 2 questions though to start:
Why have the IB chosen to send this out this week?
It’s the week before the IB AP conference, and there is a session on the PYP review. I hope they’ve organised a large room for this one! There is going to be lots of discussion on this!
All the other areas of the PYP review have been drip fed to us through the IB website and we have been given time to digest and process. Although I recognise that we’d like the process to move faster as we are all itching for the review, I also respect the need to control the process and ensure the review announcements are handled with purpose and in a balanced manner.
So, I wonder who and why it was decided this was important enough to:
- Release now
- Release with no pre-empting or discussion
- Has released it as 4 different documents rather than compiling one formal complete document? I worry most will just read the covering letter and not dive deeper into the FAQs or Scenario documents, or view the Frayer model. I feel it’s very dangerous to release as is – and schools will read it and interpret as they wish.
- Has it been released in the other IB official languages or just English?
I guess my big question is purpose and reason behind timing and way it was released.
How will this support or reflect those schools and areas that have requirements for religious instruction such as the study of Islam in the UAE?
I’ve spent this morning looking at the original document and the additional documents (FAQs, Scenarios & Frayer model) and have begun the conversation through a google doc and welcome perspectives, thoughts, disagreements and those who wish to help me change my own perspective.
If you can, please log to your google account so we can see who the contributors are and where the thinking is coming from.
Always learning,
Tx
Learning to wear the big shoes - one step at a time 
Hi
My wonderment is exactly the same, how will schools interpret it, I already do see some schools interpret it as they like to and that is already becoming my worry.
LikeLike
We will see (and hear!) how things develop in the next couple of weeks. I think there will be a number of people very keen to sign up to the webinar.
Tx
LikeLike
Thankyou Tanya. I am also perplexed and with a review visit pending and the words ” effective immediately” my heart went in my mouth. I have not had the chance to read in depth but will this weekend. I also find the separate documentation frustrating. The FAQ was helpful. I emailed IB with my immediate concerns and received a prompt reply that helped. The UAE/ GCC have some obstacles within the subject of Social Studies and MOE requirements. Trying to balance this and conform with both both IB and MOE is not easy.
I look forward to following the responses from others. I did put a comment on social media and actually took it down an hour later because some comments made me feel as though I was ” stupid” … aren’t you doing that already ???!!,!, type of thing. UAE and GCC schools who are bilingual … wow… it is not easy….
Thankyou for the initiative and collaboration.
LikeLike
Hi Sandi
Having worked in the UAE I understand the struggle of trying to work through ( and around) the requirements of the PYP, and GCC.
We did manage to have Social studies integrated into a number of home room units, and found this not only supported the TD nature of the programme, but helped learners to make connections – especially those learning social studies in Arabic.
When working with the MOE in ABD and RAK, we found they were very open to having a more inquiry based, TD programme and contradictory to teacher beliefs were happy for text books to be used as “a” resource for teaching and learning rather than “the’ resource. They were happy as long as the curriculum was covered. Having said that, we also learnt how fast things change or differ depending on who you are talking to – so I understand the frustration.
I am glad the broadening of the standard helps to make things easier in the UAE / GCC areas and look forward to hearing positive things from the region.
Tx
LikeLike
Hi All,
I believe that this particular requirement has been debated for quite a long time. While you (and I) have not been involved in a discussion related to this requirement, I am almost certain that members of the IB World Community have been involved in discussing this particular requirement for quite some time.
There are literally millions of stakeholders out there, and not every person can give direct input into every change. I think we can say the same of any changes which have been communicated to this point.
My feeling is that the change makes no difference to many schools, and provides schools who do have issue with it further flexibility. Personally I do not particularly like the change as it indicates a movement away from a more ideological stance, but it will make no difference to my school on a pragmatic level.
LikeLike
Thanks for your input and reply. I agree, not everyone can be involved in every conversation – would almost be impossible!
But the fact this was issued out of the blue and is in immediate effect makes you wonder. Not even the IBEN visiting teams were given any prior warning, and there are some of us currently on school visits that this will affect.
On some of the FB groups – even some of the IB staff members were unaware – so we wonder where it came from – and why now?
My new school also looks forward to this ‘broadening’ as it allows us to explore the fluid use of a whole teaching team rather than a one home room teacher. So we look forward to next steps.
My worry is – especially in the AP region that those schools that have been trying to stream, teach stand alone science and have maths specialists come in will now use this as a tool to practice how they wish, rather than in line with the programme.
When reading all 4 documents together, there is so much more clarification, however, I believe more is needed so we don’t have even more ‘grey’ areas that are open to interpretation.
We will wait and see what the next steps are.
LikeLike
Thanks for putting the Doc together, Tania! I find it helpful to see others’ thinking on the details.
I too feel this change is a departure from the ideological stance. I guess I am wary because I haven’t been in a setting in which this broadening would help implementation. I am crossing my fingers it doesn’t backfire on those practitioners who have been working hard for true collaboration to bring about TD learning. (Some less-collaborative-yet-powerful personalities within learning environments will need solid explanations of what this looks like in practice.)
I am eager to hear examples of how schools utilize this change to enhance teaching and learning in their schools! Your new school sounds like the perfect spot for experimenting with this change, Tans!
~Adrienne
LikeLike
Hi Tania,
I really appreciate the discussion you’ve put forth here. I admire the critical thinking and clamor for open discussion re: changes and updates from the IB.
Changes like this affect schools in many levels. There are implications for management, teacher training, resources, possible changes/revisions in the curriculum and all. Certainly it’s not easy and it’s crucial to attain insights and deeper understanding of what’s really expected from us- IB PYP teachers and schools.
I’d like to share your article and Google doc to our teachers, hoping to ignite meaningful conversations about this, and about the IB education at large.
Thanks again and looking forward to more bold articles.
LikeLike
Salaam Tanya,
You have raised some key points and questions about the timing of the change in policy on standard c3.1b. I have the same questions, concerns and more about it.
I would like to add the adverse effects of the policy change to implementing inquiry in the classroom and the fundamentals of PYP. I feel now Schools with compartmentalised , traditional time-tabled teaching with subject specialists can now become PYP schools. To see how effective inquiry can be coordinated between subject specialists, one can simply look at the challenges to achieve this at the DP level. If this was passed ad hoc ouside the PYP review process for greater access and appeal then not only has it undermined IB procedural systems but greatly effected standardisation of IB PYP ideals across schools.
I will read and contribute further on the document.
We met at the IBEN workshop leader/visitation lead member training in HongKong some time ago. It is wonderful hearing from you.
Best,
Taymur
The International School, Karachi, Pakistan
LikeLike
Lovely to hear from you Taymur. I remember our training week with very fond memories full of smiles and laughter!
Looking forward to reading your perspectives.
Tania
LikeLike
Tania – you’ve done an excellent job of pulling this together in order to rationalise the intention and potential impact of the change. It’s a healthy way to initiate open-minded discussion.
There’s no doubt there’ll be a bumpy road ahead – but when was it ever smooth? In spite of the well-founded concerns and the anxiety level for those about to embark on school visits, I’m delighted to see this change. It may appear to have come out of the blue but has, in fact been wrangled over for years.
It’s the spirit of the change that I salute – moving towards a relationship of trust where schools are able to interpret the ethos rather than the letter. For example, I’ve seen excellent teaching programmes in Intermediate Schools in New Zealand, where specialist science teachers are involved. Telling them they’re breaking the rules went against the grain when learning outcomes for students were so positive.
From my perspective, Bravo to the change team!
LikeLike
PS I didn’t mean to be anonymous with the above comment. I’m Trish Fenton.
LikeLike
Morning Trish,
Kia Ora from down South!
Thank you for taking the time to reply.
I, too , am all for change and progress and do think this change allows schools who are future focused and looking at ways to ensure teaching and learning are more authentic and real world focus to take their next steps.
I also recognise the scope of the IB and all the different contexts and perspectives that need to be considered and supported so do respect their global responsibility. I do wonder what the urgency was with this particular practice? Why not release with the rest of the review documents and why is it in immediate effect?
I too have enjoyed watching students light up as we have brought, for example, our secondary science teachers in to support teaching and learning – and would love to continue this practice, but also worry that if this is the ‘ norm’ rather than the exception is the TD nature of the programme being celebrated? There are so many rich connections with language, science, maths and technology and I would hate to see schools losing these connections because it is easier for schools to bring in ‘experts’ instead of upskilling teachers to develop a love of TD learning (Which I think we do so well in New Zealand and Australia)
Last term, I spent some time at PYP intermediate schools in NZ, working with them to try and find ways to integrate and include their ‘tech block’ (which I think is such a valuable experience for our kids) into the classroom units. There were challenges of 6 week blocks of tech rotation, using secondary classrooms (and travelling to them) and having part time experts – but as I left we were definitely on the road to having those conversations and exploring solutions…. and after all – the conversation was about the students and the learning, so all whatever solution we went towards was going to be a step in the right direction.
I have heard through the grapevine that the IB will now be running breakout sessions and Q&As at the AP conference in Yokohama this coming week – so this is a very positive step forward for all concerned.
Best wishes to you and Bill,
Tx
LikeLike