The International Schools Review Forum

"If there are problems with a school this will come through in the administration of the programme that you teach - whatever that programme is."

you got it there. 21 days until lifeisnotsobad!

:D

Good luck and have a great summer when you get there!

Here are a few thoughts about MYP: First of all, I was teaching before MYP was invented, and the idea that students didn't know how they were being evaluated is complete nonsense. Second, of course much that is incorporated in an MYP program is artificial and phony. MYP assumes that both teachers and students are too stupid to know what to do in class. This is why we have to have collaborative planning! We have to spend at least as many hours in planning as we do in actually teaching. The trouble with this approach is that a committee of idiots will produce idiocy and a committee of 9 idiots and 1 bright person will produce idiocy as well, because the bright person has to give up in the face of the MYP rabble. Third, the educational "thinking" behind MYP is incoherent. Anyone who thinks that criterion referenced evaluation (I refuse to use the cant term "assessment") is objective or somehow more enlightened than good old fashioned evaluation of the sort that was normal when I was in high school, needs to take or retake Philosophy 101.

You are clearly an enlightened educator who is well versed in research about effective teaching. I am assuming you would class yourself as one of the 'bright' people and I clearly would be one of the idiots. Perhaps you could explain the incoherence of the programme for me as I haven't noticed it in my classroom?

By the way...the MYP wasn't 'invented' it was developed...by teachers... who were part of the International Schools Curriculum project. I expect they were idiots too?

Good old fashioned evaluation when you were in high school probably went along with good old fashioned 'discipline'. Ah, the 'good old' days...

lifeisnotsobad:

1. The point that there is nothing new about the claims of MYP ideologues is a serious one.

2. The claim about the incoherence of the thinking behind MYP is a serious one too.

3. The claim that the pretentiousness of MYP language reveals the shallowness of MYP is a serious one. (The language problem is shared by DP too, but I gather both programs are at least getting rid of Latin tags such as Homo Faber and ab initio). This is a claim that I didn't pursue in the last post.

All of these are truth claims. They are either true or false. They have nothing to do with the "good old days of discipline" or any other cliches you happen to have opinions about. Nor do they have anything to do with idiots and geniuses.

I have noticed that when you challenge the assumptions that MYP people make about education you rarely get an answer. If you don't accept all this MYP nonsense as the gospel truth you are not a team player and you don't believe in collaboration! But of course such objections have nothing to do with truth and falsity.

And I actually agree that life is not so bad. That is why I would prefer to be doing something with my time other than making up task sheets and unit planners.

Good for you, Panglosser.
The IBO is just a business with the sole purpose not being education, but making money - anyone want to buy an IBO logo coffee cup?
The language used in all IBO documents is purposely vague and abstract to divert attention from its vapid content as well as to prevent IBO from having to maintain a solid, concrete, educational philosophy.
By the way, can anyone tell me the number of schools that have actually been NOT ACCEPTED into the IBO "family" - other than because they could not afford the hefty joining fee?
Let's forget these silly gimmicks and get back to teaching kids in a creative, exciting way.

Panglosser:

With the exception of point 1 you seem to be a little confused between what you claim to be 'truth claims' and your own opinion. A dangerous trait in an educator...

In response to your truths:

1. Exactly right...there is nothing new about the claims of MYP ideologues. The MYP has been developed over the past 15 years by teachers, and it continues to develop. It is based on good teaching practice. For many this is nothing new, just an articulation of what good teachers do.

2. I asked you to give me an example of incoherence...you just tell me it is a serious claim.

3. I disagree with YOUR OPINION that the MYP is a shallow programme. That the language of the MYP is evidence of this is not a 'serious claim'. It is a shallow argument that shows poor knowledge and understanding. It would most definitely lead to a poor level of achievement if this was used in a paper written for me.

Please do go ahead and challenge my assumptions...I promise that you will get an answer.

Senator: I hope that you are putting your money where your mouth is and that you quite simply refuse to work in a school that offers the IB. I for one would refuse to work in a school, or educational programme, that did not clearly put the students at the centre of its purpose for being.

Teaching is about "fit." Right? You teach best in an enviroment which "fits" you best. Right?

Some love the IBO, they live it, breathe it and embrace it. For some the IBO is not a good fit. This is probably for a variety of reasons, specific to each individual. In my school the PYP coordinator is an absolute JOKE. She has turned off many, many people on staff. This is why I chose to not interview with schools that have imbibed the the IBO (PYP specific) Kool-Aide. Maybe one day I will try again, but the program here is absolutely horrid. I needed some distance.

I encourage others who feel the same way to step aside and let others find their fit.

There is no reason to get combative with one another over personal opinions. Don't you think?

As a side note I would love to see how many candidate schools don't achieve fullauthorization. I imagine it is close to 0 percent. And it is not because these schools are IBO "quality." But the check cleared!

Hi samuraiwriter,

Certainly no intent to get combative on my part and I apologise if I came across that way. However, it is a problem when people make gross generalisations (or claim truths) based upon a limited experience - often gained in one school and (perhaps) soured by poor administration of a programme. Surely, as teachers we work hard to encourage our students to avoid this?

I agree with you completely about your statement regarding best fit. Perhaps I was a bit too combative in trying to make the same point :-)!

Deleted

I have taught in the MYP since 1996 and in the DP also since 2000. I think there is a need to separate any issues with the programme itself from issues with the implementation of the programme. It takes an experienced MYP coordinator and a supportinve administration to engage teachers in curriculum development, but once this begins to happen, teaching takes on a whole new meaning and students really see the relevance of what they are learing, because it is being given context and made relevant.

I would never work in any other type of system now (and I have taught British A levels and GCSEs, IGCSE and US AP courses).