The International Schools Review Forum

MYP: a Refutation

MYP was vastly unpopular at my school in Vietnam, although we did have one or two MYP evangelists (it suited their personalities – made them feel important). MYP is just as unpopular at my present school in Ghana.

Most teachers grimly accept MYP and quietly pay lip-service to it. If you sign a contract to work in an MYP school, you have to play the game. Personally, I have played the game by attending the required MYP meetings and by doing the bare minimum of Unit Plans. However, I have also felt compelled to speak out about the essential uselessness of MYP.

In Vietnam I wrote to my Head, saying that MYP “has no educational valueâ€

Well said - a pile of BS; I'll never work at an MYP school.

agree, MYP SUCKS!

I have taught MYP for 6 years and I agree, IT SUCKS! They use big words to explain simple concepts and its is a waste of time and energy, whatever happened to teaching skills?

.isr

one2many: That might be the case in your school but not in mine...I love it as a teacher and more importantly...I love it for my own children. It just seems to represent good teaching practice to me...

.isr

one2many: I think the criticism of the MYP should often be more appropriately be directed at school leadership, and the inability to develop a rigorous and demanding programme when left to do so. For many schools the 'curriculum in a box' that is provided by such as the IGCSE is necessary because it takes little structure or imagination to deliver it.

Personally, I like the MYP because it does accept that the world is not compartmentalised into neat little subject areas, and that there are many overlaps that we should be aware of and build on rather than ignore. The Areas of Interaction are simply a statement that learning should be grounded in a real life context in order to answer the question 'why do I need to know that', and there is a belief that assessment should be used to guide learning rather simply judge it. It doesn't seem like rocket science to me...and yet many schools seem fundamentally unable to manage it.

Is that a problem with the programme or with school management?

..and now without the typos :-)

one2many: I think the criticism of the MYP should often be more appropriately directed at school leadership, and the inability to develop a rigorous and demanding programme when left to do so. For many schools the 'curriculum in a box' that is provided by such as the IGCSE is necessary because it takes little structure or imagination to deliver it.

Personally, I like the MYP because it does accept that the world is not compartmentalised into neat little subject areas, and that there are many overlaps that we should be aware of and build on rather than ignore. The Areas of Interaction are simply a statement that learning should be grounded in a real life context in order to answer the question 'why do I need to know that', and there is a belief that assessment should be used to guide learning rather than simply to judge it. It doesn't seem like rocket science to me...and yet many schools seem fundamentally unable to manage it.

Is that a problem with the programme or with school management?

.isr

I don't think the real issue is that the MYP is poorly implemented or that it's just another flavor of the month. My issue with it is that it's not properly aligned with the Diploma Programme.

Take for example the Personal Project: a rather interesting assigment that allows students to explore interests, connect with the real world, and produce something of their own for all to see. Great, no? But as a culminating MYP type of activity, shouldn't it really tie all things IB together and provide that bridge toward the DP? This is the real issue - the DP is highly rigorous, and has a very distinct philosophy. The MYP, however interesting in theory or even practice (depending on your school/leadership/whatever), doesn't really provide the opportunity to hone the skills needed to be successful DP students.

This is why many schools use the IGCSE. As far as the "curriculm in a box" theory goes, I agree. However, it is more in line with the IB (many IGCSE people once worked for IB and vice versa) and so makes more sense.

My conclusion: the MYP is not evil or a waste of time. It simply is not aligned with the DP. This does not have to do with how it's implemented; it's just a fact.

...and yet the IB has produced a comparative study that shows MYP students DO outscore their non MYP counterparts in the Diploma...

I am the author of the article and have read with interest the replies.
True, MYP does not articulate with DP, but this is NOT its biggest fault.
Sure, MYP seeks to link all the subject areas; but is all the work involved WORTH IT? I've always thought that similar teaching methodologies and the English language are the natural links.
Don't blame school leadership; you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. MYP may be relatively OK in some schools, but they would surely be better off without it.
The study that shows MYP students outshine their non-MYP counterparts at DP level proves nothing. Maybe the sheer relief of leaving MYP behind in Grade 11 gives them an adrenalin boost!
As someone said, the MYP assessment criteria are far too rigid. Good teachers invent all sorts of different criteria all the time to fit the topics they are teaching.

I have taught MYP French for 10 years and think it's a great program:

We had total freedom to decide the topics we'd teach (topics and grammar: what would make sense for the students/age group), etc.
The assessment (if well prepared/designed) is challenging and a good preparation for IB.

I am now in an IGCSE school, and I miss the MYP.

That said, I recon some coordinators can be maniacs and control freaks. I was lucky enough to work with one who was great.

To lifeisnotsobad:

I've heard this argument before, possibly here and maybe from you as well.

Funny how an IB conducted survey would conclude that MYP students outscored non MYP students...

Any independent research out there? Just like with everything else in the international school teaching business, real facts and figures are usually missing.