Category: Writing Units of Inquiry

Designing for Humans: Thinking Beyond a Checklist for the Enhanced #PYP Planner

Designing for Humans: Thinking Beyond a Checklist for the Enhanced #PYP Planner

This past year we trialed a new PYP planner, and the intentions were good with letting the students’ responses to our provocations direct and lead the unit, but we ended up having a planner that was so complex that it became cumbersome to actually fully complete. It was christened “The Big Book”, which should have clued us in that this was an exercise in paperwork. Clearly, it’s back to the drawing board.

So what are “The Basics” that have to be on the planner? As I see it, there need to be 12 components that are fundamental to the planning document:

  1. Transdisciplinary Theme
  2. Central Idea
  3. Lines of Inquiry
  4. Key Concepts
  5. Learner Profile
  6. Approaches to Learning (ATL)
  7. Questions
  8. Provocations/Engagement Activities
  9. Resources
  10. Assessment
  11. Action
  12. Reflection

As I began to wonder what is the “special sauce” that would move a planning document beyond “the basics” and make this planner “enhanced”, I decided that I needed to go back and listen to the webinar that addressed this aspect of the enhancement.

My big takeaways from the webinar were:

  • The document takes us through a PROCESS of CO-CONSTRUCTING learning.
  • It encourages COLLABORATION with staff.
  • It fosters REFLECTION.
  • It not only documents STUDENT AGENCY but reminds us that this is central to the learning. Teachers need to consider the WHO just as much, perhaps more so than the WHAT.
  • It influences the ROLE OF THE TEACHER and how they inspire ACTION in students to support SELF-MANAGEMENT skills.

While I considered the ideas shared, I was thinking “What would be the purpose of even re-designing the PYP planner?” I mean, they have given us a “refreshed” and updated example that we may use and other schools have already created other templates that could be integrated into our school. Truly, there is no immediate demand that schools HAVE to create their own planner.  But now schools have the liberty to design their own, yet it isn’t a mandate. So, if schools were to embark on creating their own, it would only be for the sole purpose of improving their collaborative planning at their school in an effort to increase student agency.

Agency is about listening.

Sonya terBorg

As I contemplate the benefit of redesigning the PYP planner, I wouldn’t dare create a copy and paste version of the templates shared. Not because they aren’t wonderful, but because they aren’t unique to the needs of my school.–which would be the purpose of even embarking on this journey. I remember thinking that students should learn the way I taught- they should adjust to me. I could not have been more wrong. A great teacher adjust to the learner, not the other way around (7)In my past school’s pilot of the re-designed planner, it was a hard copy only. This worked well for our initial planning session, but on-going additions to the planner weren’t possible unless you were to have the hard-copy in your possession. And because it was a “big book” it took up a lot of space on one’s desk area, which became problematic since we had 6 Units of Inquiry plus 6 stand-alone Math planners. You might imagine the frustration of all those paperwork piles in one’s workspace, which created a disdain for planning since it meant that one teacher had this A3 sized booklet taking up a lot of real estate on their desk. This was an unintended consequence of going “retro” with our planning. I wouldn’t recommend this. So, with this in mind, if the planner isn’t digital, with equal-access available to all teachers, then it’s set up to fail. That’s like putting square wheels on a bike–it is taking us nowhere with collaboration.

With this in mind, I would utilize Design Thinking, focusing on human-centered design principles of really understanding what would be the needs of the users of this planning document. Also, since human-centered design considers the interaction along with the actual “product”, the experience is of vital importance. Here is the overview of the process:

designhc
Designed by Dalberg

Framing the Context: Understanding our Users and Their Problems

Human-Focused Design optimizes for human motivation in a system as opposed to optimizing for pure functional efficiency within the system. -Yu-Kai Chou-

What is the challenge: Let’s be honest, the main reason why teachers don’t appreciate using the PYP planner is that it seems like a time-consuming document that doesn’t seem to support their day-to-day planning of the unit of inquiry.

So how might we design a planner that is collaborative, compelling and ultimately results in better learning outcomes and increased student agency?

Hmm…..

In the first phase of design, Planning, we have to consider the audience for this document. Teachers, right? So, when we consider feasibility, we should ask ourselves what might be the biggest barrier that we will need to overcome in order for this document to work?

I’m rather practical so as a teacher, I would say TIME poses the biggest challenge to collaboration.

Thus, when we create this document we need to think about the amount of time it might take to fill out this document, especially since we might imagine that the initial planning will involve multiple teachers who represent a variety of subject areas. Trying to get all those educators in a room can seem like putting the planets in alignment. So, if we UNDERSTAND these teachers, then we must take into consideration that this document will most likely require at least 40 minutes of time to begin the planning process, with opportunities to plug into the document to give feedback and feedforward into the learning (at least another 30 minutes of individual or grade level teacher time). Lastly, there will need a final block of at least 40 minutes for teachers to get together to reflect on how students responded to this unit of inquiry. So, with that in mind, the document, from start to finish, needs to be completed in 3 planning periods; 2 of which will include multiple voices and perspectives in the room, and at least 1 planning period in which teachers or a grade level team get together to discuss how the unit is progressing and what direction it might need to take. So let’s just say, this collaborative document takes at least 2 1/2 hours to complete, give or take 1/2 hour.

Then, as we peel the layers of the onion, we know that the 2nd biggest challenge will be ensuring that this document is truly collaborative, with the opportunity for multiple voices to be present, particularly our subject area specialists, who often feel marginalized during planning.

Furthermore, this document must create a holistic process of learning about our students, so we can create learning opportunities for our students, in that we can examine what learning came from our students. It has to fuel conversation and inspiration among teachers to develop student-directed inquiries and motivate student-led action. Moreover, it should get teachers discussing how they can access the larger community, whether local or global, to tap into resources that expand the learning outside the 4 walls of the classroom.

Lastly, when teachers engage with this document, I would want them to feel excited and anticipating the best that could happen during this unit of inquiry. I wouldn’t want this to feel like “ticking a box” but instead designing learning that changes lives. (Because, truly, that is what we are doing, every day. How cool is our job, right?!)

Learning Phase: Perspective and Use by Teachers

I know that this planner has to contain the “Basics” but I’d think about the teachers first and not the “boxes” that it needs to tick. Already I’ve made some assumptions, such as identifying some barriers and challenges to using the planner. However, those are inferences and my own biased opinions. I have yet to tap into the perspectives of the teachers directly at my school, which might produce different ideas. I must put on my researcher hat and use some of the methods of Human-Centered Design to get an accurate picture of the challenge and its possible solutions.

empathymapdesignFrom a design point of view, I might start from one of the PYP planner templates shared, observing teachers “in the wild”, using the document during the collaborative planning process.  I would record reactions with the Empathy Map to evaluate their experience with the planner. Since I’m not just considering the physical experience with the document, I need to collate the responses of the emotional experience of the teachers when deciding how to help craft a new one. Remember, I’m not trying to devise a fancy planner, I want the planner to actually get teachers to have rich discussions that connect and extend the learning of students so that students can ultimately become self-motivated and feel a great urgency to take action. I’d need to be a fly on the wall, leaning in to listen and notice how planning is being “enhanced”.

Brainstorming Ideas

First of all, this is not me, alone, on my laptop or with a pad of paper and pen in hand, ready to sketch out ideas. It takes a team to cleave through the data and create mock-ups that will ultimately result in a prototype document. Every one of those template planners on shared on IB’s PYP resource page took a team of dedicated individuals to shape and mold the prototypes that we see today. And I use the word “prototype” very intentionally because no doubt these planners will evolve as those teams reflect on what works and what doesn’t work with its use. Just as our teachers have spent time reflecting and evaluating the “big book” planner that was created at my past school, all schools need to stand back and be critical of their work so that it can be refined and improved upon.

So when brainstorming ideas, it will require a group of diverse and interested educators who will not only ensure it contains “The Basics” of PYP principles but develops our teachers understanding of our student learning and improve collaboration among teachers. That’s a big ask. Needless to say, where we go from here is To Be Continued…….

If any brave and like-minded individuals want to share how their school is approaching this project, I’d be keen to hear more. Please post in the comments below so everyone can benefit from your learning and experimentation. 

Future Thinking: Evolving as a Part of Enhancing A #PYP Programme of Inquiry

Future Thinking: Evolving as a Part of Enhancing A #PYP Programme of Inquiry

Not everyone wakes up on a Sunday morning and sketches out ideas for a Programme of Inquiry (POI), but I’ve been reflecting for a while on my experience from last spring when I went to the IB’s headquarters in the Hague to help design sample POIs for the Enhanced PYP initiative (see the Teacher Support Materials that can be accessed in the MyIB section of the main page for those samples in PYP resources). During that time, our teams sat down and began to create POIs that were structurally synergistic, organized so that there was more conceptual coherence and personalized to the uniqueness of that school reality and age group. In the blog post, #PYP: What is a Successful Programme of Inquiry?, I articulated the intention that was foundational in creating those sample POIs, but I’m starting to consider this definition of “success” as my “first thinking” when I consider what it might mean to “enhance” something.

Probably all you English scholars know that the word “enhance” is a transitive verb, meaning that this verb is relational and influential. enhanced pypI find it an interesting word choice by the IB in its re-branding effort. So their call to “enhance” our Primary Years Programme has got me lingering on what it is that we want to elevate in the learning experience.  Visually, “Agency” has now become the symbolic heart of the PYP’s graphic. I think many educators are painting a picture of what that can look like in our classrooms; the blog called IB Educator Voices contains a multitude of examples of teachers pivoting towards an agentic pedagogical approach. Currently, I am enamored with Rick Hanson’s definition of agency from his book, Resilient: How to Grow an Unshakable Core of Calm, Strength and Happiness , which I’d like to share with you:

Agency is the ability to look for ways to cause an effect. It’s a sense of internal freedom when you make something happen.

Hmm…..when I consider that interpretation, my eyes begin to widen its focus upon the outer ring’s message of this enhanced PYP graphic: “Building For the Future”.  Should we not, as PYP educators, be contemplating what sort of future we wish to build? We often undermine our influence of the big picture of how society and culture are developed over time through our educational paradigms. Educators have played a big role in creating the Millennial-generation, and we are helping to create the next generation of global citizens. We shouldn’t take these things lightly, and in fact, I think we should be much more intentional with our power and ability to transform our human experience and life on Earth. We should look for ways to cause an effect….because we have the freedom to make something happen. For example, it seems obvious to me that the intelligent and thoughtful people at the United Nation’s know this, which is why they have created a call to action with the #TeachSDGs movement. Our schools should be seriously considering how we might achieve those 17 goals by 2030, because this is certainly one way to shape our schools’ POIs which is in alignment with the PYP curricular framework and values of the IB.

A Second Thought

As I reflect back to that Hague experience, I feel that this initial approach to considering what it means to “enhance” the design of the POI is still ongoing. If you look carefully at those Sample POIs, you would notice that they don’t really deviate much from each other. Because at the end of the day, whether we were using national curricular standards or the IB’s Scope and Sequence, the challenges with using either the standards-based vs. concept-based curriculum results in more similarities than exceptions when creating the units of inquiries. I think this a testimony to the strength of the PYP framework and transdisciplinary learning with how translatable it is to a variety of educational settings.  However, when I read books like Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow by Yuval Noah Harari, The Inevitable: Understanding the 12 Technological Forces That Will Shape Our Future by Kevin Kelly and  How to Create a Mind: The Secret of Human Thought Revealed by Ray Kurzweil, I begin to wonder if our current POIs are teaching towards the past or preparing for the imminent reality of our students. Are we, as schools, engaged in future-building, with meaningful and forward-thinking POIs, or clinging onto industrial-age ideas.

I’m not sure how familiar you are with those books, so I’d like to share a quote that persistently plagues me from Homo Deus:

As human fictions are translated into genetic and electronic codes, the intersubject reality will swallow up the objective reality and biology will merge with history. In the 21st century, fiction might thereby become the most potent force on Earth…hence, if we want to understand our future, cracking genomes and crunching numbers is hardly enough. We must also decipher the fictions that make meaning in our world……Fiction isn’t bad. It’s vital. Without commonly accepted stories about money, states or coorporations, no complex human society can function. We can’t play football unless everyone believes in the same made-up rules, and we can’t enjoy the benefits of the markets and courts without simliar make-believe stories. But the stories are just tools. They should not become our goals or our yardsticks. When we forget they are mere fiction, we lose touch with reality.

Yuval Noah Harari, from Home Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow.

I’ve been marinating in those words for over a year. Curious about what could be the “story” we are telling ourselves now about our future and how we can use it as a “tool”. I know that some feel that the book Future Shock is becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. But what if we could choose another direction, one in which we meet the disruption that advancing technology will bring with creativity, grace, and intention. I believe wholeheartedly in that possibility, which is why I’ve been working on developing online courses for well-being in the digital age. I feel strongly that we should not resist technology but instead embrace it and use it to promote greater health and improve our relationships. That is the empowering “story” I wish to tell.

And today, I woke up, feeling alive, wanting to create a POI that was bathed in an over-reaching goal of developing well-being because I think that is the “fiction” I’d like to cultivate in the intersubjective (socially agreed upon) future reality of students. Here are the main 6 concepts that I feel need to be unpacked and gone into depth over the course of a student’s PYP experience within our 6 transdisciplinary themes.

  1. Sustainability (Production and Consumption):  because we need to shift from scarcity to ingenuity.
  2. Entrepreneurship: because we need to shift from profit-orientated goals to positive contributions in society.
  3. Computational Thinking: because we have to understand the algorithms of life and how we can co-evolve with exponential machine learning.
  4. Digital Citizenship: because online relationships and media are influencing us and our society. We need to navigate this reality skillfully.
  5. Social Emotional Learning: because attention and emotional awareness is vital to our health and is the new currency in our economy.
  6. Imagination (and Poetry): because creativity is the by-product of imagination, and we need to find more beautiful ways to express it.

I’ve started to create potential POIs that take these main concepts and build them out so that the overall force of the programme is one that develops well-bing: resilience, awareness, positive outlook and generosity. It’s really hard to translate these ideas into words without a fully fleshed out sample POI to show as a model but hopefully, the spirit of this quest has been communicated and I will have something completed soon that I can show as an example.

An Invitation

Now, whether you agree with me or not about what concepts need to be on a future-orientated whole-school POI isn’t the point but I do hope to open up a debate. I know in schools that are moving towards personalized learning culture, very broad and general central ideas are highly valued so that there is a lot of flexibility in the direction of a student’s inquiry. In my own experience, I am grappling with casting such a wide net with central ideas in the curriculum, uncertain if the overall outcome behooves the students and is manageable for teachers. But the purpose of this post is not to incite discussion around central ideas, but instead to provoke a re-examination of “the big picture” of your current school’s POI and reflect upon the future that you want to create through the curriculum.  Especially in schools that have authorized programmes, we need to be really challenging ourselves, moving beyond horizontal and vertical articulation. Perhaps this is my new working definition of the Enhanced PYP. I’m calling it “trans-articulation”. It’s less about ticking boxes and more about growing the future today, evolving consciously and actively within our curriculum approach.

As always, I hope you share your reflections, wonderings and concerns in the comments below.

 

#PYP “Sharing the Planet” by Design

#PYP “Sharing the Planet” by Design

I think one of the hardest decisions an educator has to do is to release the curriculum into the hands of the students. On most days, it’s just being in the “teachable moment”, but what if you handed over a whole unit of inquiry. Forget vertical alignment this once. Could you do it?

Last year we had a unit that was an abomination that I wrote about in Post Mortem Reflection: Autopsy of a Failed PYP Unit (Sharing the Planet). Needless to say, we WEREN’T teaching that unit again but then what would we teach?

In our new approach to planning, we usually properly launch a unit with doing provocations and THEN determine the learning outcomes. But I felt like we were trying too hard to interpret what the students were really interested in and assess their previous knowledge to determine the direction of the unit. Upon reflection, I felt it’d be better just asking them so we waste less time. I prefer to “pre-pack” a unit of inquiry rather than “unpack” it, so we took a Design Thinking approach to co-creating this unit with students.

design thinking.jpeg

With that in mind, we had to understand what the student’s prior knowledge might be. We felt a simple class discussion in which they could do a “turn and talk” then share their thoughts and feelings about what it means to “Share the Planet” would be perfect. Funny enough, they touched on every dimension of the transdisciplinary theme, which just seems like a testament of the genius behind the framework. Here are some note that captured some of their ideas:

IMG_8322.jpg

After reflecting on the ideas they shared, we summarized them into 5 main areas which touched upon the descriptions of the theme and highlighted the main concepts. We thought we’d have them rank them as their “learning priorities”. We spent some time describing the concepts and then gave them an opportunity to consider which ideas they felt most intrigued by. (The link to this doc is here.)

Screen Shot 2018-12-13 at 6.15.08 AM

While they were cutting and pasting their priorities, we went around and asked them to tell us a bit about how they were ranking them to gauge how much prior knowledge they might have of the concepts. The main concepts were:

  1. Sharing with living things
  2. Pollution
  3. Resources
  4. Earth Cycles
  5. Poverty

My favorite part of this exercise was actually when the students came back into the “big group” and talked amongst themselves about why they ranked the concepts in the order they did. Their conversations were gorgeous to listen to, and we found out if there were misconceptions or ideas that we need to clarify. Great data!!

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

After that, we surveyed the class about their learning priorities to find out how we might craft central ideas to suit their interests. The students “took a stand” for what their first learning priority, and then we had them repeat the exercise for their second learning priority. We then added those up to get a total vote count. This helped us to define what the unit was going to be about: Sharing the planet with living things and Pollution were nearly tied.IMG_8335

Afterward, our team met and debated the concepts from this survey. We found it really hard to resist the urge to override the majority because we felt that “poverty” would be an interesting concept to delve into since most of our students have such limited appreciation for their high quality of life. Also, lower grades rarely touch upon this aspect of the transdisciplinary theme, and we were compelled by the challenge, especially since it would have a strong transdisciplinary math link with using money as the fodder for addition and subtraction. However, at the end of the day, we all agreed that if we were to honor the voice and choice of the students, we had to put aside our desires, but would see how we might add this concept to other units this year.

Once we were in alignment with that, we started to pour over our notes and curriculum documents to evaluate what they already have learned, examining our school Programme of Inquiry and ManagBac to get a bigger picture of where we might take the learning. We began to ideate, brainstorming some central ideas, and agreed on 3 potential central ideas. To be honest, we spent so much time looking at the data, we didn’t have much time to wordsmith anything unique so we modified a few that we found on other school’s POIs. If we had more time, however, we would have had the students help us write them in more to suit them specifically and in kid-friendly language. These were the central ideas that made it to the final round of debate and voting by the students:

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

We discussed each central idea with the whole group then pinned them up around the classroom. Students took a moment to talk amongst themselves about what those central ideas meant to them and why they thought they would be interesting to learn about. IMG_8337After some time to discuss, we asked them to “take a stand” again, and migrate over to the corners where the central ideas were posted.  The vote counts were extremely tight, and we ended up having a near tie, which provided a great opportunity for students to debate and deliberate their choices. We asked one of the groups to re-choose and so the “leading” central ideas had to persuade those individuals to choose their central idea. It was fun to hear their interpretation of the central idea and their reasons why they thought that central idea would be the best one for our learning. At the end of this exercise, we came back as a teaching team to refine the central idea and create lines of inquiry that balanced student interests and the objectives of the TD theme:

Central Idea: Living things are affected by and often adapt to the natural world.

Lines of inquiry

  • Adaptations to weather (change)
  • Habitat loss (connection)
  • The impact of pollution on living things (causation)

Following the flow of a Design Thinking approach, we are in the prototype stage, and when we come back from holiday break, we will test this unit with our thoughtful provocations. It’s hard to describe the level of excitement for this unit by the students, and by us, the teachers. Emphasizing their voice and providing them with ample opportunities for choice grows their agency and engagement.

I hope you consider how you might apply a Design approach to co-constructing units with your students, no matter the age. I don’t know why we wait until the “Exhibition Year” group to have them write their own units. That puts tremendous pressure on those year group teachers. I understand that we didn’t have them write lines of inquiry, but we could certainly do that in our next unit since we already have a template of this experience to build upon. Perhaps this has sparked some thinking around this, and if you have alternate ideas, I would LOVE to hear them.

 

Math in the #PYP: Can you really “kill 2 birds” with one planner?

Math in the #PYP: Can you really “kill 2 birds” with one planner?

I’ve been doing a little light reading and exploring the new PYP: From principles into practice digital resource in the PYP resource center. This led me to nose around the Programme standards and practices documentation to see if anything had dramatically changed. I was surprised at how much it had changed in wording, not just swapping section letters for numbers but how some of the ideas have shifted to articulate the “enhancement” of the programme.  Here’s something that stood out to me:

(2014)Standard C3: Teaching and learning

Teaching and learning reflects IB philosophy.

1. Teaching and learning aligns with the requirements of the programme(s). PYP requirements

a. The school ensures that students experience coherence in their learning supported by the five essential elements of the programme regardless of which teacher has responsibility for them at any point in time.

 

(2018) Learning (04)  Standard: Coherent curriculum (0401)

Learning in IB World Schools is based on a coherent curriculum.

Practices: The school plans and implements a coherent curriculum that organizes learning and teaching within and across the years of its IB programme(s). (0401-01)

This led me to question and scan through the standards and practices documentation to examine how “stand alones” are being viewed in the enhancements. Since I wonder how they fit in with this idea of “coherency”, (which was not defined in the glossary of terms, oddly enough) they could be problematic as they might conflict with transdisciplinary learning.

And why do I think this?-because I’ve been struggling with trying to “cover” the math standalone along with the transdisciplinary maths. At schools in which TD (Transdisciplinary) Maths and SA (Stand Alone) Maths are taught simultaneously during a unit of inquiry,  I’m sure many of you PYP educators share my pain and are trying to “fit” it all in while not sacrificing the main UOI.

Oh, I can hear you–

Judy, but TD Maths is supposed to be embedded naturally into our UOIs. We shouldn’t know where one subject begins and where ends in transdisciplinary learning. 

But math is not a noun, it’s really a verb. And unless you write units of inquiry that create the context to do mathematics organically, it hardly lends itself to transdisciplinary learning. Perhaps it is for this reason why our school has created a whole Math Programme of Inquiry (POI) around the strands of Number and Pattern & Function. Christopher Frost wrote a brilliant blog post that articulated his school’s challenge with the PYP planning puzzle: mathematics so I can appreciate why our school has attempted to create a Math POI. However, because we only developed it within those strands, in my opinion, this has further complicated the challenge of integrating math into our units of inquiry.

For example, our last Math UOI  in 1st Grade was:

Patterns and sequences occur in everyday situations.
Patterns can be found in numbers.
-Types of number patterns
-Patterns can be created and extended.

This was our conceptual rubric for this Unit of Inquiry:

Screen Shot 2018-10-28 at 9.52.48 AM

The lines of inquiry came from the learning outcomes (which we refer to as “learning territories” at our school) from the IB’s Math Scope and Sequence, under “constructing meaning” in Phase 2 in the Pattern & Function strand.  But then this stand-alone wasn’t enough, and we had to then create a TD math focus to go with our How We Express Ourselves unit:

Language can communicate a message and build relationships.
-Different forms of media;
-The way we choose to communicate;
-How we interpret and respond.

So there we were, as a team, staring at this central idea and wondering what would be a natural match, conceptually, with this unit. We could definitely DO data handling as a component of this unit, creating graphs and charts that reflect the 2nd and 3rd lines of inquiry. However, since we were stuck on the CONCEPT (rather than the skills), we ended up focusing on the word LANGUAGE and eventually wrote another conceptual rubric based upon the conceptual understanding (from the Math Scope and Sequence): Numbers are a Naming System (Phase 1, Number), using the learning phases from the Junior Assessment of Mathematics from New Zealand–a standardized assessment that we use across all grade levels.

Screen Shot 2018-10-28 at 10.08.44 AM

Although we felt that we “covered” the learning outcomes or “territories”, we definitely felt dissatisfied with how we approached planning and learning these of concepts. Recently, I read the Hechinger Report, OPINION: How one city got math right, something stuck out at me and made me reflect deeply on our process and purpose of math in the PYP.

The top countries in education have shown that going deeper and having more rigor in middle school are the keys to later success in advanced math. Compared to high-performing countries, American math curricula are a “mile wide and and inch deep.” Students who want to go far in mathematics need a deeper, more rigorous treatment of mathematics…..

Going for depth of understanding in the foundational years, and accelerating only when students have solid backgrounds and have identified their goals, has paid off. This is progress we can’t risk undoing by returning to the failed practices of tracking and early acceleration.

Here are the questions that surfaced after reading that article and reflecting on our context:

  1. Is having TD math and SA math taught during the same unit of inquiry really “best practice”? Are we creating a “mile wide and an inch deep”?
  2. Is focusing on conceptual understandings vs. skills really the best approach to transdisciplanary learning in math?
  3. Do broad conceptual understandings help or hinder the assessment of a math UOI?

Now I’d like to add one more question after reading the Standards and Practices……

4. How can we create coherency, not only by “covering” all the learning expectations for our grade, but create authentic math connections for transdisciplinary learning?

 

Where we are in place and time with Math in How the World Works.

Our new unit began this week. Originally our upcoming Number SA Central Idea was going to be:

Making connections between our experiences with number can help us to develop number sense.

As we were beginning to develop lines of inquiry for our “learning territories”, we decided that this central idea seemed hard to approach and written for the teacher, rather than the learner. (In my opinion, if students find Central Ideas to be goobly-gook, then how on Earth can they make meaningful connections?) We went back to the IB’s Math Scope and Sequence to provide clarity and direction to developing skills.

Will mathematics inform this unit? Do aspects of the transdisciplinary theme initially stand out as being mathematics related? Will mathematical knowledge, concepts and skills be needed to understand the central idea? Will mathematical knowledge, concepts and skills be needed to develop the lines of inquiry within the unit?

When we looked at those questions, our team nodded their heads in agreement–Yes, of course this is a TD Math unit–it’s a scientific thinking unit, for heaven’s sake–the best kind to connect with!

Thus we rewrote the Central Idea and created our lines of inquiry based upon what they might be “doing” with number, recognizing that other math strands might be employed in our How The World Works unit (Central idea: Understanding sound and light can transform experience), thus combining the “Stand Alone” with our “TD Math“. Here is the unit we created:

We collect information and make connections between our experience and numbers.
use number words and numerals to represent real-life quantities.
-subtitize in real-life situations.
understand that information about themselves and their surrounding can be collected and recorded
-understand the concept of chance in daily events.

To be honest, I’m not sure if this is the best approach either and I spent a good amount of time cross-referencing pacing calendars and scope and sequences from other national curricula. However, this not only would help us to “kill 2 birds” with one planner, but it also helps us lean towards creating math units that develop the context of discovering vs. “being told” when and how to do math. This is true inquiry, in my mind, whether it is through a SA or a TD Math lens of learning. But when you are trying to squeeze in teaching two maths (TD and SA) during a unit then there is the challenge of approaching problem solving as a rote skill instead of having enough time for students to make decisions based on their math understanding. Documenting and analyzing those student decisions require time in order to evaluate appropriately what our next steps might be and in order to guide them towards a deeper understanding and more flexible thinking. So stay tuned.

If any other schools have been fiddling around with integrating math into units, I’d love to hear some of your stories–indeed anyone reading this blog would!! So please share your approaches in the comments below.  It benefits all of us trying to put “Principles into Practice”.

 

 

#PYP: Are We More than Data? Units of Inquiry that Develop the Digital Lives of Students

#PYP: Are We More than Data? Units of Inquiry that Develop the Digital Lives of Students

Have you stopped to consider what this might mean for ourselves and students?

“Cambridge Analytica is just the tip of the iceberg, and this problem doesn’t begin and end with Facebook,” Evan Greer, the campaign director for the Internet activism group Fight for the Future, told me when I asked about last week’s media circus. “It’s not even just big tech companies; retail chains, hospitals, and government agencies are vacuuming up massive amounts of sensitive personal information about all of us. We’re seeing now how that data can be used not just to invade our privacy, but to manipulate how we think.”

Vanity Fair: Why the Privacy Crisis is Bigger Than Facebook

I’ve been thinking about how people and governments are responding to the Facebook privacy scandal, wondering how I, as a digital citizen should respond and how schools, as citizen developers, are considering what might need to shift or change in curriculum.  Of course, this seems obtuse of me to think that schools are holding staff meetings and having conversations about this. Probably most of us haven’t even changed our privacy settings on our personal accounts, either due to ignorance or indifference–what’s the point?–they got our data anyhow! That may or may not be true. But what I do know if that we have a chance to change the trajectory of our student’s digital’s lives, as educators, we should be reflecting and responding to this opportunity.


In the past, I promoted the launch of a BYOiPad initiative starting at Grade 3. I wanted to further expand this initiative to Grade 2 because of its success. When first discussing this idea, we consciously decided to do a BYOD initiative instead of investing in a 1:1 program because of the unique opportunities that this would create in shifting attitudes; students and families would come to see that technology is not a toy, instead it is a tool because these were personal devices, and so they had to consider their responsible use of it. Needless to say, this created real and purposeful contexts for developing digital citizenship.

In the beginning, however, we went for tech and digital citizenship lessons that weren’t embedded into our units of inquiry. These were one-off lessons and usually in response to concerns we had in the learning. But into our second year, there were so many challenges and misconceptions that cropped up, we decided that we would have to write a digital citizenship unit into our Programme Of Inquiry (POI)  in the year group that launched the BYOD (3rd grade) so that they could create a deeper understanding of the tool (iPad) that they were using. This was the Where We Are In Place and Time unit.

The use of mobile devices has changed the way we work and play.

  • How digital technology works (function)
  • Changes in society and culture (change)
  • Our responsibility as digital citizens (responsibility)

And what ensued? Self-initiated and authentic student action.  Why? Because it ticked all the boxes for a well-written unit of inquiry:

Engaging:  Of interest to the students, and involving them actively in their own learning.

Relevant:  Linked to the students’ prior knowledge and experience, and current circumstances, and therefore placing learning in a context connected to the lives of the students.

Challenging: Extending the prior knowledge and experience of the students to increase their competencies and understanding.

Significant: Contributing to an understanding of the transdisciplinary nature of the theme, and therefore to an understanding of commonality of human experiences.

Making the PYP Happen

In that unit, students not only developed knowledge of how the internet works and what a “digital footprint” is but more importantly a critical understanding of questions that mattered to them like “What is cyberbullying” and “Do I have technology addiction?”  So this is where the conversation began within our curriculum but now I have to wonder where it has gone next. hmm…..

Naturally, this experience has shaped me and my attitudes toward technology. And I feel strongly that schools shouldn’t squander the chance to include it into their curriculum.

So as I think about the learning opportunities that can arise in our upcoming How We Express Ourselves unit, I get excited about how we can incorporate more robust digital experiences as a meaningful context for students. Here’s the unit:

The language we use can communicate messages and develop relationships.

  • Different forms of media (form)
  • The way we choose to communicate will affect relationships. (reflection)
  • How we can interpret and respond  (causation)

scopesequencedigital citizenI’ve been examining standards and curriculum sources like Common Sense Media that address the concepts and skills that need to either be embedded or explicitly taught.  Obviously, those lines of inquiry are perfect for developing our digital behavior and we have access to a wonderful resource called NearPod to help support the learning. Also, using our SeeSaw classroom account creates a safe haven to test out concepts around social media and Flip-Grid provides another layer of online interaction for our 1st graders. I think these sorts of platforms give us a “digital playground” for our students to experience the ups and downs of life online.  They also get to develop their awareness and maturity around its use, while applying the critical thinking skills and skepticism of information that we get online.

As we begin to launch this unit, I am wondering about what other educators’ experience has been–I’d love to learn from the observations and struggles that you have encountered.  Please share! Because our humanity far exceeds the borders of our data, and we need to be thinking about how we can educate, not only ourselves but most importantly the Mark Zuckerbergs of tomorrow.

 

 

 

#PYP: 3 Things to Consider when Evaluating a Programme of Inquiry

#PYP: 3 Things to Consider when Evaluating a Programme of Inquiry

The Programme of Inquiry is a living document.

So it’s not a surprise that around this time of year, many PYP coordinators are getting staff to hover around the Programme of Inquiry, taking a critical stance into the what and how we do teaching and learning in the classroom. Often times we thumb through the guide on developing a programme of transdisciplinary learning and wonder if our central ideas meet the criteria, and see if we have horizontal and vertical alignment of the key concepts, learner profile attributes and ATLs.  If a school is really thorough, they will make sure that there aren’t any conceptual gaps, particularly in science and math, and ensure that units of the same flavor aren’t repeating themselves. I find this simple task of deeply examining our POI a vital component of what makes a PYP school unique because, in so many ways, it is an inquiry into Who We Are, as a school, digging into the written curriculum, discussing the breadth and depth of our curriculum. This sort of professional conversation and debate are what creates a dedication to quality learning and ownership into the school culture.

But I think, not many schools really poke or probe their units of inquiry to see if the ideas are even worth inquiring into. They spend more time wordsmithing them instead of challenging the value of them. Investigating the Programme Of Inquiry (POI) with a good measure of curiosity and openness to change can really enable schools to rewrite units so that they are engaging, relevant, challenging and significant (Making the PYP Happen)  to the learners and the context that you find your school in and be innovative with your curriculum.

Here are 3 things that you could consider when looking at units of inquiry:

Why over the What

I’ve seen plenty of Units Of Inquiry (UOI) that read like it is a learning objective or standard from a national curriculum.  quote-it-is-better-to-teach-a-few-things-perfectly-than-many-things-indifferently-and-an-overloaded-andre-maurois-251482Yes, developing content knowledge and skills are really important, but what’s more important is the WHY that knowledge and skill are important. I think we can all agree that if you can google it, it shouldn’t be in a line of inquiry, let alone a central idea.

Schools should be seeking to bring more innovation and inspiration into the learning environment so that students can become more empowered. So the WHY should always be about the kids.

Why would students want to learn this?

Why is learning this important for their future?

Start with Why and the What takes care of itself anyhow.

When

Not all Central Ideas should be taught to all grade levels. Yes, I understand that the rule of thumb is that they should be written in such a way that you could theoretically teach them to any grade level, however, that doesn’t mean that it’s really appropriate for ALL grade levels.

Let me give you an example. I had an early year’s Central Idea from Where We Are In Place and Time that was about personal histories. Let’s be honest, 3-4-year-olds just don’t have a lot of personal history that they can reflect on, plus time is a very abstract concept that doesn’t really develop until they are 7 years old. So, we moved it to 1st grade and it became one of the favorites of that year group since the students had ownership and pride in that inquiry.

Here’s a hint: if a unit is not suitable for an age group, then the teacher has to micro-manage and direct the inquiry in order to “get through the unit”; it’s probably out of their developmental experience and aptitude…or interest! You can choose to rewrite it so it’s more appropriate or transfer it to another year level.

How might we …….

Now every school has their unique context and challenges, but overall we should be having conversations about improving our curriculum about issues that might naturally invoke agency.

For example, last year, our school developed a special Who We Are unit in which every grade did the same Central Idea (Our choices and actions as individuals define who we become as a community.) which included specific lines of inquiry that developed our understanding and appreciation about the local culture and traditions. These lines of inquiry also gave our local staff an opportunity to be more involved in the learning, thus providing more voice for our instructional assistants.

However, thinking ahead for next year, we’ve been inspired by Teaspoons of Change and our conversations may shift into examining and reflecting on how we can promote the UN Global Goals. Personally, I’d love to see that!

Global-Goals

So perhaps you could be wondering how might we incorporate more……..

  • Computer Science and System’s Thinking
  • Financial Literacy
  • Sustainability
  • Design Thinking
  • Entrapreunual skills
  • Equity Issues
  • Nutrition and Fitness
  • Digital Citizenship
  • Artistic behaviors
  • Well-being and social-emotional learning

into the Programme of Inquiry. These ideas are just a smattering of things that could be brought into your written curriculum so that it is challenging, engaging and relevant for your learners.


At the end of the day, we want units of inquiry that inspire our learners and develop student agency-right?! Spending time as a staff having dialogue and debate is not silly nor a waste of time. It’s a wonderful opportunity to have deep professional conversations, and come to an understanding of how we live out, not just the mission and vision of our schools, but also IB’s aim to develop inquiring, knowledgeable and caring young people who help to create a better and more peaceful world through intercultural understanding and respect.

Hopefully when you consider the important questions of Why?, When? and How Might We..., your school’s Programme of Inquiry will come into greater focus.

#PYP “Pre-packing” vs. “Unpacking” the Central Idea: Design Thinking Based Approach to Writing Units of Inquiry.

#PYP “Pre-packing” vs. “Unpacking” the Central Idea: Design Thinking Based Approach to Writing Units of Inquiry.

Anyone who teaches the Primary Years Program knows preciously what I mean by the word unpack. But just for clarity sake, let me explain:

Unpack (verb): to explain and define the key conceptual understandings and “big words” used in a central idea and lines of inquiry, usually as a part of “tuning into” a new unit of inquiry.

Depending on the unit of inquiry, teachers can choose to go a more traditional path to explain the big words or they can create provocations that awaken the meanings. I suppose it depends on how much weight you want to give to these keywords or how long you want to dwell on them. Each unit is sort of unique in that way.

In an earlier post (#PYP The Sound and Light of Using Design Thinking To Write a Unit of Inquiry), I explained the experiment and struggle of using design thinking to construct a unit of inquiry. This past week, we presented two different “prototypes” of a central idea for a How The World Works unit that we are creating for our Grade 1 students. Here are the prototypes:

Version 1.1: Understanding energy can lead to discoveries and help us predict its behavior.

Version 1.2 Exploring light and sound can lead to discoveries and open up new possibilities.

When we presented these central ideas, we discussed them one by one and asked them what words they connected to and what did it make them think about. This was a very revealing exercise! The first reaction to the central ideas:

“Wow, that is long and hard sounding”

Second of all, only a handful of our 34 kids had much to say about the scientific concepts in either central idea, showing a deep need to develop real content knowledge.  Third of all, our English language learners preferred “light and sound” over “energy”, which was something that we needed to put a high emphasis on since we have a large group of them. Last insight was that they made the connection with the words exploring and discoveries to “finding out”, which then evolved into the idea of a “science experiment lab”–these words got an uproar of excitement in the group. They began seeing themselves as scientists, creating all sorts of investigations.

At that point, we voted on whether we would explore “energy” in general or if they wanted to just focus on “light and sound”.  The latter was the most popular with both our ELLs and our girls (which made me go, “hmmm….”) in high numbers for the vote.

So then I tried to capture the ideas that the students resonated with, while still honoring the nature of this transdisciplinary theme, and wordsmithed some new ones. Our grade level team discussed and debated them, which is an important aspect of using design thinking.

Central Idea, Version 1.3: Experimenting with light and sound can lead to discoveries and innovation.  

Team comment summary:

” I think it’s 1 dimensional, with the word experiment in it because there are many ways to explore light and sound that isn’t through experiments. “; 

“This sounds like an upper-grade unit because they can do more research into the innovation part”;

“Yeah, we’d have to unpack the word innovation and they don’t have much context for that concept yet”. 

Central Idea, Version 1.4: How living things hear sounds and see light impacts their experience of their world.

Team comments summary:

“Kids this age love animals, so I think they would really enjoy the learning.”; 

“Yeah, this is very Grade 1 friendly and we need to develop the concept of living vs. non-living”;

“Oh, and we could discuss sonar with underwater animals and how bats use echolocation. They’d love that!”;

“Would this have any scientific thinking and process skills though? They really wanted to do experiments and I think we’d lose the ‘science lab’ aspect if we made this the central idea. I mean, we could do experiments showing how living things experience light and sound differently but then it would just be proving scientific facts vs. exploring with our own original ones. In our original UOI, it was all about scientific thinking so maybe it covers a different TD indicator and this one definitely feels like an inquiry into the natural laws. But maybe we could write this into a line of inquiry”.

Central Idea, Version 1.4: Human understanding of sound and light can transform their experience.

Team comments summary: 

” This invites more inquiry-how many ways do humans experience light and sight?” 

“Yeah, when I think about this, I think about how humans first harnessed fire and this sort of discovery led to so many more advancements, as people tried to turn night into day.”

“Oh, totally– this has more of a transdisciplinary approach because we not only have the science bit with natural vs. artificial light but then you have social impact of candlelight to electricity.” 

“But if we only focus on humans, then this unit might not be as interesting as the one with animals. The concepts within electrical energy would be better for older kids. Our 1st graders would appreciate more the context of how animals and plants have senses that detect light and sound in different ways.”

” Good point-How about we just drop the word ‘human’ so we can keep it open for other living things and see where this unit takes us?”

Nods in agreement……..

So here is the new prototype that we are going with for our UOI:

Central Idea (v. 1.5): Understanding sound and light can transform experience.   

Lines of inquiry        

  • How living things hear sound and see light (perspective)      
  • Transformation of energy (change)
  • Ways we use the scientific process (reflection)

       Related Concepts:  Energy, Impact, and Transformation

Attitude: Enthusiasm, Creativity, Curiosity                              LP: Reflective, Thinker, Inquirer

Although this process may have taken longer than we would have liked, it was important to reflect on the needs of our students as well as appreciating what fascinates them and promotes curiosity. When I think about how the PYP has been reviewed, I think this exercise in Design Thinking honors the new emphasis on Learner Agency. In the new IB documentation, it states:

Your understanding of the learner is the foundation of all learning and teaching and will influence how you support student agency, and how the learning community considers children’s rights, responsibilities and identities.

Agency is present when students partner with teachers and members of the learning community to take charge of what, where, why, with whom and when they learn. This provides opportunities to demonstrate and reflect on knowledge, approaches to learning and attributes of the learner profile.

The Learner in the Enhanced PYP

Even though I think this is our first iteration at developing learner agency through “pre-packing” the Central Idea with student thoughts and viewpoints, I still believe that we have honored the core of the PYP programme and moreover have really carefully considered our learners over pulling units of inquiry out of the archives to see which one might “fit”. For our team, we have a higher level of excitement going into this unit (and maybe a little trepidation), knowing that we can’t wait to surprise and inspire them with the provocations and challenges that this Central Idea will bring.

How does your team approach honoring student voice and choice? Have you ever “pre-packed” a unit of inquiry (other than Exhibition or PYPX)?

#PYP The Sound and Light of Using Design Thinking To Write a Unit of Inquiry

#PYP The Sound and Light of Using Design Thinking To Write a Unit of Inquiry

I’ve opened a can of worms. After our last Sharing the Planet unit, I felt exasperated and wanted to shift some units around so we could develop more conceptual understandings in science. We have 3 units left since it’s the end of the term, so the choices were: Where We Are in Place and Time, How We Express Ourselves, and How The World Works. We thought that How The World Works would be the best fit for meeting those goals. The Central Idea was: Thinking scientifically helps us to make sense of the world. A lively debate ensued between my co-teaching partner and I–is this the unit that students need?? What other options might we have? So we decided to dig up “old units” to evaluate what was “best fit” for our students–the old vs. the “new” UOI. This didn’t feel very satisfying either. We had to write a new unit.

 

ben franklinSince we had a planning retreat we started wordsmithing some new central ideas so we could “get down to business” when our team is all together but then I experienced a perfect storm of inspiration after reading “Agency” and the UOI and Being a PYP Teacher: Collaborate with Your Students.These perspectives got me thinking that I really need to ignite student interest by tuning into what scientific concepts fascinate them and putting them at the forefront of our planning of this upcoming unit.   I find that design thinking is a creative and effective way to problem solve, so I thought I would take the opportunity to apply this process to crafting a Central Idea because student interest would take center stage naturally.

So even before we had our planning retreat, I created a poll using Plickers to have students express what their level of curiosity around 5 scientific concepts that would be new to students and are developmentally appropriate:

  1. The purpose of physical structures of animals and plants (adaption).
  2. The properties of materials and states of matter.
  3. Growth and care of living things.
  4. Natural Cycles of the Earth and Weather.
  5. Light and Sound Energy.

We discussed what each one of these “big ideas” might entail as we explored it during a unit of inquiry. Students made comments and asked questions about what sort of things we’d be learning about. After the poll, the students had to put these concepts into a list of learning priorities that I represented visually, just to make sure I captured their interests accurately.

 

learning priorities
The English language learner-friendly rating system

 

design slideI was very surprised that light and sound came in first place with 12 students indicating it as their first choice, with materials and matter coming in 2nd with 8 students picking it as their main interest.  Armed with these results, I felt confident enough that this basic knowledge of our 1st graders was enough to begin using Design Thinking to draft a unit. Although there are different approaches to Design Thinking, I decided to go with the d.school’s model.

Empathize: We began with thinking about how we perceive our students and discussing what we know about them as learners.  I shared the survey results and we considered how this unit could develop scientific thinking and experimentation.

Define: Then we began discussing the challenge of writing a transdisciplinary unit around light and sound that complemented a nearly equal student interest in materials and matter. This landed conversation us smack dab

Ideation: There are different ways to ideate but I chose to explore ‘prototyping’ as our framework for creating a unit of inquiry. We worked on our own and then collectively to come up with a “prototype” of what this unit could inquire into. Because we hadn’t designated a transdisciplinary theme indicator (ie: the natural world and its laws; the interaction between the natural world (physical and biological) and human societies; how humans use their understanding of scientific principles; the impact of scientific and technological advances on society and on the environment.), this broadened our swath of possibility.

“Ideation is the mode of the design process in which you concentrate on idea generation. Mentally it represents a process of “going wide” in terms of concepts and outcomes. Ideation provides both the fuel and also the source material for building prototypes and getting innovative solutions into the hands of your users.”
– d.school, An Introduction to Design Thinking PROCESS GUIDE

As we explored related concepts in various domains, we collated what could be “driving” transdisciplinary ideas in a How the World Works unit in order to “build” a central idea around. What emerged from the ideation process was the conceptual understandings of :

  1. transformation
  2. energy
  3. data
  4. communication
  5. process
  6. classification
  7. movement
  8. diversity
  9. discovery
  10. behavior
  11. properties

Prototype: After deliberating and scribbling out all the perspectives that could make this a powerful learning experience, we settled on the central idea:

Understanding energy helps us predict behavior and can lead to new discoveries. 

  • Types of energy (Form)
  • Transformation of energy (Change)
  • Ways of knowing (Reflection)

Energy=science (light and sound)

Predict= math/science skills

Behavior=PSPE (personal social and physical education)

Discovery=Social Studies

We started digging into the curriculum documents, thinking that we had “nailed it”. But one of our team members sort of sat there blankly as we started choosing the conceptual understandings and learning outcomes. Our PYP coordinator said, “now aren’t you excited to teach this?” And she clearly articulated that she had no idea what this unit was about, which stung a bit because we had sat there discussing ideas for so long. Then she added that the “kids wanted to learn about sound and light and do experiments and we’ve written a unit about energy”.  We’d spent an hour on writing this so there was justification–“light and sound are forms of energy” in which she retorted, “But if I am a teacher who hadn’t been involved in this planning, I would have no idea how I might approach this.” She was right. She was right on both accounts. We had designed a prototype which hadn’t met the needs of the “users”–the students AND the teachers.  She echoed a feeling I’ve written about before in Central Ideas: The Good, The Bad and The Messy. How the Primary Years Program Can Rethink and Define Them. We’d been too clever, too adult and created something close to gobbly gook. We needed to go back to developing a central idea based on honoring the students’ curiosities.

After our meeting, we homeroom teachers continued this discussion and spent an hour debating if “sound and light” were topics vs. concepts. (Good lord, you know you’re a PYP teacher when you care so much about nuances.), examining curriculum documents.  We created a refined version that would require less “unpacking”:

Exploring how light and sound works can lead to discoveries and open up new possibilities.

  • Light and sound as forms of energy (form)
  • Transformation of energy (change)
  • The use scientific thinking in everyday life. (reflection)

Because I have never considered so thoughtfully the interests of our students, it is hard to say if this central idea meets the prototype criteria from d.school’s Design Thinking PROCESS GUIDE:

  • the most likely to delight
  • the rational choice
  • the most unexpected

Nevertheless, I am going to push these versions of the UOI through to the students and move onto the next step of the process.

Test: On Monday, we will present both prototypes of the unit to the students and observe their reactions and collect their responses. Hopefully, this will provide greater clarity of how this unit could be shaped. I reckon that we will continue to refine this unit and engage in more pedagogical conversations.


So, this is what might be considered “first thinking” when it comes to “designing” a unit vs. “writing” a unit of inquiry. I feel very grateful to be a school that allows us to challenge how we approach our curriculum. Sometimes people in leadership can be more focused on efficiency vs. innovation in planning and implementation of our curriculum, desiring to tick off boxes rather than dig deep into what and, more importantly, WHO we teach.

“To create meaningful innovations, you need to know your users and care about their lives.” , d.school’s Design Thinking PROCESS GUIDE

There is an award-winning designer, Onur Cobanli, who says that “great design comes from interaction, conflict, argument, competition, and debate”.  As a team, we are definitely in the throes of some of this. But I’m wondering if anyone has any suggestions or comments that might help enhance our approach.

Central Ideas: The Good, The Bad and The Messy. How the Primary Years Program Can Rethink and Define Them

Central Ideas: The Good, The Bad and The Messy. How the Primary Years Program Can Rethink and Define Them

The Primary Years Program is a challenging curriculum. As you work in this framework, it forces you to put all of your educational values under the microscope and really analyze what you truly believe about how children learn best.  Often the ideas sound good on paper but can really be a struggle in practice, especially depending upon the constraints their school puts upon them with math and literacy programs. As a coordinator who works with new-to-IB staff, getting them to “drink the Kool-Aid” isn’t always an easy sell, especially at first because all the jargon overwhelms them. But I think that the first step to convincing new PYP teachers that this is the best approach to learning out there is the central idea. Well written central capture students interest and make for powerful inquiries.

So how do you know if your central ideas are “bad”?  Here’s the main clue: Your teachers say “huh, what does this mean?” when they look at it. I’ll share an example to clarify:

Natural materials are used to inspire and express ideas. (How We Express Ourselves)

This is bad for all sorts of reasons–it’s ambiguous yet narrow focus on “natural materials” and the words “inspire” and “express” seem to be subjective in this context. These are two things that jump out at you. But what did you say after reading this? Let me guess:  “huh, what does this mean?”    Yep, that’s the hallmark of a failed attempt at a central idea.

What about messy? Well, I love this handy-dandy guide to developing a central idea that I’m pretty sure ever PYP school references at some point in their review of their Programme of Inquiry (POI). It’s well-intentioned and tries to be thorough, but when you put pen to paper, you can really get some gobbly-gook.  This part, below, is what causes some major mumbo-jumbo in our fabrication of central ideas:

How do I know if I have written a good Central Idea?

 Did you include two or more concepts in your statement?

 Have you used an active, present-tense verb?

 Did you avoid using proper and personal nouns?

 Did you avoid the use of to be (is, are) and have verbs?

 Did you write a complete sentence

You couple this with the advice in the Developing a Transdisciplanary Programme of Inquiry, and you can really have some creative wordsmithing. I say this all respectfully, especially since the PYP is undergoing a big review at the moment, but put yourself in the shoes of a new IB educator.

developing a transdisciplanr
From the publication: Developing a Transdisciplanary Programme of Inquiry

It takes a sharp eye to see the delineation between the 2 versions and you got to remember that this is a central idea for a 1st grader/Primary 1 student–words like organization, endeavor, and enterprise take a week (at least) to unpack before you get to those 4 lines of inquiry. You can totally appreciate why new IB teachers are absolutely overwhelmed with the notion of writing or revising a central idea. Furthermore, you can understand why a candidate school would just copy a sample POI that is either posted on the Online Curriculum Centre or on another IB school’s website.  Just the other day I was having a coffee with a candidate’s school appointed PYP coordinator. At first, I didn’t quite understand her intention- her school’s POI looked fine, decent central ideas- but after an hour I came to understand that what she actually wanted me to help her with writing lesson plans for her teachers. Her teachers needed help with lesson planning because they personally hadn’t gone through the process, they had no skin in the game and definitely no understanding of what it means to do an “inquiry into…..

But this goes back to the point I was making–a good central idea should generate more possibilities. If a teacher can’t look at a central idea and come up with a place to start, then the inquiry is going to get messy.  Just look at that central idea above: People create organizations that solve problems and support human endeavor. They will probably just fumble around for at least a week instead of hitting the ground running doing a bonafide inquiry because they can’t get past those words. The words–the ones that the summative task is supposed to be built around–is a major stumbling block, especially for a 1st-grade teacher. Let’s be honest, right?If the central idea is messy than it typically demands that we put a stake in the ground at some point and say, “ok kids, this is where you need to go with your inquiry–it’s nearly summative time!” I know IB understands these challenges, which is why it is painfully taking a knife to the PYP and rethinking how we can approach central ideas.

Let me give you another example from a 2nd-grade unit at our school:

The population of a community can determine the structure of its organizations within it.

When we wrote that central idea under How We Organize Ourselves theme, we followed the handy-dandy aforementioned guide. I’ve highlighted the concepts that we pulled out the IB Social Studies Scope and Sequence. The purpose of this unit was to help students start gaining an understanding of government and economics that was lacking in some of the future P4 and P5 units. The summative task is to have the students form a “city council” and create a community with a given population, using a budget to provide for its goods and services. So that was the intention of this wordy central idea. This year, when a new 2nd-grade teacher came in and looked and looked at this unit, her response to the central idea indicated that it was messy. In our last meeting, we discussed how well the kids, who LOVED this unit, understood the central idea. She said that she spent more time focusing on the lines of inquiry because of the wording of the central idea, but that ultimately yes they understood the relationship between population and community design. The fact that she circumvented the Central Idea is definitely a symptom of a messy central idea. So we thought about ditching all those big words and simplifying the central idea to reflect a more kid-accessible central idea:

People design communities to fit the needs of its population.  

(I think we have transformed it into a “good” central idea–or at least a better iteration.)

So, a perfect central idea isn’t so wordy and nebulous that you can’t find a place to start, nor creates an exhausting level of teacher content delivery or misguided student research. What do I mean about this? Look at this:

Signs and Symbols can be used to communicate messages through different media.

Screams transdisciplinary right?–Instantly specialists want to jump in and connect with the ideas of signs and symbols, and it’s an easy link with literacy, social studies, technology, and math. Not to mention that it’s got friendlier language so we can dive right into the inquiry. And assessment organically emerges, with the kids being able to contribute to what a summative task might look like. It’s interesting, it’s engaging and student action is prominent.

So let me summarize my definition of a “good” central idea:

  • Transdisciplinarity ( I don’t know if that’s a word, but it is now!) can happen organically.
  • It is easily understood by the teacher so they know how to start the inquiry.
  • The students can access its language.
  • A clear summative task naturally arises and students can provide input into how it can be assessed.
  • It connects students to concepts that will be needed in future units of inquiry.

Now, perhaps you share my opinion about central ideas or you may want to lambaste me. This is a hotly contested area between educators. Fair enough. But as a coordinator, I make a good stab at being knowledgeable and reflective, however, the only thing that I am certain of is my experience as an educator with this framework.  Perhaps your experience matches mine or maybe you think I’m speaking blasphemy–fantastic! Let’s debate! I’d love to hear your definitions–what are the attributes of a “good” central idea?

Subscribe for weekly blog updates.

* indicates required


Verified by MonsterInsights