
Does anyone here have a child enrolled in this type of school or program? What do you like/dislike? Does it matter at all if it's done in a public school vs. private? |
My child is at a PYP school (public MCPS). I am not so sure what the big fuss is..though that is all we have ever had so I can't compare. They do get a small amount of language each week (1 hour) but they are cutting that back to cultural experiences next year. Kids are not allowed to switch classes at all during the day which makes things hard for grouping. They focus on these PYP characteristics but almost too much..like in PE and Art. I don't no tlike it but I wouldn't go out of my way for it either. |
Thanks for responding, PP. I'm looking at Seneca Academy which is also in MoCo. Right now it's just a candidate school. I know that College Gardens is also an IB Primary Years Programme, and we live very close to that district. It might be possible to move there to take advantage of their program, but I don't know whether it's worth it or not. I don't know whether: (1) IB Primary Years is worth it to begin with; or (2) whether the public school system might be constrained by budget and NCLB limitations (private may be constrained by budget at least).
Do you feel like your child is an active participant in the class? Do they do both group and individual work? Do you think the curriculum and teaching style help your child learn how to think critically? And most importantly (IMO), does it seem to foster a love of learning? |
You didn't request a teacher's perspective, but here it is, for what it's worth:
Basically, the IB PYP is a layer of planning, pedagogy, and content integration with some character education thrown in. The specific pedagogy is inquiry learning, which could be implemented without IB. The requirement to create integrated themes using all of the social studies and science content of a given school or school system can result in mindless, kitchen-sink integration. For public elementary schools that don't have a strong world history and geography curriculum, CK is a better remedy, because it actually strengthens the academic program and also allows for more meaningful integration of geography, history, literature, art history, and music. For the inquiry pedagogy, Great Books is better than IB. |
How? |
For instance, creating an IB unit that integrates science content on weather with social studies content on the Civil War. The results are often awkward, and sometimes just plain silly. It makes a lot more sense to integrate history, geography, literature, art, and music. |
Here's another perspective. We're at a Chinese Immersion school which uses the IB PYP and will grow into the IB MYP. At our school, the students are in English one day and Chinese the next. The integration is absolutely critical because they are covering the same material in each classroom - but in different languages so that they develop the vocabulary and cultural framework to really understand the material. In this context IB is a really useful framework for developing a curriculum that fosters their bilingualism and biliteracy. Other than building the basics up to the Diploma Programme, I couldn't say what the benefit of IB's PYP is in a non-immersion environment but in trying to educate students in both English and Chinese it's proving to be a very valuable program. |
I am probably at the same school as PP but not in the immersion program. I still remember when my 1st grader had learn words like disiduous and carniverous in Spansh as opposed to regular basic Spanish words (colors/number) etc. All in the name of IB's integtrated curriculum. |