IB Schools and "Global Citizens"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IB means that the school gets evaluated by educators who don't give a crap about american politics or arne duncan.

This in turn means that the IB schools avoid being quite so insular, or teaching strictly to the state tests in whatever state they happen to be in.

That's a non sequitur. IB schools here tend to be the public schools with the most low income and ESOL kids, so they devote the most energy to teaching to the SOLs and other state tests in order to avoid the wrath of the Arne Duncans of the world. It might be different at a private.

Not my experience, and my kid attends one of those.

[Anonymous]

The global citizens stuff is mostly marketing crap. But the point of an IB program is that it is a rigorous program, and an alternative to taking AP courses. I think, if administered properly, it can be valuable, rigorous learning environment. Just as AP courses can be taught truly at the college level or just test prep drill, IB can be hit or miss.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC is not in an IB program but the critics seem to be the same folks who criticize kids learning foreign languages in elementary school as a waste of time...You see that a lot here on DCUM

Foreign language instruction is great. FCPS could afford more of it if it wasn't shelling out so much money for expensive, under-utilized IB programs.

TY. Expensive, under utilized and nobody can explain specifically it offers students. We live in an IB pyramid and plan to avoid. We are an international family of recent Americans. We came here because we value what America offers in opportunity, rule of law and freedom and want to immerse in America.

[Anonymous]

Oh and our kids are in language immersion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder if they are teaching the fact that so many other countries are intolerant in the IB program? Kind of doubt it.

I think the point of the IB program (as administered in the US) is to teach empathy for others, not to bash the US. I don't think teaching empathy for others and teaching patriotism are mutually exclusive. I think it can be the best of both world.

That's a silly and likely elusive goal for what's typically held out as a rigorous college prep program. IB equips a small subset of students to banter with one another using IBO-favored terms such as "hegemony." The article cited in the OP suggests that type of approach is more likely to teach elitism than empathy.

I think the IB program here is crap. It is rigorous but kids learns nothing but crap. We were in an IB program overseas. The interesting thing is, the school was heavily focus on math, technology and science. There were also a lot of writing DONE in class and a focus in world history, and lots of travels(3-4 times/year). Your IB diploma would represent someone who is not clueless about global issues, who speak a couple languages, but mostly well versed in math/physics/technology. No one thinks they're special by getting an IB diploma. My own kids will focus on the AP program and some travel abroad in between.

This is what I have learned from people who write these types of 'expert' articles. They'll visit the country of their subject after studying it for years in a lab(college campuses) maybe as a fellow for a few months to year, surrounding themselves with a captive audience (students, other professors), looking to reinforce preexisting opinions. Without much passive observation, they then come back here and write an 'experts' book or article about said country So here I am thinking but I've lived here for 5 years and I'm somewhat part of the local culture since my kids attend the local school, I'm just now having a surface understanding of this culture. It is similar to a foreigner who has lived here for 5 years and then go back to their home country an expert on everything american. Would that be possible? Anyway I do not listen to elitist snobs' advice about anything.

[Anonymous]

The article is not about the IB program. Why is the arguing here over IB and not what the author was saying?

[Anonymous]

Because IB haters -- and those who fear the program because they don't get it and think it is somehow anti-American -- abound and will use any excuse to attack it.

All I know is that admissions officers at elite colleges have been very impressed that my son is doing an IB diploma, as we have. I'm constantly amazed that folks around here who claim to be happy with their kids doing AP feel such a need to tear IB down. Can only assume they fear IB kids are getting something there's aren't.

[Anonymous]

This article is basically saying that you can't be an expert at everything and that we should first be an expert on being an American and proud to be one first. It's similar to the argument that you shouldn't focus on being well rounded anymore, but should specialize in something and be very good at it. The problem with those arguments though is that people become good at a couple of things and know who they are but then have little understanding for others who aren't like them and tend to segregate. Just think of the disputes between the republicans and democrats acting as if there's no common ground between them. The US doesn't have one national identity like many other nations. It's always been a land of immigrants, so therefore I think it would only help us if we all tried to learn a little about one another. Only then I feel will we actually be strong as a nation. Pride in America comes from caring about your neighbors and civic opportunities more than history. This worldwide teaching of history is even more important now because the US plays such a dominant role overseas and because so much of our business is now overseas. I have no idea on the merits of the IB program, but I can appreciate children taking at least a couple of world history courses rather than just American history. It seems silly that American children must memorize so many dates and people in US history, but can't tell even basic history events from other countries. I get the feeling a lot of people in government haven't learned much about other countries either because of all of the misunderstandings read in the paper. If the IB program is ever scrapped, I think a worldwide view of history should be kept in some form.

[Anonymous]

"theirs" oops. too early on a snow day

[Anonymous]

My two children who graduated from an AP high school both had college roommates who graduated with IB diplomas from two different FCPS schools. Both felt they had gotten short end of the stick--mostly because they didn't get the credit my kids got.

[Anonymous]

To be clear: it was their roommates who felt they lost out. Both thought AP would have worked better for them.

[Anonymous]

Pride in America comes from caring about your neighbors and civic opportunities more than history. This worldwide teaching of history is even more important now because the US plays such a dominant role overseas and because so much of our business is now overseas. I have no idea on the merits of the IB program, but I can appreciate children taking at least a couple of world history courses rather than just American history. It seems silly that American children must memorize so many dates and people in US history, but can't tell even basic history events from other countries

You must not have gone to an American school. Every US high school I know about requires World History--two years of it.

[Anonymous]

Freshman and sophomore years both require World History. My kids' AP school taught AP World History starting at sophomore year.

[Anonymous]

Yes, but AP credit has nothing to do with being a "global citizen" and anyway colleges are cutting back on allowing AP credit for college courses. My neighbor homeschools her kids with the "story of the world" curriculum and activities around the neighborhood they're involved in, another has children at Montessori school where they learn about different cultures all the time, and my kids go to public school where they get civics lessons and American history lessons, but little else. Their children already have a better understanding of the world than mine, but my child has a better understanding of US history. At some point, we need to find balance between raising loyal Americans and producing adults who can understand others around the world better.

[Anonymous]

9:29 In the past, it was just one year of world history. If it's two years now, that's better at least. The other issue growing up was that nothing from the present was taught. It was all up to world war II and then the end of the year came and we never learned about the present or recent past.