Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank yuo so much for posting these links. But they seem to deal primarily with IB at the high school level. I wish there were discussons about the PYP.

09:13 thanks so much for your contribution. i am curious if you can elaborate on what makes you say that dcps and dc charters seem to know little about how IB works for little kids.

It's the parents who generally don't know about IB due to lack of exposure.

And a lack of willingness to do a simple Google search which would turn up the IBO website in a nanosecond and give them all the information they could want. Let's face it, they just want to bitch on DCUM.

Anonymous wrote:Thank yuo so much for posting these links. But they seem to deal primarily with IB at the high school level. I wish there were discussons about the PYP.

09:13 thanks so much for your contribution. i am curious if you can elaborate on what makes you say that dcps and dc charters seem to know little about how IB works for little kids.

It's the parents who generally don't know about IB due to lack of exposure.

And I just checked and indeed there are four schools in DC that are official PYP schools: WIS (private), Thompson, HD Cooke and Shepherd. It would be so awesome if parents from these schools were able to contribute to this dicussion.

Thank yuo so much for posting these links. But they seem to deal primarily with IB at the high school level. I wish there were discussons about the PYP.

09:13 thanks so much for your contribution. i am curious if you can elaborate on what makes you say that dcps and dc charters seem to know little about how IB works for little kids.

Anonymous wrote:Wow, if your niece was taking AP classes while in elementary school, no wonder she got into Harvard (and several other Ivies, it should go without saying)! What a helpful addition to this ludicrous PYP thread.

You sound like somebody who didn't follow the IB curriculum as a kid, and doesn't have children who've followed it, at least not all the way up. The over the top emphasis on process is a real issue; it starts in PYP and run through 12th grade. As a teacher of both HS IB and AP life sciences for a decade, I've come to prefer AP msyelf. Yes, more rigor, less examination of how learning happens, which, after a point, starts to see like a waste of time. I note that PYP and the MYP, while fun, are hardly necessary prep for IB in HS. Many kids at the international privates in DC don't touch IB until HS, even until 11th grade, and they do well enough. Since few DCPS and DC Charter seem to know much about how the IB curriclum works, for either little kids or teens, this thread is no bad thing.

Curious. What makes you think the faculty in those schools don't know about how the IB curriculum framework works?
People interested in this thread might be interested in these:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/class-struggle
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/class-struggle/post/admissions-101-ap-takes-step-toward-international-baccalaureate-like-credential/2012/03/05/gIQAdWkDtR_blog.html
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/class-struggle/2010/05/ap_vs_ib--choosing_sides.html

Wow, if your niece was taking AP classes while in elementary school, no wonder she got into Harvard (and several other Ivies, it should go without saying)! What a helpful addition to this ludicrous PYP thread.

You sound like somebody who didn't follow the IB curriculum as a kid, and doesn't have children who've followed it, at least not all the way up. The over the top emphasis on process is a real issue; it starts in PYP and run through 12th grade. As a teacher of both HS IB and AP life sciences for a decade, I've come to prefer AP msyelf. Yes, more rigor, less examination of how learning happens, which, after a point, starts to see like a waste of time. I note that PYP and the MYP, while fun, are hardly necessary prep for IB in HS. Many kids at the international privates in DC don't touch IB until HS, even until 11th grade, and they do well enough. Since few DCPS and DC Charter seem to know much about how the IB curriclum works, for either little kids or teens, this thread is no bad thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: As several people have pointed out, I am less concerned about any language acquisition aspect but more about everything else -- skills as well as knowledge, and I suppose it's really the knowledge piece of it, and whether the "unit of inquiry" model is really rigorous enough to allow in depth understanding/mastery of the traditional subjects. I mean, diagramming sentences was kind of a pain and yet I think it was really important. I worry that in the rush to embrace this cool, nontraditional model, our kids might not be getting the kind of preparation they need to succeed.

I, too, am concerned about the seeming over-emphasis on process, vs. knowledge acquisition. I'll mention a niece who attended IB curriclum international schools from a young age. She opted to do several on-line AP classes, although her school didn't offer AP, to supplement full IB diploma work. This was because she, and her parents, had long found the IB curriculum to be somewhat fluffy, and were concerned by the fact that test results don't come out until after one graduates (far too late for college applications). She was admitted to several Ivies (attends Harvard) and said that a couple of the interviewers complemented her on the decision to supplement with traditional course work. She found AP prep to be more rigorous than IB prep, not what those rushing to embrace the latter are saying. Basis has gone with AP not IB, which I find interesting.

Wow, if your niece was taking AP classes while in elementary school, no wonder she got into Harvard (and several other Ivies, it should go without saying)! What a helpful addition to this ludicrous PYP thread.

Anonymous wrote: As several people have pointed out, I am less concerned about any language acquisition aspect but more about everything else -- skills as well as knowledge, and I suppose it's really the knowledge piece of it, and whether the "unit of inquiry" model is really rigorous enough to allow in depth understanding/mastery of the traditional subjects. I mean, diagramming sentences was kind of a pain and yet I think it was really important. I worry that in the rush to embrace this cool, nontraditional model, our kids might not be getting the kind of preparation they need to succeed.

I, too, am concerned about the seeming over-emphasis on process, vs. knowledge acquisition. I'll mention a niece who attended IB curriclum international schools from a young age. She opted to do several on-line AP classes, although her school didn't offer AP, to supplement full IB diploma work. This was because she, and her parents, had long found the IB curriculum to be somewhat fluffy, and were concerned by the fact that test results don't come out until after one graduates (far too late for college applications). She was admitted to several Ivies (attends Harvard) and said that a couple of the interviewers complemented her on the decision to supplement with traditional course work. She found AP prep to be more rigorous than IB prep, not what those rushing to embrace the latter are saying. Basis has gone with AP not IB, which I find interesting.

OP HERE, thanks so much for the parents who have shared their experiences with the IB/PYP model. As several people have pointed out, I am less concerned about any language acquisition aspect but more about everything else -- skills as well as knowledge, and I suppose it's really the knowledge piece of it, and whether the "unit of inquiry" model is really rigorous enough to allow in depth understanding/mastery of the traditional subjects. I mean, diagramming sentences was kind of a pain and yet I think it was really important. I worry that in the rush to embrace this cool, nontraditional model, our kids might not be getting the kind of preparation they need to succeed.

I am a non-native Chinese speaker considering YY and I have to say I've been pleasantly surprised by the Chinese I've heard the students speaking. It is by no means fluent, the accents/tones are all over the place, but it's definitely Chinese and they are definitely learning!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Honestly, demographics have a lot to do with it. If you have a largely upper-middle class cohort of students, then student-driven learning is terrific. However, those are children who don't need to have discipline and self-control taught in addition to the curriculum (that they're already a year or two behind their high-performing classmates).

I see it working well at a school like Yu Ying.

I don't see it working all that well at YY, where a sizeable minority of students has been bumped to a non-immersion track, almost all of them AA. YY doesn't have a largely upper-middle class cohort of students - the student population is split between better-off kids (who don't speak Chinese at home), and poor kids (who don't speak Chinese at home). IB PYP is really designed for private international schools serving the children of diplomats, aid workers, private sector managers etc. It just sounds hip for DC public schools where at least half the kids are low to moderate-income.

That's funny. I just looked it up and Yu Ying's FARMS numbers are at 24%. That's richer than, say, Deal (an IB school) at 28%. The Chinese-lite track is less than 5% of the student body (and exclusive to the leading class, which has more typical DC demographics). If your argument is that IB only works with high SES students, then it doesn't hold any water.

What explains how far away from reality your rant is? Could it be that you're bitter?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree with the poster above. I think the IB/PYP program works very well at Yu Ying. I have a child in 4th grade. Last Friday they had an exhibition on their electricity unit. It was pretty cool to see my child and the rest of the class explaining circuitry in both Chinese and English. Their exhibition last year in third grade on influential people was pretty cool too. They were able to get into character and explain their accomplishments in Chinese.

I do not feel that my child is behind in any subject because of either immersion or because of the IB/PYP curriculum.

You speak Mandarin? You have Mandarin speaking relatives, or at least close friends? So know that your kid's Mandarin is good? We speak Chinese fluently, as do our children, we talk to Yu Ying kids in Chinese and generally aren't terribly impressed. It's easy to tell that they aren't learning the language from peers, Chinese-speaking parents involved at the school, or at home (other than for a handful who have Chinese-speaking friends, the pals of our Chinese au pair). The IB/PYP program works well at the international schools we attended growing up, in Hong Kong etc. Yu Ying does a better job than a great many schools in DC, but, objectively speaking, it's a stretch to say it's all that great.

Whoa! Kind of critical no for someone who doesn't even have a kid at the school.

I speak some, but my kid has surpassed me. How do I know my DC's Chinese is good? Well, DC is often speaking it, can communicate in Chinese with native Chinese speakers (yes we have Chinese friends). Is DC at grade level in Chinese? No. Maybe you have not spoken with all the YY kids? There are some YY kids with "Gwai Lo" parents, such as my DC who can speak quite a bit of Chinese.

I fully expect DC to spent time abroad to cement the language when DC is older. At this point DC is familiar with the language and culture. Moreover, this aquisition of a second language has not been at the expense of other subject areas, math and reading (which is what the original question posed -- does the IB/PYP program cause students to fall behind in other areas. Answer no.

YY is not perfect, nor is it the school for every kid. Every parent makes that decision based on what they want for their kid and where the lottery lands them. Anyway, the initial question did not even address YY. Only my response and example did(it is the only IB/PYP program I have any direct experience with).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Honestly, demographics have a lot to do with it. If you have a largely upper-middle class cohort of students, then student-driven learning is terrific. However, those are children who don't need to have discipline and self-control taught in addition to the curriculum (that they're already a year or two behind their high-performing classmates).

I see it working well at a school like Yu Ying.

I don't see it working all that well at YY, where a sizeable minority of students has been bumped to a non-immersion track, almost all of them AA. YY doesn't have a largely upper-middle class cohort of students - the student population is split between better-off kids (who don't speak Chinese at home), and poor kids (who don't speak Chinese at home). IB PYP is really designed for private international schools serving the children of diplomats, aid workers, private sector managers etc. It just sounds hip for DC public schools where at least half the kids are low to moderate-income.

Oh for god's sake, get over it!! you harp constantly on this site about the differentiated curriculum model and yet less than 4% of the YY kids are receiving their language instruction this way. These kids still receive the IB PYP; their Chinese is delivered as language instruction rather than immersion. That's not a "sizeable minority". You also have no clue about whom the IB PYP is designed for: 58% of IB schools are public schools!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree with the poster above. I think the IB/PYP program works very well at Yu Ying. I have a child in 4th grade. Last Friday they had an exhibition on their electricity unit. It was pretty cool to see my child and the rest of the class explaining circuitry in both Chinese and English. Their exhibition last year in third grade on influential people was pretty cool too. They were able to get into character and explain their accomplishments in Chinese.

I do not feel that my child is behind in any subject because of either immersion or because of the IB/PYP curriculum.

You speak Mandarin? You have Mandarin speaking relatives, or at least close friends? So know that your kid's Mandarin is good? We speak Chinese fluently, as do our children, we talk to Yu Ying kids in Chinese and generally aren't terribly impressed. It's easy to tell that they aren't learning the language from peers, Chinese-speaking parents involved at the school, or at home (other than for a handful who have Chinese-speaking friends, the pals of our Chinese au pair). The IB/PYP program works well at the international schools we attended growing up, in Hong Kong etc. Yu Ying does a better job than a great many schools in DC, but, objectively speaking, it's a stretch to say it's all that great.

NP, you are comparing apples and oranges. OP asked about the curriculum. Whether the kids speak Chinese correctly is a different issue than IB/PYP as a curriculum which is not dependent on language. Are the kids learning, science, math, social studies etc. at Yu Ying or a monolingual school that uses IB/PYP--that is the question.

Wow, this is disappointing to read. They just established this program for the poorest peforming school in Alexandria City in the hopes that it was going to turn the school around. The school is almost all low income children and one of the persistent problems over the years have been low parental invovlement in education. It sounds like this program is not going to do much to improve the education for the students in the school or attract new students to the school.