THE INTERNATIONAL BACCALAUREATE-DIFFICULT TIMES AHEAD?

THE IB

Difficult times ahead?

Comment

The IB has enjoyed an increase in popularity over the last few years (close to 200 schools teach it) but is now experiencing its most difficult period. While the numbers of pupils taking the IB has been on the rise, for the first time schools are beginning to drop the award. The most recent to do so is a leading independent school, Kings Wimbeldon. The award is widely seen as more challenging than the A level and claims, with some justification, not to be a victim of grade inflation. But it is also seen by teachers and pupils alike as more challenging.  No bad thing, say supporters ,who say it’s the opposite of by rote learning, encouraging breadth and real understanding of the subjects studied. The ideal IB candidate is self-motivated and inquisitive. The Diploma also requires more teaching time, so it is more expensive to deliver. Already schools complain that they spend too much on exams and testing so any award that is relatively costly, at a time when budgets are under pressure,  is going to have the cards stacked against it, whatever its merits. There is another issue that is sometimes glossed over. The IB requires the post 16 study of maths and a science, subjects that pupils are often very keen to drop.

The IB, which it is often forgotten, operates at three levels: the Primary Years Programme for students aged between 5 and 11, the Middle Years Programme for those aged 11 and 16 and the Diploma Programme in the Sixth Form. The last is the most common in the UK. The Primary and Middle Years levels are rarely taught in the UK (mainly international schools for the middle years programme -and of course Wellington College-whose Head Anthony Seldon admitted that introducing the MYP was a  risk). Although some state schools run the IB most of the take-up is in the independent sector. And quite a few schools who offer the IB, also continue to offer A levels as an option.

Students on the diploma study six subjects, and specialise in three. They choose these from six subject groups to ensure a breadth of learning: first and second languages, humanities, sciences, maths, and the arts. They also write a 4,000-word essay, take classes in the theory of knowledge, and commit to 150 hours of CAS (creativity, action, service).

Running the IB programmes, though, is a challenge for schools and is not a task that should be lightly undertaken. Marlborough College is still searching for a Head having stipulated that it wanted someone with a sound knowledge and experience of the IB Diploma. Rumour has it that the candidates that they have seen who were proficient in all matters IB ( fishing in  relatively small pool) had perceived  deficiencies elsewhere. (no names no pack drill)

It is fair to say that the IB  may be in some danger of becoming an obsolete qualification and disappearing as a mainstream award  over the medium term  unless universities play their part in keeping  the award  alive. In theory IB students should be attractive to Higher education institutions and their admissions tutors  as it encourages the kind of  self-reliance and lateral  thinking that they are on the look- out for in candidates , but   as things stand, see  far too little of.   But its not that easy.  Indeed, supporters of the IB believe that admission tutors are being far too harsh on IB candidates and must take decisive action and insist that the offers for IB students reflect the depth and breadth of study it demands.   Rather too many IB students believe the IB is receiving unsympathetic offers from universities, and this is having a direct impact on the number opting to sit the IB Diploma. If you hear of disappointed IB students not getting the offers they thought they might , then you, as a pupil , begin to worry and this is shared in spades by parents and  slowly   confidence leaches away.

UK universities are systematically underestimating top candidates with IB qualifications in their admissions procedures, according to recent research by Professors Anna Vignoles and Francis Green of the Institute of Education .They found that at the top end of the scale, universities are demanding higher scores from IB candidates than from their A-level equivalents. Overall, universities systematically deviate from the official recommendation (provided by UCAS) in the offers they make to IB students. Universities tend to ask their IB applicants for higher IB points than officially recommended, but adjust too far at the top end of the scale. The report states “In institutions with IB students having an average grade of 37 or more, for example, we find that the IB students are 5.4 percentage points more likely to achieve an upper second class degree or better.”

Dr Anthony Seldon, the Master of Wellington College, put the concerns as follows in a letter to Times Higher Education Supplement –  ‘My own experience as the head of an independent school offering both A Level and IB informs my alarm.  It is deeply frustrating to see two students of comparable ability being asked for (for the A Level student) three grade As at A Level and (for the IB student) 40 points with – and here is the sting – two 7s and a 6 at Higher Level.  That A Level student, doing modular A Levels, is almost assured of gaining his or her place; for the IB student there is far less certainty.  Students are being penalised for taking the tougher option. ‘

With competition for places at top universities getting harder all the time the very idea that IB students are not getting a fair deal has the potential to undermine the qualification. Those who support the IB as an important qualification and absolutely suited to the requirements of some pupils, which I do, need to work hard with stakeholders to resolve the  outstanding issues and the sooner the better.

Note; The IB Diploma should not be confused with the other Diplomas introduced by the last government which were neither  vocational nor academic qualifications  –so had a bit of an identity crisis right from the start. (qualifications should be demand- led not prescribed, top down by politicians and officials).  Poorly conceived, marketed and managed,  they never quite managed to establish themselves  as robust qualifications among stakeholders,  though championed and over-sold  by education ministers in the last government.

THE ENGLISH BACCALAUREATE-WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

THE ENGLISH BACCALEUREATE-EBacc

What’s it all about?

Comment

In the White Paper, The Importance of Teaching, published on 24 October 2010, the Secretary of State announced the introduction of the English Baccalaureate. Not to be confused in any  way, of course,  with the IB which is altogether different and a qualification in itself. This new group award  is to be used as an additional indicator in KS4 performance tables. The EBacc is not a new qualification . It will recognise students’ achievements across a core of selected  ‘academic’ subjects in getting good passes in rigorous GCSEs or iGCSEs. It has been introduced due to concerns that the number of students who currently receive a broad education in core academic subjects is far too small. This is particularly the case apparently  for students in disadvantaged areas.  Special recognition will be given in the performance tables to those schools which help their students attain this breadth of achievement and the achievement of individual students will be marked through a certificate.  The English Baccalaureate will recognise A* to C passes at GCSE or iGCSE in five subject areas; English, Maths, Science, Humanities and Languages.  Further details listing which qualifications will be counted for each subject are now available in a Statement of Intent 2010 Addendum notice, on the Department for Education’s website.

The 2010 Tables which should be published this month  will also, for the first time, show the proportion of pupils at school, local authority and national level achieving good GCSE grades (A*-C) in both English and maths. The Governments  intention is to include science in this ‘Basics indicator’ from next year.  So it seems the English Baccalaureate, which new league tables will measure, will encourage pupils to study the following core Academic subjects:

English, English Lit, Maths, Triple Science, History, Ancient History or Geography and a Modern (although the correct definition of that term is now up for debate) Foreign Language (Spanish, French, German, Italian, Hindi (as a second language), Welsh as First and Second language   and  Latin ,classical Greek  and Biblical Hebrew.

Note Cambridge International Certificate and  CIE legacy iGCSE options are  also  included –see web site

Pupils  can then pick one subject (yes just one it seems) from, for example,   the following (non academic?) GCSEs:

Applied Sciences,  Applied Ethics, Business Studies, Classical Civilisation, ICT, Sociology, Art, Drama, Music, Media Studies, RE, Engineering, Psychology, Health & Social Care, Law, Economics, Critical Thinking, Citizenship, Statistics, PE, Resistant Materials, Textiles, Technology, Graphic Design Catering, Food Tech ..etc

In fact, all of the GCSEs listed above have  some  academic rigour, but aren’t academic enough to be counted in Government plans it seems. The worry is some will simply disappear as  it will not make economic sense for exam boards to continue to offer them or indeed  for teachers to train for them .  How do you distinguish between Ancient History and Classical Civilisation ,  the former is in, the latter out. Is it because one is more academically rigorous than the other? Already religious leaders are lobbying hard for RE, which they argue is a humanity, to be included in the core EBacc.  Critics point out that  if last years results  are viewed through the new  EBacc lens  it would mean  just 15%  of pupils passed.  On the one hand, they point out,  Gove complained about how much was prescribed by the previous government and the need to reduce central prescription. On the other, he has made it  clear that schools will in future be judged solely on their success in this  specific combination of subjects, effectively prescribing them as the route  that all students must take. This also clearly impacts on Academies and Free schools  freedom to choose their curriculum too. Indeed given the above do schools actually have   much meaningful  freedom, when it comes to the curriculum?  On a positive note, it is good that the ICGSE qualification gets the recognition it merits. The nonsense  whereby fine schools  dropped  to the bottom of the  league tables because they entered pupils  for more demanding IGCSEs ( because the league tables didn’t recognise them) will  now end.  The Government plans to continue to include the current 5+ A*-C GCSEs measure, including equivalences, in the Performance Tables for the time being.

Some Heads  are angry the league tables are being reformed  in effect retrospectively, ranking schools on exams taken before the new  Ebacc measure was announced. The Guardian has found that some schools are radically changing their curriculum offer to fall in line with the Ebacc requirements. But others welcome the fact that it will flush out schools that have been gaming, in other words entering their pupils for soft options in order to inflate their schools league table position,  whether its  in  the interests of the children, or not.

The Government says that the Ebacc is  not compulsory and will not suit all children, but it is the effect it will  have on league tables that worries many Heads.

PS

Under the new English Baccalaureate measure, according to the results released on 12 Jan – 15.6 per cent of pupils in England achieve an A* to C GCSE (or iGCSE) in English, mathematics, sciences, a modern or ancient language and history or geography

BRIGHT GIRLS LESS LIKELY TO WANT TO STUDY MATHS AND PHYSICS AT A-LEVEL THAN BRIGHT BOYS

BRIGHT GIRLS LESS LIKELY TO WANT TO STUDY MATHS AND PHYSICS AT A-LEVEL THAN BRIGHT BOYS

Stereotypical view reinforced

Implications for International Baccalaureate too?

Comment

The largest ever investigation analysing whether teenagers want to take maths or physics in the sixth form has found that even high-ability, highly motivated girls are less likely than boys to want to persist with the subjects beyond the age of 16. Researchers from the Institute of Education, London, who surveyed 10,355 14- and 15-year-olds in 113 schools across England found that girls were less likely to want to take maths and physics at A-level and through other post-16 qualifications, even when compared to boys with similar background characteristics. Three times as many boys as girls said they strongly agreed with the idea of taking physics beyond the age of 16, while for maths, boys were 1.5 times more likely to say this was the case. The academics behind the three year study, presented at the British Educational Research Association’s annual conference  last  September admitted that it was still not clear what schools should do to counteract this “male-orientation” towards take-up.

Apart from confirming a stereotypical view with wide currency, this study also raises questions about how you can make these subjects more appealing to girls. Also there has been much in the media recently praising the merits of the IB, which makes science and maths  study obligatory, post 16 ,however, this research suggests that the IB would hold much less  appeal  for girls than  for  boys, certainly as things stand.

Some 79 per cent of UK entries for physics A-level in 2010 were from boys, while the corresponding figure for maths A-level was 59 per cent.

CENTRAL CONTROL AND INTERVENTION OVER CURRICULUM

 Erosion of trust and confidence in qualifications – is the culprit political interference?

Reforms may not improve confidence

 Comment

Simon Lebus, Cambridge Assessments (CA) Chief Executive, attacked continuing political interference in our qualifications system, in a recent CA conference.CA are responsible interalia for innovations such as the IGCSE and Cambridge Pre-U .

Reforms are envisaged under the Apprenticeships Skills, Children and Learning (ASCL) Bill, completing its Parliamentary passage, which establishes a new independent regulator, Ofqual. The aim is to distance itself from qualifications regulation in the hope that this will improve trust in the system, and put an end to the annual dumbing down debate. But this is unlikely to happen, according to Lebus’ reading of the developing situation. He does not believe the new arrangements will be sufficient on their own to restore trust. This is partly because the long hand of central control continues to exert its influence through Government ownership of the curriculum. Lebus said, “ Whilst there is a legitimate issue of accountability here, the realities of bureaucratic activism and the need to reconcile competing interests among stakeholders make this self-defeating. Originally well intentioned efforts to ensure consistent minimum standards soon lead to overbearing and overloaded programmes of study.”

 Lebus used the new science curriculum as a case study to illustrate his point. The new science curriculum reflects the tension between the desire to promote general scientific literacy among non-scientists and the need to educate the next generation of practising scientists. So he said “the emphasis has been on producing a motivating National Curriculum which includes coverage of all sorts of contemporary social issues rather than a succinct statement of a common core of learning that lists key concepts and processes and establishes them within a sensible framework of conceptual progression.”

 He continued “So we have the paradox that the instrument of central control – in this instance the National Curriculum – destabilises the learning it is designed to protect, a good illustration of how concentration of control in the centre can generate its own entropy and a good justification for an approach along the lines of that locally-responsive ‘community curriculum’ proposed in Professor Alexander’s review.”

The producer cannot, as Professor Alison Wolf pointed out at the same conference, also be an honest inspector –and the Government now is clearly a producer. It has moreover a vested interest in showing ,year in year out, that performance is improving (which is now a political imperative) so it duly does, to most stakeholders continuing disbelief. Admissions tutors at Universities meanwhile continue to observe a mismatch between what they see in terms of the skills and aptitudes of new students and what official results supposedly tell them.

It is instructive that in most other countries, indeed almost everywhere, Government interference in qualifications is confined almost exclusively to vocational education and training for the young. As ever, our establishment feels that it knows best, though OECD league tables might suggest otherwise.

 The Progressive extension of state control over our qualifications is predicated on two assumptions – that the government can be both effective and impartial and top down interventions are preferable to bottom up. It also implies that the Government is more effective, and more impartial, than independent bodies can be, even under regulation. This is an unlikely proposition in the first instance. In practice it is demonstrably unsustainable.

Producer, or Regulatory capture, follows if governments are measuring their own success through the performance of tightly supervised, or nationalised, agencies.

These agencies self-evidently have a strong incentive to influence the way they are measured. The establishment of Ofqual was supposed to signal a move back to independent quality assurance with light regulation but it appears too close to Government and few insiders believe that it will make much difference. The Reform think tank recently proposed that HE Institutions should become more involved in the development of subject syllabuses for A levels. Lebus approves, as it would permit HE, schools and awarding bodies to re-connect and re-establish ownership of the curriculum, instead of its being mediated, as at present, through regulatory and other central points of control. Awarding Bodies would welcome such a development and would be able to respond quickly and effectively (A levels were designed primarily for HE entry)

Lebus also suggested that, more generally, we need to think about how to achieve a shift in control so that we establish a better balance between a less ambitiously stated ‘framework’ National Curriculum and giving room to teaching professionals, awarding bodies, representatives of HE and other interested bodies to create interesting and challenging learning programmes on the ground, programmes in other words, which incorporate a slimmed down National Curriculum but go well beyond it.

 What should drive any education system is the needs of learners. Teachers must be allowed to use their professional judgment more and to teach creatively to respond to learners individual needs and to deliver a rounded education. The qualifications system should be demand driven and while elements of our system are demand driven, far too much of it simply isn’t. You have to ask why most of the best schools are turning away from GCSEs and A level and towards the IB, IGCSE and Cambridge Pre-U.

The answer is that they are losing confidence in the qualifications and the quality assurance and regulatory regime that goes with it. Meddling politicians and civil servants are the primary reason for this state of affairs.

Sometimes centrally driven interventions, and the command and control model works. Literacy and numeracy policy is an example (it is easy to forget just how poor literacy and numeracy teaching was 12 years ago). But the default position should be programmes driven from the bottom up rather than top down. With qualifications the Government has simply got it wrong and needs to change tack.

The shambolic introduction of Diplomas has simply reinforced this message.

Cambridge Assessments concerns over the ability of Ofqual to restore confidence should be a matter of huge concern for all stakeholders.

THE INTERNATIONAL BACCALAUREATE-NOT TO EVERYONES TASTES BUT…

 

THE IB

Not to everyone’s tastes, but the market speaks

Comment

It is extraordinary how much debate there is in the blogsphere about the merits and demerits of International Baccalaureate, which is seen by some  here as a better alternative to the A level and in its junior form, the Middle Years programme, as  a better option  than the GCSE.

  In the States some critics suggest that the IB promotes “socialism, disarmament, radical environmentalism, and moral relativism, while attempting to undermine Christian religious values and national sovereignty”. Crikey, it makes it sound rather appealing.

 Elsewhere, in the middle east and Far East it is seen by some  to be   promoting values which are perceived to be too ‘pro-West’. 

 Despite  such criticism demand for the qualification is on the rise. Here in the UK if you include pupils in both the maintained sector, FE  and Sixth Form colleges included, and the independent sector, the total figure for pupils taking the IB  for 2007/8  was 2,485, divided  pretty equally between the private and state sectors.

While growing in popularity here but  from a low base  it  ironically perhaps, is seeing its greatest  growth   in the US, the Middle East, and South East Asia. Across the IB brands , year on year growth is thought to be around 14%. And because the IB doesn’t have ‘ the baggage’ of any one faith, it can gain access to schools which are predominantly Christian or Muslim or Jewish (or anything else come to that)

 The  British government, when  Tony Blair was PM  announced that every local authority in the country would have an IB school; Gordon Brown has gone back on this, but the Conservatives are well disposed  in principle towards the IB, both as a model, and as a programme (http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2008/11/michael-gove-pr.html)

 

Browns decision to backtrack on the IB commitment is perhaps understandable given that the IB is much more expensive to deliver than A levels. Perhaps, 50% more expensive in fact, as it requires much more  teaching time than the A level.

 The Middle Years programme  of the IB has been in the news recently as a handful of schools are either already delivering it in preference to GCSEs, or about to.

 One noteworthy aspect of the MYP is that it comes in two basic forms. Either a school, can take the more expensive route  seeking  the MYP  as  a full stand-alone qualification:  ie  with certification (which is what  Wellington College has opted for), or  schools  go the other non-certification route and use it as a  way station to the IB Diploma, which is what most  schools, using the MYP in the UK, do.

 However if a pupil leaves school, at 16,  for whatever reason and has been studying the MYP, but not with certification, then they will leave with  no qualification to show to future employers, which might be a consideration for some parents. .

 My only problem is that apologists for the IB tend to oversell its  case-it is clearly not the best option for  every pupil, indeed its insistence that science and maths are  studied by every student,  post 16, probably makes it unsuited to all but a minority.

 The key point in all this is  though is that the increased demand for the IB, and indeed  other qualifications like the IGCSE and Pre-U is because confidence in GCSEs, A levels  and the new Diploma is not what it should be. The blame for this must rest squarely with meddlesome politicians and the QCA.