Talk:IB Middle Years Programme

Education Mid‑importance

	Education portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

PreIB

In the opening statement, it lists the MYP is sometimes referred to as Pre IB. However, in my experiences, that is often what I hear schools call their own custom-made program that choose not to go through the process of becoming an actual IB MYP school. Granted, this is only within my limited framework... can anyone say they know of actual authorized MYP schools calling it pre IB.

SenWe 4:57, 25 Jan 2017 (CST)

Criticism

I had generally ignored it before, but when editing, actually looked over the criticism section. I understand criticism sections are often critical, however, if you compare it to the criticism section of AP, the one here provides no counter articles/studies (which are available) and seems to push the same negative POV that was seen prior to other edits.

SenWe 5:25, 25 Jan 2017 (CST)

PoV

As a DP senior, I can certainly understand the frustration many MYP students must face. Wikipedia, however, is not the place to vent this frustration. This article is fine, for the most part, but had a whole bunch of lines that were clearly written by frustrated MYPers. Lines such as

However, most students decide to abandon the IBO after having experienced the tedious MYP programme.

are unsourced, and words like "tedious" are red flags for PoV statements. Is there a study to back up this claim? If so, cite it! If not, please don't put it in. You'll find that citation will be a handy skill to have once you're writing your EE. Unless, of course, you decide to abandon the IBO ;-) I've removed the PoV statements, went back to the basic facts, and I'm hoping- nay, praying- that you'll keep this article factual, properly sourced, and encyclopedic. --~Ça Suffit~ (talk) 06:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Environment AoI

Changing the name of the AoI "the environment" and removing the link. The AoI is called "environment" and the link does not serve to improve the understanding of what this is within the MYP context.

Candy 09:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personal project

I've added further information about the personal project, since it's a fairly major part of the MYP cirriculum. Based primarily on my own experience as an MYP student – little bit of trivia, I used Ultima Linux for my project – not sure how much of it is specific to my school and how much is done by all MYP schools, but I've got all the documentation for how to do the project, etc. here if anyone needs a copy.

multima 02:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I.B.No

Why isn't there any mention of the fact that IBO is all about learning how to bullshit? The secret to IBO is knowing how to transform 53 words into 2000 words while not adding any new information. Concise writing is the mark of an intelligent writer and yet this program demands that students drag out and fill in their ideas to fit requirements. Furthermore one learns how to bullshit in terms of Areas of Interaction and "connections". Everything about IBO is just so stupid and it focusses on such things as keeping logs for the personal project, which no one actually works on until the final week, meaning that they must invent months worth of emotions and commentary on a project that they completed in three days. The personal project, therefore, is truly a measure of how well one has come to master the IBO philosophy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.53.137.52 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 1 November 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Fortunately the majority of students have learned to be honest, hard-working and have academic integrity. ˜˜˜˜

No, he's right. This is how many IB students feel about the program.

its true, although bullshit might not be the correct term. there is procrastination. they give us so much work that to do it all and not procrastinate is impossible. Pikasneez27 02:08, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop trolling please. Candy 19:48, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Community and Service

I removed this section. The statements are inaccurate in that the IBO does not indicate nor mandate a minimum number of hours for this. It is Community and Service not Community Service. There is a clear distinction in philosophy between the two and it seem that the writer is mistaking perhaps incorrect implementation of the programme or is confusing it with CAS in the Diploma programme?. Refer to the IBO AoI subject guide for more information. ˜˜˜˜

DGS

dartford grammar school was like the first state school in the uk and world to offer this course incorporatng into original courses, research this ad include! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.192.243 (talk) 14:43, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As of 2007 the school has been awarded the right to teach the International Baccalaureate Middle Years Programme, becoming the first school in Britain and the first state school in the world to teach the course. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.192.243 (talk) 14:46, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, not noteworthy with respect to the scope of the article whether verifiable or not. --Candy (talk) 21:31, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting deletion

There was a major section deleted from the article (which I take as vandalism as it was unexplained). I then managed to cock up the reversion and vandalised myself.

The article is back in skeleton form again. Sorry if I have destroyed any minor editing that someone feels attached to during my attempt. I also edited out some opinions too.

Next ... citations needed and will return to clean up more text. --Candy (talk) 17:03, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Participation

Why is an entire section in the article devoted to a single school in the US? For now I'll add a notability tag to it. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:55, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, this article seems to be poorly informed and subverted to push a negative POV of the IBMYP.

A few major issues:

The IB use British English spelling so it is probably appropriate to reflect that here.
Heading such as "scoring system" (it should be about assessment) are written extremely badly. The "criteria of Science is ..." should be the criteria of science are. Sadly it is littered with such basic mistakes, but more importantly the content is generally poorly expressed. The comment about how the criteria are used for science is original and speculative research.
The IB learner profile is out of date with respect to the flexibility options.
The AOIs are badly explained and some statements are untrue.
The comparison of the extended essay with the Personal project is spurious to say the least and shows no clear understating of either, and is confused about internal and IB validated grades.
Participation is incorrect. A student must attend an IB World school with an authorised IBMYP. This is not the same as what is stated.
The criticism makes no sense without an explanation of the IB philosophy or positive benefits of the programme. The costings also make no sense unless that are compared to regular schooling costs fro equivalent programmes, it ask confuses annual fee for candidate fee, and uses an article for the basis of criticism which is not notable.
The research section is odd. Worthwhile conclusion from research should be incorporated in the article and not make research as basis for a section of the article.

Until the article is almost completely re-written to reflect upcoming changes as well, sadly it looks doomed to stay in its sorry and uninformative state :(

Candy (talk) 07:07, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. It is entirely pushing a negative POV with little to no counter balance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.69.134.242 (talk)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on IB Middle Years Programme. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131205023220/https://www.ibo.org/become/fees/index.cfm to http://www.ibo.org/become/fees/index.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:32, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Major cleanup from one outside the IB movement

When an article stays twisted up for a decade it needs a fresh perspective. I came over here as I needed it for a wikilink for The Skinners' Kent Academy. I am familiar with accreditation systems see Thinking Schools and schools that use the IB Diploma Programme such as Rochester Grammar School but the Kent Academy is notable in using the MYP within the UK National Curriculum.

To be honest the article I found looked like a student assignment written to maximise the length, incomplete then savaged by a far right nationalist religious political party. I was not impressed and then it was so old. Just using the facts hidden in the article I have attempted to wikify it, and unlock the structure. I accept in advance that glaring inaccuracies may have crept in. I intend to go back now to my sources and to attempt to reference. Please join in here on the talk page.ClemRutter (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]