John Hayward Posted: 1 May 2009
Keywords: Education,
Following yesterday's publication of Sir Jim Rose's Independent Review of the Primary Curriculum, last night I was at a governors' meeting discussing the possible introduction of the International Primary Curriculum (IPC) to my children's primary school in September.
The IPC is a topic-based curriculum that focuses on a combination of academic, personal, and international learning, with 'innovative, exciting, engaging and real ways to learn'. Core subjects - including science, mathematics, history, art, language, and geography - are taught through topics such as the Rainforest, Mission to Mars and Beyond, Chocolate, Fit for Life, The Olympics and Making the News, each one lasting two to six weeks.
The question is, how should this be evaluated? Yesterday's report from Sir Jim Rose identified as a central requirement of the review the need 'to reduce prescription and overload by reviewing the current programmes of study so that schools have greater flexibility to meet pupils' individual needs and build on their prior learning.' It went on to recommend that the primary curriculum be organised into six areas of learning: Understanding English, communication and languages; Mathematical understanding; Scientific and technological understanding; Historical, geographical and social understanding; Understanding physical development, health and wellbeing; and Understanding the arts.
Now, interestingly, Ofsted published a report last October into schools that felt that the minimum requirements of the National Curriculum did not give the best possible support to learners' achievement and personal development and that wanted to improve their curriculum provision. High performing schools studied had introduced at least one of the following four categories of curriculum innovation:
- Organising the curriculum around themes which drew from different subjects.
- Reorganising the school day or adjusting the school year to allocate longer blocks of time to activities.
- Introducing a number of pathways through Key Stages 3 and 4 in order to meet the needs of learners of all abilities and interests.
- Developing pupils' learning skills.
Ofsted's 'Curriculum Innovation' noted that 'The most successful innovations focused on developing a range of essential skills and attitudes for pupils' personal development, which underpinned their ability to learn effectively ... The curriculum innovations in the survey generally provided strong support for pupils' social development. From early on, they had many opportunities to work collaboratively, in pairs and in groups, and to develop the skills of teamwork and leadership. They also had rich opportunities for discussion and debate, often with representatives from the wider community and business. This was more than an academic exercise, since they tackled real issues with real people.'
So, it appears the IPC potentially has a lot to offer and I now look forward to seeing a presentation on it next Tuesday. Yet, I am reminded of an anecdote from a letter I received recently: 'On the CofE's "Education Sunday" in 2008 I listened in church to the CofE's National Director of Education describing education in CofE schools. I found it insipid and asked him afterwards if the object of education was the pursuit of wisdom. Surely this has been its purpose in all civilisations of which there are records, but it was clear that the idea was not uppermost in his mind.'
Watch out soon for a Christian 'Point of View' on education that the Jubilee Centre is developing in partnership with a number of other Christian education organisations!
very interesting article! I have booked someone from the IPC to speak to all staff {and some Govs} on June 4th - but would be very interested to see how your meeting went. I have read a great deal about the IPC, have spoken to an IPC school and already feel that, even after the Rose publication, it "ticks" all the boxes.
Exciting times ahead....I hope!
Liam Jackson 2 May 2009
It was an interesting presentation, Liam - no doubt the same one you'll have next month. As a governor in a church school, I was interested that RE is one of the areas (along with literacy, maths and modern foreign languages) excluded from the inter-disciplinary topic-based curriculum. So, it will still be down to the teaching staff to provide "the context of Christian belief and practice" and promote "Christian values through the experience it offers to all its pupils" (to quote the Church schools' model ethos statement that I've previously cited, at http://www.jubilee-centre.org/blog/196/diversity_threat_spreads).
That said, I know from my own past experience how much work is involved in developing a full school curriculum that is content-based, maximises the learning time students spend working together in meaningful contexts, and equips students with the skills required to enable them to be autonomous learners, so the IPC clearly does a lot of the work that would otherwise fall to teachers, hopefully leaving them free to personalise the material for the needs and background of their particular classes.
John Hayward 5 May 2009
I appreciate the benefits of the IPC, but having been subjected to 2 inset days where speakers from the IPC were present to try and SELL it to us, I can say that in my opinion it is a con. The speakers blare on about the CHOCOLATE topic (which you can get for £12 from hamilton trust by the way!) and then switch tracks entirely and berate older styles of teaching and planning (they make fun of old topic based planning - saying how it is funny how teachers find tenuous links to their subject title? Even though every teacher knows you extend a topic as naturally as possible and don't force a link where there isn't one).
The IPC costs a lot of money, the speakers are smug, and the end product is an AWFUL series of booklets that are more a list of ideas than lesson plans. There are NO RESOURCES to speak of (one booklet says i need to "obtain a motorised toy, the more complicated the3 better"!!!!). Websites such as hamilton trust provide you with resources (pictures and worksheets) where required for a fraction of the cost.
Also, i appreciate IPC is about children doing research etc... but i can tell you from personal experience this DOES NOT WORK for key stage one students!
Aviod like the plague. Its a hot topic and flavour of the month. Its also overpriced and poorly put together.
chris 19 May 2009
I am really surprised by Chris’s blog – I can’t quite believe what has been written.
I chose IPC for my school back in 2004 and I know that since then hundreds of other UK primary schools have trialled and chosen to deliver the National Curriculum through the cross-curricular approach of the International Primary Curriculum. Ofsted has praised the IPC in many inspection reports, including my own school. Here’s some of what they said.
“The exciting, relevant and innovative curriculum ensures that pupils use and extend the basic skills acquired in the mornings to the International Primary Curriculum in the afternoons.” This really goes to the heart of why we work with IPC. Fundamentally it is enriching and inspiring children’s learning. Our school is a inner-city one with high levels of social and economic deprivation and IPC has really helped us to meet the needs of all our children.
We also chose IPC because it is endorsed by the University of Bath and Campaign for Learning and I heard recently that it has been praised publicly by Mick Waters, the former director of QCA. All have closely critiqued and tried and tested the IPC; some for months and – others, like my school - years. Are you really saying all those people and groups have got it so wrong?
These are not perceptions or subjective opinions based on listening to a presenter talk about the IPC. They are judgements made with experience, having used and used and used the IPC in the classroom, with teachers and with children. If you want to make a decision about the IPC, go and see it in action in a school near you, (come to mine if you want), talk to some of the teachers, Headteachers, parents and children, including those in key stage 1. Trial a unit with a teacher and a class, and then make your choice.
Since 2004, it has been a pleasure to have worked with so many Headteachers and teachers who use IPC from not only this country but around the world – all of us committed to improving learning in the 21st century. Judging by your message Chris, it would seem you’re perhaps not quite ready for really helping children to learn in the 21st Century.
Avril 22 May 2009
I realize this is long gone but I would like to add my comment on the IPC. I have used the IPC since 2007 and it has been exciting and challenging all through for both teachers and students. Though the more traditional parents still have issues with having no exams (as that is their only way of assessing learning) I have a good percentage who have observed lessons and been involved in activities with their children; they are full of praise for the curriculum.
IPC opens up a whole new dimension to teaching and learning. Teachers have become better by accepting that indeed children learn differently and each classroom comprises multiple intelligences. This has changed their lesson planning and view of different students and learning.
It is about the children and not the teacher anymore. It has worked perfectly in Keys Stage one with children surprising us with their abilities. They research,present,question ,and challenge teachers. Every child has an opportunity to excel. With the IPC , once you have the material,the rest is upto you and what you want as a school. It does not hinder creativity..if anything it removes cobwebs that have long clogged minds that have crammed each content taught over the years. The chocolate unit offers the best example to someone hearing about the IPC for the first time.
This is the 21st C-it would help to look at Howard gardners five minds of the future. Remember we are soon counting a decade into the 21st century. I would recommend the IPC for any school that cares about learning and is learning focused !
jackline Aming'a 17 August 2009