Since the original post in early 2016, we’ve made some progress, experienced some great successes and uncovered some further challenges. Enthusiasm is building behind Interdisciplinary Units (IDU’s), though there is still work to be done. I’ve updated the flowchart below to show some other “ways in” to IDU planning, and for potential inclusion in MYP IDU support materials. The pdf version has live links to supporting documents.
Twitter is an amazing tool for building a PLN (personal learning network), but as you follow more accounts the main stream can be too fast/distracting to follow, and dipping in at random times is inefficient. Tweetdeck is ideal for curating your feeds: create a column for each topic of interest. Here’s an ugly image for an overview. It’s also great for keeping up with rapidly-moving feeds (such as twitter chats or breaking news).
- I find TweetDeck for Chrome works well
- I get rid of the “Activity”column, it’s distracting
- Click on >> (lower-left) to see more options
- I add columns for many topics of interest. Each is its own potential PLN.
- Some Twitter users curate “lists” of accounts. You’ll get notified if you are added. If you look in the list, there may be other interesting people to follow.
- When an interesting conference or event is on, I follow the #Hashtag and am able to review the feed to learn vicariously. Too many columns can slow down Chrome, so delete them if they’re no use.
- “Likes” are often used as bookmarks, though the poster will know. On the main Twitter app you can “save bookmarks” but not here yet. Sometimes at the end of an exchange, a user will “like” the final post as a polite way of ending the conversation.
Some MYP-related Hashtags/Accounts you might want to put into columns. Copy everything, including OR. As you follow more accounts, you can see the kinds of #tags they are using.
- #MYPChat OR @MYPChat OR #IBMYP OR #IBChat
- #PYPChat OR #IBRebelAlliance
- #IBATL OR #SkillsFirst OR #DOKChat
Update: here’s a short tutorial video by Dan Klumper (@danklumper)
Over the last few years as a science teacher and coordinator I’ve been thinking a lot about how we might create a culture of thinking that balances vigorous and challenging outcomes with student co-creation (or navigation) of inquiry, particularly where there might be high-stakes terminal assessments looming. The “Curriculum as a compass, not a calendar” metaphor* helps me wrestle with these ideas.
This one has been brewing a while and is still pretty drafty, so I reserve the right to edit ;> With so much written about inquiry and edtech in recent years, there is likely little new in here, but writing helps clarify thinking. Also, my kids and I love Moana, hence the images and gifs.
*See the “Heritage of the Idea” at the bottom of the post.
Inquiry as a Quest (or Journey)
The Japanese term Tankyuu (探 究), meaning inquiry, journey, quest or investigation, is a nice fit for this idea. It aligns with a pragmatic definition of inquiry, suggesting that there is a journey worth taking, knowledge worth learning and many paths worth exploring.
It suggests depth and vigour, a level of sophistication that empowers learning, building on (and feeding back into) a solid foundation for the future.
This is no new idea, and has been written about in many different ways. Most recently, in Quest for Learning by Marie Alcock, Alison Zmuda and Michael Fisher, inquiry is presented as a part of a “quest” that is enhanced by effective networks and elements of “gaming” that drive learners. Hop on over here for a review of their book.
Curriculum as a Compass, not a Calendar
If we think of inquiry as a voyage, then we might think of curriculum as a compass – map and compass set. As a map the curriculum outlines the destinations and checkpoints, obstacles and viewpoints. The curriculum outlines the “need to knows” in context (national/international standards), but doesn’t dictate the route to take – or the schedule for the learning. There may be well-trodden paths to lead us to tourist hotspots but there might also be areas uncharted, adventures waiting to happen where the questing learner (co-)creates new knowledge, ideas or outcomes.
The compass holds “true north”, ensuring that whatever the path taken, learners can find themselves back on track, relatively unscathed. The compass can help the tempered self-regulating learner decide “If I’m here, and I want/need to get there, then I have to ______ .” In the PYP context, you might want to read the ever-great Edna Sackson’s post on “curriculum shouldn’t be linear“.
With curriculum as a map and compass, teachers and learners can navigate the “need to knows and where to go’s” with some confidence. They might even be ready to set sail into the blue yonder…
Just in case & just in time: the navigator’s toolkitWhat are the roles of knowledge and skills in an inquiry context? Under this metaphor, we might think of them as the “need to knows” to start the journey: the contents of the voyager’s backpack.
- What does the explorer need to know and be able to do to set the course? What experiences and provocations can inspire the journey and create the moving force to get going?
- What do they need to know and be able to do to get going? How will they know they’re making progress and how will they generate feedback to take action on the journey? What are the most effective ways to learn this foundational knowledge, misconception-free, so that they are prepared for the journey ahead?
- What are the “just in case” lessons or resources that the teacher might have to hand (or workshop with), in prediction for challenges ahead? “Ah, I can see you’re heading up the mountain…. do you have the right rope?“.
- What are the “just in time” lessons that the teacher might need to prepare, or have at their fingertips, as the journey progresses? How can we spot and take appropriate actions on the little nudges that get the lost wanderer out of the bog?
The Teacher and Learner as WayfindersThrough all these decisions the teacher makes (or helps the student make), we can hold the following in mind:
- What knowledge might help here, and are they on track?
- What disciplinary skills are useful here and do they know them well?
- What approaches to learning skills can drive this forwards?
- What tools – physical, digital and strategic – might be needed and how will they access them? How much of this is just in case or just in time?
- How can this connect to other learning, in this quest, other classes or outside?
- Who can help as journey-mates, experts or co-navigators?
- Are they holding “true north” and how far off course is OK until we need to step in?
So what is the role of the elder in the hero’s quest?
Inspiration? Co-creator? Director? The holder of cultural knowledge (curriculum)? Guide? Instructor? Coach? Confidante? Expert?
As the adults in the room, with a great weight of responsibility, it is likely to be all of the above. The challenge is knowing who needs what and when, helping our own learners find the joy in uncertainty and the fulfilment of doing the hard work of learning to find our way.
Technology can help bring the magic…
With potentially transformative technologies in our voyagers’ backpacks, our quests have the potential for charting new territories, creating new outcomes and connecting across the map.
From productivity to efficiency, creativity to critical thinking, wellbeing to connection, the potential for technologies to really elevate learning is endless, and can amplify (or transform) a knowledge-rich, student-owned learning adventure.
Reach out and connect: it’s a rich world of shared learning and collaboration that can give the voyagers access to learning that might not have been possible otherwise.
…but don’t let SatNav ruin the adventure
SatNav, as wonderful as it can be, has two main flaws. First, it gives “the answer” quickly, even though it might not be the answer we need (and may sometimes lead down a dodgy path). Second, it can be annoyingly fiddly, dominating your thinking when you should be driving the car. As the teacher it can be hard to resist jumping in with the answer (or an assumption) that steals the opportunity for thought, like a satnav giving shortcuts that miss out on the best part of the journey. Similarly, edtech is not always the solution and even in the age of Google our students need to be masters of valuable knowledge.
I like to think about these “get out of the ways” (and I’m sure will add more):
- If surface-level enquiry (looking up simple stuff) is wasting mental energy that could be better put to work on true thinking (inquiry with an “I”), find a more efficient way to teach the basics and move on to better questions.
- If the adult is getting in the way of the real thinking, step back and listen.
- If the tech is just a “shiny” distraction, reconsider its worth. Do we really need this side-plot in our adventure?
- If the tech tool is creating an unproductive struggle (a “clicky-clicky timesuck”), ditch it for something more truly interactive and/or effective.
- If grades are getting in the way of learning, find ways to separate them from feedback (feedback first, feed-forwards and so on).
- If the navigators are lost (or antagonistic), teach the teamwork skills that are needed to move on.
- … (can you add more?)
“It’s not just sails and knots…”
“… it’s seeing where you’re going (in your mind). It’s knowing where you’re going by knowing where you’ve been.”
So there you go. My two cents on curriculum as a compass, inquiry as a quest and ATL skills, edtech and more as navigation tools, using Moana gifs. If you have any thoughts, please add them in the comments below or find me on Twitter.
*The Heritage of an Idea
When I heard the phrase “curriculum is a compass, not a calendar“, years ago, it resonated,
but I couldn’t remember where I heard it, Found it: it was Aaron Duff (in 2014) – and I’d even made (and forgotten about) a graphorism when this account was on my old handle (@iBiologyStephen), a symptom of years of output littered across the web.
In a Twitter exchange on #PubPDAsia I tracked down an even earlier use of it (2008), and found a quote in Research on Second Language Teacher Education: A Sociocultural Perspective, edited by Karen E. Johnson, Paula R. Golombek. It’s amazing what focused search strategies can turn up in the context of a rapidly-moving live twitter-chat!
Now, as I think more about curriculum development and future adventures in high-quality, learner-driven, vigorous (and knowledge-founded) inquiry, I think about the toolkits and strategies we might put in place. Connecting the pieces of the the programmes (MYP, DP, NGSS etc), along with big ideas and frameworks from Bold Moves, Quest for Learning, Cultures of Thinking, Making Thinking Visible, I move closer to the image of the learner (adult or student) as a Wayfinder.
Aue, aue, we are explorers reading every sign
We tell the stories of our elders
In the never ending chain
I’ve added a new page to i-Biology.net to post resources and ideas for MYP Science Crit. D: Reflecting on the Impacts of Science. Some slides are below, but to see the full page, click here.
[IMaGE = International Mindedness and Global Engagment. To see my dissertation & resources on this, click here.]
This post has been sitting in my drafts for a while, and I was reminded to complete it after a question from a student when I was covering a TOK class: “What’s the difference between inquiry and enquiry?”
[tL:dR: Definitions matter in education, especially when a topic is misunderstood or controversial. Using traditional definitions allows for a distinction between purposeful inquiries and surface enquiries. This can help choose the right tools for the best learning and most appropriate time. We can have the best of both.]
Defining Inquiry: A Pragmatic Approach
I’ve been thinking and writing about this a lot over the last few years, tinkering with and testing definitions that try to capture what makes powerful, pragmatic inquiry learning. He’s my current best effort and if you pick it apart you should be able to recognise the best elements of the classical with an aspiration towards the contemporary (in the Bold Moves sense).
Inquiry is… creative, critical, reflective thought. It builds on a solid foundation of accessible, well-learned knowledge, skills and conceptual understandings, inviting learners to take action on their learning and ask “what if…?”
Although it opens with higher-order aspirations, and closes with an invitation to action, it is anchored by a solid foundation of knowledge, skills and concepts. Knowledge is the stuff we think with: the more we know, the better our questions and stronger our conceptual understandings. This does not dictate a linear approach. It highlights the critical role of the expert teacher who, with subject mastery and pedagogical mastery, can create a true culture of thinking in their class, (co-)creating the moving forces of experience that pull a community of learners through the hard work of building understanding.
An expert inquiry teacher inspires learners to learn lots, learn well and want to learn more. They know what needs to be taught, what has been learned and how to use this as a launching pad for exciting exploration.
So what about inquiry vs enquiry?
Beyond some regional variation*, I find this OUP contrast really useful in developing curriculum, collaborating with teachers and working with students. I suspect that the two terms are conflated in the minds of many (educators and non-educators). Could a clear distinction help?
“The traditional distinction between the verbs enquire and inquire is that enquire is to be used for general senses of ‘ask’, while inquire is reserved for uses meaning ‘make a formal investigation’.” [Oxford Living Dictionaries]*
It helps evaluate the depth of an inquiry in terms of moving into investigation, creation and research, rather than the simple act of “looking stuff up”. Enquiry gives inquiry a poor reputation when inordinate amounts of time are spent on (perceived) “fluff”, squeezing out the opportunities for truly engaging experiences. There is a time and place for enquiry, and I’ve labelled it as “enabling” in the image below.
Quick questions and known answers that have little need to expend mental energy (or valuable time): there are more efficient ways to learn about or find out simple content. The expert inquiry teacher knows which tools to select for the job.
So here’s a little planning mantra I like to hold in my head:
“Is this an inquiry with an ‘I’ or an enquiry with an ‘e’?”
How could you use/adapt some of these questions/provocations to classify your inquiries? (I’ll add/edit over time, I’m still tinkering with these ideas):
- Does it require significant new learning to me, or is is re-presenting known content? Am I really learning?
- Am I truly engaging with the content, skills and concepts or am I transcribing items from one place to another? Am I really learning?
- Am I building tenacious new understanding or storing temporary thoughts? Am I really learning?
- If I learn this this way, will I learn this best for its purpose? Am I really learning?
- Am I “just Googling” or am I sorting, evaluating, synthesising? Am I really learning?
- Is this the equivalent of a deep investigation (or creation), or a “helpdesk enquiry”?
- Will I be spending my time on thinking, investigating or creating, or will I be clicking, copying or pseudo-creating? Am I really learning?
- If I’m working with a group, are we in dialogue, discussion and collaboration or chatting, partitioning and time-wasting? Am I really learning?
- If I’m using technology is it amplifying or transforming the learning, or replacing a simpler (possibly more efficient) process? (RAT model) Am I really learning?
- Am I learning authentically in the discipline (e.g. “as a scientist”) or about the topic (e.g “about science”)? [Thinking from the perspective of supervising extended essays, developing inquiries, etc)]
- Could my learning give rise to newer, stronger questions, or will it end there?
- What am I doing in this inquiry that is more sophisticated than a student younger than me? For example, if I’m an MYP student, how am I asking a question that is more sophisticated than in PYP?
- Is this experience a moving force that will create a drive to know, leading me into learning more, or is it a gimmick that gives the illusion of learning? Am I really learning?
Shifting the Questions
Some strategies for taking a question from enquiry to inquiry:
- Question Starts (Making Thinking Visible) is a very simple set of question stems that can force a student to think about a topic from different perspectives. Importantly, students need to classify and evaluate the questions.
- Think, Puzzle, Explore (Making Thinking Visible)… but insist on quality. Similarly with See, Think, Wonder, run the routine until the observations and ideas are exhausted. This can take questions beyond the surface.
- Creative Questions (Making Thinking Visible). A simple routine for interrogating proposed questions for quality and depth.
- Similarly, Options Explosion can be used: students list all obvious options, questions or ideas and then find the hidden options or new questions that arise.
- Predict, Observe, Explain (NSTA). Great for working with data of any kind, or thinking about cause/effect and correlation. This can generate many points of questioning, and can be extended into Predict, Observe, Explain, Investigate.
- “How else can this be used?” Visual organizer for accessing Webb’s DOK4 from different domains.
Enquire, Inquire, Perspire, Inspire: a distillation of many ideas:
Generate ideas, get the easy stuff out of the way and used it to create better inquiries. If something needs to be learned, learn (teach) it well and check it is understood. Use it to inform stronger lines of inquiry. Put in the hard work of inquiry authentic to the disciplinary/interdisciplinary investigation. Evaluate the learning, communicate and put it to meaningful action.
Post-script: The Journey of a Thought
In the ‘enquiry’ sense, one could just look up a definition and be done with it, but I’ve been wrestling with ideas around purposeful, pragmatic inquiry for a long time (since ULL at Bath), connecting it to recent posts about DOK4 and Transfer, the ‘buoyant force’ of continuum learning and the “quest for learning”. More fundamentally it builds from the pragmatic definition of inquiry (IS Magazine) and investigating effective teaching and learning practices that allow for students to become knowledgeable, reflective, open-minded thinkers and clear communicators.
There is no need for an ‘either-or’ approach to inquiry learning (in the progressive vs traditional sense); a strong inquiry experience develops the modern trivium of grammar (knowledge), dialectic (questioning) and rhetoric (communication).
If you’ve been thinking about this too, let me know in the comments below or find me on Twitter.
*The British vs American usage in the general sense might hold to enquiry vs inquiry (thanks Des O’Sullivan on Twitter), though here I’m trying to distinguish ‘weak’ vs ‘strong’ question-driven learning. Where enquiry might be more common in general use in the UK (Oxford), the ‘i’ form is still used for ‘a formal investigation’ and this is closer to the heart of what we’re trying to achieve in deep learning, authentic to our disciplines. British media will still tend towards ‘inquiry’ for investigation (examples at the Guardian), with ‘enquiry’ for simpler questions (examples at the Guardian). An “inquiry into…” vs “helpdesk enquiries“, if you will. To me, ‘enquiry learning’ is looser, less purposeful and (possibly) ineffective. ‘Inquiry’ in this sense is focused, purposeful and powerful, as intended the IB context (all IB docs use the ‘i’).
This post is a quick recommendation for a very practical resource for teachers, coordinators & learning coaches. “What Does This Look Like in the Classroom? Bridging the Gap Between Research and Practice”, by Carl Hendrick & Robin MacPherson, with illustrations by Oliver Caviglioli, is available in paperback from John Catt (and Kindle). This review is written from the perspective of an international school educator and coordinator.
Make sure you visit the “What Does This Look Like?” website for more posts on these topics, colour images and discussions. It’s a great resource.
The authors have designed a very useful text that can be read in a single sitting and/or dipped into as a reference. I would recommend it in teacher training, and it should be read by anyone responsible for professional learning. Each chapter is written in a Q&A style, with introductory key points, and practical questions each answered by two experts in the field of the chapter (it’s an impressive and credible lineup). They wrap up with a summary of the ‘streamlined classroom‘, with six key practices to create flow. More on this below.
Overall, I found this text accessible, conversational and practical. I really like the format of the chapters and there is a strong focus on what teachers really need to know (away from fluff and distraction). I hope they continue to develop their blog, and look forward to a future edition in a few years’ time. It would be good to see more on international/multicultural classrooms, or even additional chapters for different disciplines.
I’ve listed the chapter and contributors below, with a few of the key issues addressed in the chapter and links to the authors’ Twitter profiles. This book in itself is a great example of the power of Twitter as a PD tool – I have followed many of these contributors for a long time and have a learned a lot from them as a result.
- Student ownership of and engagement with feedback
- The testing effect, past papers and strategies
- Efficient marking & feedback practices
- Using student data
- Classroom culture: relationships, expectations, communication
- Managing low-level disruption and poor behaviour
- Engaging students (and keeping them engaged)
- Reading comprehension and sustained ‘deep reading’ (in a technological society)
- Building vocabulary and shared roles in developing literacy
- Reading for pleasure
SEN: Jarlath O’Brien & Maggie Snowling
- Supporting students with behavioural and learning difficulties (including the role of tech)
- Challenging students who find it ‘too easy’
- Supporting EAL learners
- Extrinsic vs intrinsic, and motivating non-academic students
- Growth mindset & independent learning
- Testing anxiety, resilience
- Strategies for effective learning (spacing, interleaving)
- Remembering, forgetting and strategies for developing long-term memory
- Working memory and cognitive load theory (as “the single most important thing” for teachers to know (Wiliam))
- Student-active vs didactic techniques (and teacher talk)
- Questioning styles and encouraging quality conversation
- Generating balanced, quality discussions where all students contribute
- Multiple intelligences vs learning styles
- Creativity, critical thinking and 21C skills
- Learning in the digital age (Google & remembering**)
- Impacts of mobile technology and balance
- Academic honesty
- Making the most of available tech
Independent Learning: All contributors
Perspectives on developing independent learners from various contributors. Worth reading and comparing to your own experiences. Creating independent learners through strong development of the approaches to learning skills (in conjunction with solid disciplinary an interdisciplinary knowledge) is a touchstone of a strong IB education.
Conclusion: The Streamlined Classroom (Carl Hendrick & Robin MacPherson)
Distilling their findings into the ‘honeycomb conjecture‘ below, the authors present an idea for an effective classroom to ensure solid foundations of learning and progress. This in itself would make a great introduction to the book as a PD resource, giving multiple entry points for teacher discussion.
I’ve written a lot on here about meaningful, effective, pragmatic inquiry, defining it as “Creative, critical reflective thought, built on a solid foundation of well taught/learned knowledge, skills and concepts that invites learners to take action on their learning and ask “what if…?” . This book and its advice aligns with this definition, giving more concrete practices that help enhance a high-quality IB education. ***
In thinking about how to integrate effective tech use into teaching and learning, I can see potential applications for a streamlined classroom tech toolkit.
Footnotes & Blog Posts
* I reviewed Robinson’s very interesting “Trivium 21C” for International School Magazine, here.
** No, Google will not replace knowing: Content & Inquiry in a Google World.
*** International School Magazine article on defining inquiry here.
If you’ve read the book, continue the discussion in the comments below, or find me on Twitter:
This post is a quick review of “The Quest for Learning: How to Maximize Student Engagement” by Marie Alcock, Michael Fisher and Allison Zmuda, published late 2017 by Solution Tree Press. I’m reviewing the paperback version: 122 pages plus foreword by Heidi Hayes-Jacobs, appendices, index and online resources.
It’s written with an eye on its usefulness to a teacher/coordinator/coach in an international IB context, and I’ve posted some tweets about it using the #QuestForLearning hashtag.
Connected reads & resources:
- Quest for Learning: Reproducibles, Study Guide & all the links mentioned in the book (free but requires a free Solution Tree account).
- Bold Moves for Schools (which you know I love), by Marie Alcock & Heidi Hayes-Jacobs .
- Curriculum21, edited by Heidi Hayes-Jacobs
- Making Thinking Visible and Creating Cultures of Thinking by Ron Ritchhart.
The Quest for Learning is a concise, comprehensive and operable handbook that would be a great addition to the personal toolkit of a inquiry teacher, coordinator or instructional/curriculum/tech coach. The authors lay out the why of ‘questing’, writing the book as a ‘macroscope’ (p10) for looking at the learning process and providing a toolkit (in the form of many useful question sets and tables) for developing powerful questing inquiries. They clearly distinguish questing as a framework for designing learning experiences (in contrast with other more linear models) and build throughout on three central tenets of engagement (p15):
#1 The learner engages with relevant, worthy inquiries and experiences that are interesting or emotionally gripping.
#2 The learner engages in an active, intentional cycle with clear goals and right-sized, actionable steps.
#3 The learner engages in social, collaborative opportunities that grow expertise.
In developing the toolkit for this approach, they guide the reader through three core ‘Design Options’ for co-creating a quest: inquiry (questioning), gaming (including game design as a driver of engagement), and networking (connecting as members or mentors in affinity spaces). They provide numerous concrete examples of quests in development and take care (as in Bold Moves), to ensure the central role of useful knowledge and skills in the process; questing is presented as a vigorous and rigorous pursuit of deeper learning.
The connected, experienced inquiry educator will recognise much of what is presented in the book (including elements of UbD and many connected classroom examples), but the authors have presented an interesting triad of options in inquiry, gaming and networking for creating new and interesting engagements for learners. Their sample questing threads and tables of ‘questing decisions‘ could be useful guides in curriculum and instructional design. Of particular interest to K-12 educators might be the frequent reference to how it might look in Elementary, Middle and High-School situations: how a quest might be adapted or tailored to, over time, give students “roots and wings” (p123).
They recognise a common experience of many teachers who promote rigorous inquiry: that jumping into questing can result in student resistance as “they exert much less intellectual energy when they sit through a lecture or are told exactly what to do and how to learn,” (p99), though they also provide many tools and questions to help generate student ownership and meaning-making. Additionally, the book includes many ideas for the integration of effective technologies in the charting of a meaningful quest, promoting substance over flash/distraction. Questing (or any meaningful shift into learner-centred inquiry) is a shock to the system and will undoubtedly come with an implementation dip or period of uncertainty.
I paused for thought in the networking sections, as the authors presented the idea of affinity spaces for co-construction of learning, sharing ideas and reaching out to authentic collaborators, members and mentors. Where we might worry about a learner-centred experience becoming isolated (or self-centred/selfish), Quest suggests various levels of network engagement and membership that may create community through questing. These network spaces include the physical, “plus”, public, member and mentor, in which learners might take and change roles as the quest requires. This toolkit for the shared experience (including shifting “I can…” statements to “we can…”), might prove worthy in schools seeking to break the mould of learning.
The final section, Demonstrating Learning, focuses on opening the doors to the range of worthwhile deliverables that can arise from a meaningful quest, helping educators think how these outcomes can be planned for, produced, evaluated and reflected upon. Those familiar with Design Thinking (and/or the Design Cycle), will find comfortable connections here. It might also challenge more traditional teachers to open some doors to assessment that meet seemingly ‘locked’ performance outcomes. This is not an approach that requires throwing the baby out with the bathwater – Bold Moves can be small moves, as long as they are intentional.
If you’re interested in developing a modern, inquiry-driven classroom that really helps students develop powerful quests, I’d recommend a copy of the book. A teacher new to inquiry would benefit from their own copy (and a coach), whereas more experienced teachers might read it as a book club or share copies for reference in co-planning.
In the IB Context
This book, written with aprogramme-agnostic, standards-based K-12 education in mind would be a useful resource for coordinators and educators in IB schools, in particular continuum schools. As with Bold Moves, experienced IB educators will find huge overlaps here with programme elements, but will be able to draw new ideas, resources and inspirations from their reading. It may help give a new perspective to some units or to develop more genuinely student-driven inquiries. The book is terminology-heavy and so I’d caution against it being given ‘raw’ to a new IB teacher; they have enough jargon to deal with in our own programme documents. Rather a mentor might filter and use some of the strategies and ideas in the book in supporting the development of the novice IB educator (translating it into “IB speak”).
As I read the book, I was struck by how some elements of networking and gaming might help create community, connect with authentic global contexts and lead to the solution-generating and creative, critical inquiry that is held as the gold-standard of successful modern international education.
With an emphasis on active intentional cycles of learning (productive struggle), and feedback, Quest allows educators to see where they need to lead and where they need to co-create learning so that it can become progressively more student-driven. These tools might help coordinators and mentors in PYP Exhibition, MYP Personal Project and any student-designed assessed inquiries.
In questioning, IB educators will connect the essential questions to their own understanding of unit/provocative questions, where “driving” questions in Quest correspond to the lines of inquiry (PYP) or conceptual questions in MYP. Probing questions can support the development of rubrics of understanding (PYP) or achievement in the levels 5-8 bands of the MYP rubrics, whereas the reflective level of questioning connects to interdisciplinary learning, approaches to learning and metacognition.
There is no room for fluff in the Quest for Learning, and in my own various roles I can see how lessons learned in Quest and Bold Moves will help move things forwards. The Quest for Learning complements various IB inquiry cycles, as well as the development of many of the approaches to learning skills, including research, digital citizenship and the ethical use of shared/online resources.
Combining this book with Bold Moves, Curriculum 21 and Ron Ritchhart’s texts, along with parallel reading on school culture, leadership and future education and academic study through my MA, has helped me put together my own toolkit for curriculum leadership, coordination, co-planning and teaching. It helps reinforce my belief that “curriculum is compass, not a calendar” with actionable strategies and as I transition into a new role and context I’ll be seeking to distill this learning and my experience into a transferable toolkit of ideas, strategies and resources.
Coincidentally, the idea of ‘questing’ aligns with our work in developing teacher inquiry goals as a central part of our in-house professional learning; the Japanese phrase tankyuu (探 究) can mean inquiry, quest or journey and our Tankyuu Projects use a project cycle that one might be able to connect to the ‘questing’ of this text.
If you’ve read the book, or have any thoughts, please add them in the comments below or find me on Twitter: