Which concepts matter most in English?
Concepts in the MYP
The IB expects the Middle Years Programme be designed around two types of concept: ‘Key’ and ‘Related’. ‘Key’ is to allow transfer of learning across subjects.
Looking at the diagram below, you’ll see the Key Concepts for Language and Literature shared by other disciplines, therefore encouraging student (and teacher) recognition that certain ideas are capable of existing in multiple fields.
Courtesy of Lenny Dutton
Related concepts (below) are also provided by the IB, and each are expected to be explored once or twice across the MYP Curriculum.
Courtesy of Royal Oaks Schools
As with the Key Concepts, Related Concepts are not expected in any particular order. Additionally, provided there is balance in how many times they are featured in the curriculum, little is advised on how to structure them in relation to one another or in terms of revisiting them for consolidation.
Added to this is the expectation that units also be rooted in a Global Context. There are 6 broad categories of these, as shown in the visual below, and units are expected to identify a specific topic for exploration within one of them.
Courtesy of Managebac
As opposed to a particular text, period or type of writing, the MYP therefore ensures that units are rooted in conceptual thinking from their inception.
But are these mandated elements more trouble than they’re worth?
In search of a useful visual…
In and of themselves, each of these aspects of the curriculum have a valid claim for inclusion. The issue instead is the lack of hierarchy in how they relate to each other.
Julie Stern, who I have interviewed here, with colleagues, offer this visual in their book Learning that Transfers:
Courtesy of Julie Stern
In my understanding, the above example may translate to English in the following way:
Sub concept - Metaphor
Anchor concept - Heroism
Disciplinary concept - Character
Transdisciplinary concept - Creativity
In the current MYP unit framework, only the ‘Disciplinary’ (Related) and ‘Transdisciplinary’ (Key) are easily linked from the visual. However, the aforementioned Global Contexts are perhaps the closest thing that matches what Stern et al term an ‘Anchor’ concept.
Within the respective descriptions, it is also useful to note that despite the relative ‘smallness’ of its circle, Stern et al see the ‘Anchor’ concepts as ‘the most important’. This would seem to match with the likes of Trevor McKenzie’s approach to conceptual teaching in that students are either given or formulate their own ‘driving question’ in a unit of study.
Below are a few he offers on his website:
What makes elite athletes elite?
What is the definition of happiness?
How can the media negatively impact young girls of today?
Immediately, these focuses lend themselves more readily to the Global Contexts within an MYP framework than any other aspect discussed thus far.
A conceptual hierarchy
For me, beginning to plan with a Global Context that maps well onto students’ experience, interests and future prospects seems like the most effective starting point for any new unit.
As with other elements of the subject, certain topics are more appropriate than others dependent on the age of students. Whilst ‘Heroism’ is a good starting point for Year 7s, ‘Human Rights’ may need to wait until the end of middle school.
On the other hand, ensuring that this is done with consideration of the Related or Disciplinary Concepts is also key.
Even though Global Contexts need not adhere to a progressional sequence of learning, Disciplinary Concepts most likely do. For example, it makes more sense to me to teach the likes of ‘Character’ before ‘Theme’ and to teach ‘Theme’ before ‘Intertextuality’.
Therefore, choosing an age appropriate and engaging Global Context as well as 2 Related Concepts that fit within the curriculum’s sequence of learning should be the priority of any initial planning process.
The likes of ‘Sub Concepts’ and ‘Key’ or ‘Transdisciplinary Concepts’ can follow and are undoubtedly important but should be seen as a way to bolster students’ wider appreciation of the Global Context and Related Concepts, respectively.
Such a hierarchy would likely allow for a more focused and effective unit than one mired in seeking to find a balance across competing elements of the MYP Unit Planner.
Other conceptual frameworks in English
One last area of interest may be the growing body of discussion around conceptual teaching in English, coming out of the UK.
In recent years, English specialists have been blessed with two fantastic books on the matter: David Didau’s Making Meaning in English as well as Zoe Helman and Sam Gibbs’ The Trouble with English and How to Address It.
Both outline the 5 to 6 concepts that they believe belong in every English unit, irrespective of topic.
Didau, who I have interviewed here, offers the following: Metaphor, Story, Argument, Pattern, Grammar and Context. Arranged into a Y7 curriculum, he offers this example:
Courtesy of David Didau
Returning to the MYP’s framework, the topics along the top: Ancient Origins, Legends, Rhetoric and Romance are more closely aligned with the Global Contexts discussed earlier. Similarly, the aforementioned concepts that are repeated along the left hand column are Related or Disciplinary Concepts in English.
Looking within the scheme of work, we may notice the likes of ‘Rhyme’ or ‘Thesis Statements’ that Stern et al would deem ‘Sub Concepts’. Transdisciplinary or Key Concepts are hitherto not considered.
Helman and Gibbs on the other hand posit that: Readers (how interpretations differ), Pattern, Context, Argument and Texts (and their message) are the prevailing concepts that should be visited in every unit of study.
Within the book, they offer the following as an example of a Year 7 sequence of study:
Courtesy of Helman and Gibbs
As with Didau, the likes of ‘myths and legends’, ‘why landscapes are important to us’ and ‘the need for freedom’ draw obvious parallels with the MYP’s Global Contexts. Whereas, the overarching concepts of Readers’ interpretations, Patterns, Argument and the like are identical in nature to some of the MYP’s Related Concepts.
Both books therefore underline the greater need for recurrent ideas that match most closely with that of the MYP’s Global Contexts and Related Concepts, hence suggesting these are the prime places to start a unit and curriculum’s planning process.
In summary
Age appropriate Global Contexts, chosen from the relevant MYP document, are the most viable place to start unit planning and should be the basis for text choices and tasks that follow
Related or Disciplinary Concepts should be decided in unison with the Global Context but these will need to fit within an appropriate sequence of English learning and should ALSO be the basis for text choices and tasks that follow
Stern’s Sub Concepts and the MYPs Key or Transdisciplinary Concepts should be chosen in order to support the above but may also need to satisfy MYP requirements in terms of where and how often they occur across the curriculum
Teachers may want to consider including some form of: Context, Metaphor, Structure, Grammar, Argument, Story elements, Textual message and Readers’ interpretation within every unit so as to reinforce what Didau, Helman and Gibbs deem to be concepts worth revisiting consistently.