- 在線時間
- 7 小時
- 最後登錄
- 08-11-20
- 國民生產力
- 3
- 附加生產力
- 0
- 貢獻生產力
- 0
- 註冊時間
- 04-8-14
- 閱讀權限
- 10
- 帖子
- 253
- 主題
- 3
- 精華
- 0
- 積分
- 256
- UID
- 28617
|
In fact, only the IBD can be useful. There is no need to apply accreditation for PYP and MYP. It is just wasting of money and resources. Those schools which strike for PYP and MYP accreditation justbecause they want to use it as a marketing tool to attract more applicants.
By the way, an accredited IB school doesn't mean that it can offer ahigh quality of education. It only means it follows the curriculum andrules set by IBO. Like all the local schools are accredited by EB butit doesn't mean all of them can offer a high quality of education.
I agree to the 2nd part of the statement above. Absolutely. The 1st part is however nothing but a generalisation of a completely biased view. There are many ways to get things done. Doing PYP, MYP and DP is one.
Even the IBD system has a lot of deficiencies. It only suitables for those all-round students and cannot cater for those students who have special talent in either science or humanity. The limiation in studying at most two sciences or two humanity subjects at high level may limit the choice of applying some curriculums in some univerisities.
There is a ton of flexibility built into IB diploma grouping of subjects. For examples, an "elective" under group 6 can be replaced by another class from group 2, 3, or 4, or computer science from Group 5. Group 4 - experimental sciences - has quite a number of subjects in the group (such as physics, chemistry, biology, environmental systems, ecosystems & societies, design technology, etc.) and it is up to the students to choose one or two from the group. Likewise, group 3 is a very large group. There are subjects like philosophy, economics, business management, psychology, social anthropology, information technology in a global society, geography and history in it. The traditional arts vs science way of differentiation is too limited for IB DP. |
|