Opinions on the new IB Biology syllabus: Part II

Two years ago, we began planning the new IB biology syllabus and I shared my initial perspective. Now that we've completed our first journey through it, it's time for an update. Below, I'll discuss the content load, the overall design and the IAs.

Content load

We were all hoping for a content reduction and I've observed many complaints about the new load. What does it look like in numbers? I break down all the course content into short closed questions that my students can use to help them commit it to memory. I have been updating them and you can see my latest version here.

Last syllabus: 1370 questions.

New syllabus: 1382 questions (currently)

Let's consider other data, however. While I managed to finish within the IB recommended timing, I too felt it hard to do so in this new syllabus. It seemed I had fewer "extra" lessons for students to think through the difficult Higher Level topics. So where does the perceived discrepancy originate from?

▸Firstly, this is our first round and yet to see any official exams. As we do, I'm sure we'll begin sharing ideas on where we can cut content from what we teach. Cut from areas we may have taught in too much depth (just in case).

▸Secondly, it's very hard to design biology curricula nowadays. Biology has become too great (in both ways) and every area has its important aspects. I've seen comments, for example, in which teachers complain about content overload but also lament the exclusion of a favourite topic (e.g. the digestive system). We just can't fit it all in.

First and foremost, we need a balanced curriculum that meets the needs of our globally challenging times. But also as a qualification valid for university entrance, able to compete with others. Considering this, designing biology curricula is a tremendous task likely to leave everyone, even the designers, not fully satisfied.

▸Thirdly, the split between Standard Level and Higher Level is different in this syllabus. I feel the Standard Level course is now much fairer towards students who want to keep a foot in biology but not take it too seriously. On the other hand, Higher Level appears conceptually deeper and harder.

If you choose to study Higher Level IB biology, you must have a good reason; you're signing away a bit of your life to study. Something that could be mitigated somewhat with different subject choices. If your biology students don't study, they won't score highly.

Yet, there's nuance to discuss here. I like the conceptual focus much more than just adding more topics and more details. The latter can make biology seem rigorous but generally just adds more peculiar vocabulary to our students' worlds. It's not as hard because you can memorise much of it for many exam questions without deep understanding.

So, it seems we have a similar load of individual items (per my basic knowledge questions) but the deeper conceptual nature adds more. This is where the understanding arises. But, each timetabled lesson can leave us feeling short of time for the deep and deliberate exploration we'd like to continue with our students. This brings us back to the trade-off the IB has to navigate by creating a competitive university-entrance qualification.

Nevertheless, the designers have succeeded at limiting runaway overload. Deeper concepts are repeated regularly with feedback loops being a good example. Students will fare better in this course if they understand the fundamental principles of living systems and repeatedly generalise them. (A good thing). And, content items are often repeated too. Take, for example, antagonistic muscles in the topic of muscles (B3.3). The intercostal muscles appear as the official example, and also when we teach the mechanism of lung ventilation (B3.1).

Teaching IB biology is challenging, the content is broad and deep. I would love to see some content reduction but this course isn't impossible either. We must ensure our students make meaning of and enjoy biology, at a brisk pace. If you want to see how to do this, without lecturing at students, read my book Difference Maker. For other help, get a copy of my basic knowledge questions, and check out my posts on how I teach some tricky IB biology topics.

The Sequence Grid

The new grid design isn't just novel, but also very clever. Key idea: the themes are an organising heuristic and unnecessary for the final exams. Therefore, the grid system gives three choices:

1. Follow a sequence that oscillates between levels of organisation (without extra planning)

2. Follow a sequence that ascends the levels of organisation (without extra planning)

3. Create a personalised sequence (with extra planning but which is greatly facilitated by the grid)

Traditional syllabi gave just two choices: follow the sequence or laboriously create your own point-by-point. I like creating my sequences but understand that many prefer not to. Teaching IB biology is a major undertaking and reducing the complexity of our work is a good idea.

I argued in Biology Made Real that the whole organism is where our students will find meaning in biology. Rather than an end in itself, lower levels of organisation, like molecules, offer a perspective to explain what we experience as whole organisms. Therefore, I welcome the option of a premade sequence that oscillates between levels of organisation (by moving from left to right across the grid). I also welcome the traditional sequence option for those who want it (by moving from top to bottom). And I warmly welcome how the grid design greatly facilitates sequence creation. Rather than point-by-point, I can rearrange whole-grouped concepts. You can see my sequence here.

IAs (Internal Assessments)

The change from a 12-page to a three thousand word limit has made a difference. The outcomes of which I'm yet to understand. Before, my best students (seeking 7s) would manage to manipulate their formats to fit in 5–6,000 words. Having only to mark 3k words has made a positive difference to my workload. I'm thankful.

However, my top students this year, with their 3k word limit, produced IAs that were very different to those of the previous syllabus. With the lower word count, it's hard for top students to show the "extra" that differentiates their work from others. The research has to be shallower in the introduction and that then limits what can be said in the analysis.

The difference between IAs that score 5, 6, or 7, is now less discernible and I'm unsure what the IB moderators will think of my marking. Time will tell. As with the content load, I'm sure we'll begin adapting to the new demands and find ways to help students fit more into 3k words. I'm already encouraging my students to include a causal diagram to complement their writing. Nevertheless, the 3k limit will irrevocably change the feel of the best IAs.

Conclusion

All new curricula bring us challenges but I can say that I've enjoyed this syllabus. Over time, I think these challenges will subside as we move into new routines and gain familiarity. Change is hard, but can provoke new ideas, perspectives, and improvements.

In the next curricular iteration, I hope they keep the grid design to provide teachers with more options than a single sequence or the laborious task of rearranging without grouped topics. I'd also like to see a continuation of the more conceptual nature of biology: less description and more explanatory models that allow students to make meaning and predictions about their worlds. If you want to get your students enjoying and making meaning of biology throughout this tough syllabus – without lecturing at students or running out of time– then check out Difference Maker.