Happy New Year for 2013 to everyone. Did you notice that last month one of the underlying paradigms of the IB shifted? The ‘Hexagon’ is no longer. After forty years of loyal service it has gone. In its place we now have what looks remarkably similar to a ‘Dart Board’. (If that’s how it gets to be known then remember you heard it here first!)

The new 'dart board' IB Diploma diagram (second image © IB)

Is the change just cosmetic or are there any real differences? It does include some more IB attributes such as Approaches to Teaching and Learning, the Learner Profile and International-Mindedness but fundamentally there seems little difference to what the IB has been advocating for some years now. However, upon close inspection there are a few changes and they could be significant. Firstly ‘The Experimental sciences’ has gone. In its place is just ‘Sciences’. Is this because Computer Science is now part of Group 4 or is it a foretaste of the new programme for first exams in 2016 where ‘hands on’ practical work is being given a much lower profile in the IA? Secondly the Group numbers have gone and, like the Hexagon in the past, the Arts still misleadingly looks to be on an equal footing with all the other five groups.

Perhaps now that we are not hindered by the hexagon’s six groups this new diagram could stimulate some fresh thinking. Currently a student must choose a subject from Groups 1-5 but they do not need to do an Arts subject as they can ‘double up’ on a subject from another group. It seems completely wrong and unbalanced that one area of the curriculum is not compulsory whereas the other five are and tends to relegate the Arts to an inferior status compared to mathematics, language etc. etc. It would be good to debate some possible solutions to combat this.

1.  Keep the current six subject Diploma but make any of the six areas into the current status of the Arts. So that, for example, a student could do Language and Literature, History, Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics and Visual Arts but not do a foreign language (Language Acquisition). This is not an attractive solution and goes against the International Dimension. If you are a foreign language teacher (or a maths teacher if maths is the omitted area etc.) you would be justifiably upset but isn’t this exactly how teachers of ‘The Arts’ must feel all the time? 

2.  Keep the current six subject Diploma but make ‘The Arts’ equivalent to all the other five groups and stop students taking two subjects from one group. For many university courses this would be quite acceptable but for others such as medicine it would put students at a distinct advantage when applying. Even now some universities actively prefer all three sciences and maths as an entry to medical school and it is severely limiting if students only have Chemistry and Mathematics.

3. Consider moving to a seven subject Diploma. Students choose one subject from each of the six separate areas and then add one more subject from any of the six areas. If the maximum marks per subject were reduced to six instead of seven the maximum Diploma score would still remain at 45 (7 x 6 plus the three bonus points). A seventh subject would mean the teaching hours would need to be adjusted. If the Diploma consisted of three subjects at Higher Level and four at Standard Level then by making each HL subject 210 hours and each SL subject 135 hours this would give a total of 1170 hours over the two years. This is exactly the same as the current teaching time (3 x 240 and 3 x 150 hours). The importance of the Arts would be recognised and we would end up with genuinely well-rounded students who have just slightly less subject specialism than they do now. Worth thinking about???