FINAL IB Report - International Baccalaureate
International Baccalaureate StandardsDevelopment and Alignment ProjectFinal ReportInternational BaccalaureateMarch 2009Principal InvestigatorDavid T. Conley, PhDPrimary Project StaffTerri Ward, PhD 2009 Educational Policy Improvement Center (EPIC)Do not reproduce or redistribute without permission
2
Executive SummaryThis project developed standards that reflect the content of International BaccalaureateDiploma courses. These standards represent the first time that IB courses have beentranslated into the language of academic content standards in order to explicitly delineate thecontent that is mastered and skills that are developed as a result of taking the full sequence ofIB Diploma courses.A primary reason for undertaking the project was to validate the degree to which IB coursesdevelop content knowledge and academic skills necessary for college readiness. The otherreason was to create a reference point to gauge the alignment between the IB curriculum andindividual state content standards. The method used to determine the standards and theiralignment with college readiness was a criterion-based judgment process whereby expertsconducted repeated reviews of standard statements derived from the content of the followingcourses: Language A1, Theory of Knowledge, Extended Essay, Mathematical Studies,Mathematics Standard Level, Mathematics Higher Level, Biology, Chemistry, and Physics.Once the IB standards were developed, they were then analyzed to determine their alignmentwith a widely accepted set of college-readiness standards, the Knowledge and Skills forUniversity Success (KSUS) that resulted from the Standards for Success study conducted bythe Center for Educational Policy Research (CEPR). The KSUS standards have beenendorsed by 28 of the leading research universities in the U.S. as reflecting the facultyexpectations at these institutions for students in entry-level courses. The analysis concludedthat a high degree of alignment exists between the KSUS and the IB Standards. In somesubject areas, complete alignment was observed. In science and mathematics, many IBstandards exceeded the KSUS standards in challenge and content coverage.The conclusion of the studies undertaken for this project is that students who are exposed tothe IB curriculum are learning material that is highly aligned with the expectations thatuniversity faculty expect of incoming freshmen, and that in many cases, IB standards exceedthose expectations.International Baccalaureate Standards Development and Alignment Project: Final Report3
Table of ContentsEXECUTIVE SUMMARY . 3TABLE OF CONTENTS. 4CENTER FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH (CEPR) AND THE EDUCATIONAL POLICYIMPROVEMENT CENTER (EPIC) . 6ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . 7PROJECT LIAISONS .7CONTENT EXPERTS—FIRST DRAFT DEVELOPERS .7CONSULTANT REVIEWERS—FIRST DRAFT REVIEWS .7KEY COGNITIVE STRATEGIES CONSULTANTS .7EPIC RESEARCH STAFF .7PROJECT GOALS . 8PROJECT RATIONALE . 8RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCESS . 9STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT PROCESS .10Selection of Content Experts. 10Reviews. 11Decision Rules . 12Special Case: Mathematics Standard Level/Higher Level. 13SOURCE DOCUMENTS UTILIZED . 14Language A1, Theory of Knowledge, Extended Essay . 14Mathematics. 15Science . 15STRUCTURE OF THE STANDARDS . 16FINAL VERSION OF IB STANDARDS . 16ALIGNMENT WITH KSUS COLLEGE-READY STANDARDS . 19PRESENTATION DISPLAY .21ALIGNMENT FINDINGS .23International Baccalaureate Standards Development and Alignment Project: Final Report4
IB Language A1, Extended Essay and Theory of Knowledge aligned to KSUS English . 23IB Mathematical Studies and Mathematical SL/HL aligned to KSUS Mathematics . 26IB Science (Chemistry, Physics, Biology) aligned to KSUS Natural Sciences . 30The Lab Process Skills . 33The Options . 33RECOMMENDATIONS . 34APPENDIX A: IB STANDARDS . 35APPENDIX B: IB STANDARDS ALIGNMENT WITH KSUS STANDARDSIB LANGUAGE A1, EXTENDED ESSAY AND THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE STANDARDS ALIGNMENT WITH KSUS ENGLISHSTANDARDS .60IB MATHEMATICAL STUDIES STANDARDS ALIGNMENT WITH KSUS MATHEMATICS STANDARDS .113IB MATHEMATICS STANDARD LEVEL STANDARDS ALIGNMENT WITH KSUS MATHEMATICS STANDARDS . .256IB MATHEMATICS HIGHER LEVEL STANDARDS ALIGNMENT WITH KSUS MATHEMATICS STANDARDS . .472IB CHEMISTRY STANDARDS ALIGNMENT WITH KSUS NATURAL SCIENCES STANDARDS .642IB PHYSICS STANDARDS ALIGNMENT WITH KSUS NATURAL SCIENCES STANDARDS 713IB BIOLOGY STANDARDS ALIGNMENT WITH KSUS NATURAL SCIENCES STANDARDS .761IB LAB PROCESS SKILLS STANDARDS ALIGNMENT WITH KSUS NATURAL SCIENCES STANDARDS .797International Baccalaureate Standards Development and Alignment Project: Final Report5
Center for Educational Research (CEPR) and theEducational Policy Improvement Center (EPIC)Staff at the Center for Educational Policy Research (CEPR) and the Educational Policy ImprovementCenter (EPIC) seek to help policy makers and policy implementers alike do a better job of usingeducational policy as a tool to improve schooling and student learning. Both Centersʼ staffscontributed to the research described in this report.CEPR and EPIC work with federal agencies, state education departments, non-governmentalorganizations, private foundations, and school districts to support research on a range of issues inthe areas of high school-to-college articulation, adequacy funding, large-scale assessment models,and other policy initiatives designed to improve student success.To cite this report:Conley, D., Ward, T. (2009). International Baccalaureate Standards Development andAlignment Project. Educational Policy Improvement Center, Eugene, Oregon. 2009 Educational Policy Improvement Center, Eugene, OregonInternational Baccalaureate Standards Development and Alignment Project: Final Report6
AcknowledgementsProject LiaisonsBeth Brock, IBRobert Poole, IBContent Experts—First Draft DevelopersMimi Alkire, MathematicsJon Knopp, ScienceLeslie Skelton, Language 1AConsultant Reviewers—First Draft ReviewsJanet Adkins, St. Petersburg High School, Language A1Wanda Bussey, Rufus King High School, MathematicsJerry Chris, Mission Viejo High School, Theory of KnowledgeRobert Dull, Palm Harbor University High School, ChemistryMichelle Dumas, Lincoln High School, BiologyKenneth Fox, Recently Retired, PhysicsDean Karagianes, Mira Loma High School, BiologyRandy McGonegal, Palm Harbor University High School, BiologyMichael Ortiz, International Academy, MathematicsKaren Roads, Former teacher in Denver Public Schools, Language A1Larry Scheffler, Lincoln High School, ChemistryNancy Sullivan, Armand Hammer United World College of the American West, Theory ofKnowledgeJo Ann Wadkins, Lincoln High School, PhysicsWilliam Ward, C. Leon King High School, BiologyKey Cognitive Strategies ConsultantsNote: These individuals served as content review panelists for the Standards for Successproject, which created the KSUS standards. See s4s.org/cepr.s4s.php for more information.Michel Kovcholovsky, University of Oregon, Lane Community CollegeBrenda Leicht, University of IowaCarol Severino, University of IowaSasha Tavenner Kruger, University of OregonEPIC Research StaffEmily HayesJody KirtnerMaria ScevaInternational Baccalaureate Standards Development and Alignment Project: Final Report7
Project GoalsThe goals of this project were to: 1) produce a set of standards that represented the contentknowledge and cognitive skills students are expected to develop in IB Diploma courses; 2)analyze the alignment between those standards and a set of college readiness standards tovalidate that the IB Diploma Programme is at a level consistent with college readiness and toidentify any potential areas where it may not be.Project RationaleAlthough the International Baccalaureate (IB) Diploma Programme is offered by many highschools in the United States and is considered to be challenging and rich in content, its contenthas not previously been analyzed to determine its alignment with college readiness standardsor state educational standards in the U.S. Given the importance of academic contentstandards in recent educational reforms and the growing emphasis on improving collegereadiness among high school students, such an analysis is important as a means to help theIB Programme express its aims and objectives in a format that is consistent with state-leveleducational policies and practices in the United States and the general trend toward increasedemphasis on college readiness for all students.Each of the 50 states has established educational standards that drive the curriculum andassessments in the state. These state-level standards are frequently compared to one anotherand to standards developed by national U.S. standards-setting groups, such as the AmericanDiploma Project (ADP), Standards for Success, ACT, and the College Board. State educationdepartments increasingly expect all educational programs offered within a state todemonstrate its alignment with the stateʼs academic content standards. Postsecondaryinstitutions, which are offering college-level credit for courses taken in high school or are givingstudents preference for admission based on programs such as IB, increasingly seekconfirmation that the IB Diploma Programme is in fact well aligned with college readinessstandards.Historically, the IB Programme has employed a standardized curriculum delivered to allstudents regardless of country of origin, but that curriculum was not specifically tied to orInternational Baccalaureate Standards Development and Alignment Project: Final Report8
derived from an explicit set of educational standards. The IB relies on its course documents,with their detailed specification of course aims and goals, along with its end-of-courseassessment system to create a high degree of internal consistency. For this reason, explicitstandard statements have not been necessary. However, the educational landscape within theUS has changed dramatically over the past 15 years, and educational standards are now thefoundational element to all state and most district instructional frameworks. The IB Programmefinds itself at a distinct disadvantage when it cannot compare its course content in an “applesto-apples” fashion with state standards or to other college readiness standard systems. Thecreation of a unique set of IB academic content standards addresses these needs.IB staff members will be able to use the standards developed in this project to demonstrate toeducational agencies and organizations how IB students are prepared to meet stateeducational standards in ways that simultaneously prepare them for college. The alignmentanalysis conducted by this project will be a useful tool to confirm the tight connection betweenthe IB Diploma courses and college readiness. In combination, these two products will beuseful tools for use with legislators, state education department officials, and postsecondaryadmissions officers and faculty to demonstrate explicitly what IB students are learning andwhat they can do in relation to state standards and college readiness expectations.Research Methods and ProcessThe primary research method employed by this project was a professional judgment modeloften referred to as convergent consensus. This method requires the repeated review ofdocuments by experts who make changes at each review stage designed to move towardconsensus agreement on a final document that achieves a set of pre-established goals. In thiscase, the goal was to develop a set of standards that represented the knowledge and skillsstudents learn in IB courses.The method followed a set of predetermined steps. An initial draft was generated by compilinginitial drafts from a core set of content experts who were also experienced IB teachers. Thisinitial draft was then reviewed, edited and revised in multiple phases by additional IB teacherswho had experience in standards development. The IB teachers were involved in both initialInternational Baccalaureate Standards Development and Alignment Project: Final Report9
stages in order to ensure that the standards reflected the true content of the IB curriculum. Asthese experts edited the initial drafts, they did so with an eye toward ensuring that thestandards could be easily understood by those unfamiliar with the IB and also viewed as validby those familiar with the Diploma Programme.The role of CEPR/EPIC staff researchers was to develop the online tools used by reviewers,recruit and train reviewers, synthesize all recommended changes, and work with consultants torevise the standards after each review. The multiple rounds of review, feedback and revisionscontinued until no additional significant changes were recommended by any of the reviewers.Two final reviews were then conducted. First a broad cross-section of IB teachers andadministrators without specific expertise in standards development was recruited to conduct acomprehensive review of the draft standards via a secure online website. They providedcomments to CEPR/EPIC staff researchers, who synthesized the recommended changes andmade the final edits to the standards. IB academic program staff in Cardiff, Wales conducted asecond review. In it they were asked to examine the standards carefully to ensure that eachset reflected any curricular changes that had occurred since the beginning of the project.CEPR/EPIC staff researchers and consultants then made final revisions. IB subsequentlyauthorized the standards.Standards Development ProcessThe standards development process involved multiple steps and stages, beginning with theselection of content experts to serve as reviewers. This was followed by the development ofdecision rules necessary for refining each draft version. Each is described as follows.Selection of Content ExpertsStaff at the IB nominated three content experts for the first of the multi-stage development andreview process and 14 additional IB classroom teachers for the second round of reviews. Athird group of reviewers recruited by both the New York and Vancouver offices of the IBreviewed and recommended modifications to the draft standards via a secure website. A fourthgroup of reviewers was recruited by staff at CEPR/EPIC for their experience writingeducational standards for the Centers, state educational agencies and national organizations.International Baccalaureate Standards Development and Alignment Project: Final Report10
IB content experts were recruited for the final review. All reviewers used the following methodsfor providing their recommended edits.The writing of draft standards was initiated using the IB course documents listed above. Thewriters reviewed hundreds of pages of IB Guides, Aims and Assessments before they createdthe first draft of the standards. Throughout the process they were reminded of the goal tocreate a thorough and accurate representation of the IB curricula. The initial result was acomprehensive list of standards representing the content areas and the key cognitivestrategies taught to IB students.Once all initial drafts of standards and key cognitive strategies were completed, theCEPR/EPIC research staff prepared the standards for review. A separate review documentwas created for each subject area. The documents included lists of the key cognitive strategystatements and content standards in a format that allowed reviewers to provide theircomments and recommend edits.ReviewsAll reviewers conducted their reviews in the following manner. Each was trained in a 45-minuteconference phone call. CEPR/EPIC staff developed the training and materials and conductedall group trainings by conference call. Trainees were directed to refer to the written materialsprovided and did several trial reviews together. After each, they discussed their decisions fortheir recommended revisions. Reviewers were trained to select one of the following choices tobest represent their recommended change to each standard: No Change, Simplify, Expand,Comment Only, Combine Habits, Rewrite Habit. In addition, a comment section was includedto allow them to easily provide their recommended changes to the text. They were also able toadd new content standards or key cognitive strategies throughout the document. Eachreviewer was asked to review and recommend changes to approximately 20 key cognitivestrategies and 175 content standards per subject area.Several of the reviewers commented about two general issues. First, for some of the subjectareas, the order of the standards did not reflect the customary sequencing within the IBcurriculum. Reviewers were encouraged to provide this feedback and staff researchers laterInternational Baccalaureate Standards Development and Alignment Project: Final Report11
used it to reorder the standards. Second, some reviewers noted missing content. CEPR/EPICstaff encouraged them to propose additional standards in these missing areas.After this review was completed and all recommended changes made, the draft standardswere sent to a set of reviewers who had not taught the IB curriculum. These reviewers ensuredthat language of the standards was consistent with customary educational language used bystate departments of education in the U.S. and provincial departments in Canada. This stepwas necessary to ensure that when the IB standards were aligned to the KSUS standards andlater with state and provincial standards, the grain size and language would allow meaningfulalignment. The primary goal of the modifications was to create a set of standards that bestrepresented all reviewersʼ comments. At each round of review, CEPR/EPIC research staffmembers analyzed the reviewer recommendations and made modifications following a set ofpredetermined decision rules.Decision RulesDeleting Standards: Standards were deleted when a majority of reviewers said that thestandard was redundant, did not reflect the curriculum, or needed to be combined with anotherexisting standard. If a minority of reviewers recommended deletion, the standard remained.Language: Whenever a reviewer suggested text changes to clarify the standard,modifications were made. Staff researchers followed reviewer recommendations whensimplifying or expanding a standard.Combining Standards: If any reviewer indicated that two or more standards should becombined, standards were merged. The only exceptions were if the resulting changespecifically conflicted with another reviewerʼs comments, or if the change meant that the finalstandard would include more than one expectation in the same standard. If two reviewersrecommended conflicting modifications, the judgment call rule was used. It is described next.Judgment Calls: When two or more reviewers expressed conflicting ideas about how astandard should be modified, research staff chose the recommended language of the standardthat would be most clearly understood by someone without knowledge of the IB curriculum.International Baccalaureate Standards Development and Alignment Project: Final Report12
Adding Standards: Occasionally, reviewers recommended additional standards andprovided proposed language for those. Most of the standards provided by reviewers wereincluded, except when it was clear that another reviewerʼs recommended change sufficientlyaddressed the missing standard. When a reviewer noted a missing standard but offered noproposed language for the standard, the CEPR/EPIC researchers asked one of the projectcontent consultants to write the additional standard.Reordering Standards: When a reviewer recommended that a standard be moved becauseit was placed in the wrong subsection, the move was postponed until all of the reviewerchanges were made. A single reviewer then reordered all the standards in each content area.Special Case: Mathematics Standard Level/Higher LevelIn mathematics, the IB curriculum specialists reviewed the Mathematics StandardLevel/Mathematics Higher Level standards and recommended a large number of languageedits to comply with the customary language of the IB curriculum, policies and practices.Because the IB curriculum is rooted in European traditions and practices, most of therecommended changes would have resulted in language and mathematical conventionsuncommon in the U.S. and Canada, the intended audience for the final outcomes of theproject. Furthermore, because the purpose of the project was to translate IB curriculum,practices and language into standards more accessible and understandable for those in NorthAmerican universities and state and provincial governments unfamiliar with the IB Programme,many recommended edits were not incorporated. In consultation directly with IB (New Yorkand Vancouver offices) and indirectly with IB (Cardiff), CEPR/EPIC staff ensured that alllanguage was acceptable for the cultural context of mathematics in North America.To ensure that no essential standard was deleted or revised inaccurately, CEPR/EPIC hired aspecially trained mathematics consultant to evaluate each comment provided by IB programstaff on the standards for Mathematics Standard Level and Mathematics Higher Level. Thisconsultant was chosen because he received his mathematics training in Europe but has sincetaught for more than two decades in colleges and universities in the U.S. Using his knowledgeof the language of mathematics on both sides of the Atlantic allowed him to carefully evaluateeach recommended change to determine if it was consistent with common language andInternational Baccalaureate Standards Development and Alignment Project: Final Report13
practice in the U.S. All changes that would be understood by U.S. mathematics educators andmathematical errors noted by the IB program staff were corrected. Those recommendedrevisions that would confuse or mislead North American mathematics educators were notrevised to comply with directives from IB staff.Source Documents UtilizedThe standards were derived from key documents that specify the content of IB courses.Following is a description of those documents.Language A1, Theory of Knowledge, Extended EssayThe source documents for the Language A1 standards and key cognitive strategies were:Assessments, Guides, Nature of Subject, Aims, Objectives, and the Learner Profile associatedwith Language A1, Theory of Knowledge and Extended Essay including but not limited toLanguage A1 Guide First Examinations in 2001, Aims, objectives, syllabus and assessmentdetails, Language A1 Prescribed World Literature List for First Examinations in 2001,Language A1 prescribed book lists for First Examinations in 2001, English A1 teacher supportmaterial: Internal assessment, English A1 World literature teacher support material, Theory ofKnowledge Guide includes aims, objectives, syllabus and assessment details for LastExaminations in 2007 and new guide for First Examinations in 2008, Theory of KnowledgeCourse Companion, Extended Essay Guide for First Examinations in 2009, Guide to ExtendedEssays in all Diploma Programme subjects that begin teaching in September 2007 for FirstExaminations in 2009.The Extended Essay requirement is not embedded within the Language A1 curriculum, andmany IB students produce work from the sciences when completing this course. However, therequirement aligns best with the KSUS standards in research, which are included in theEnglish KSUS standards. So in anticipation of the eventual alignment with the English KSUSstandards, the Extended Essay standards are presented with the LA1 standards. During thereview phases, however, Extended Essay standards were reviewed by content experts in bothLanguage A1 and in Biology.International Baccalaureate Standards Development and Alignment Project: Final Report14
MathematicsPrior Knowledge (PK) standards, Process Objectives (PO), and Aims (A) associated withMathematics SL, Mathematics HL and Mathematical Studies were used as the sourcedocuments for the Mathematics standards and key cognitive strategies including but notlimited to Diploma Programme, Mathematical Studies SL, First Examinations 2006 andMathematics HL First Examinations 2006.Because students who take Mathematical Studies do not take either the SL or HL version ofMathematics, Mathematical Studies is presented separately. Students who enroll inMathematical Studies are typically students in the arts or in disciplines less dependent onhigher order math skills (e.g. sciences or computer science).ScienceGuides and Assessments associated with Biology (including Ecology), Chemistry, Physicsand Environmental Systems were used as the source documents for the Science standardsand key cognitive strategies documents including, but not limited to Biology for firstexaminations in 2003, Chemistry (February 2001) Physics (February 2001) EnvironmentalSystems (February 2001). (Note: During the project, Environmental Systems was eliminatedfrom the IB curriculum as a separate course. Much of the course content remains within the IBcurriculum spread across other courses. The standards were revised during the project toreflect the changes. IB science content experts reviewed and ensured that all of the retainedcontent on Environmental Systems was included in the final drafts of the IB standardspresented in the appendices.)When material occurred at both a “standard level” and a “higher level,” consultant experts weredirected to choose the higher level because most students choose to master the higher levelcontent. Presenting the standard level would under-represent the curricular challenge.Conversely all IB students also take at least one of several science Options topics, most oftenchosen by their teacher or school. Because students have several alternative contents fromwhich to choose and not all IB students learn the same Options materials, no science Optionscurricula are included here. Essentially, the standards presented in this report for scienceInternational Baccalaureate Standards Development and Alignment Project: Final Report15
represent the content that all IB students are expected to master, acknowledging that all IBstudents master additional science content in Options topics as well.Structure of the StandardsEach content area consists of two types of standards: content standards that identify the skillsand knowledge expected in the subject, and key cognitive strategies that describe ways ofknowing and thinking about the subject. Content standards derive most often from the IBAssessment statements. Key cognitive strategies were deduced primarily from the IB Aims.Final Version of IB StandardsThe final version of the IB standards is presented in Appendix A of this report and organizedby subject area: Language
International Baccalaureate Standards Development and Alignment Project: Final Report 3 Executive Summary This project developed standards that reflect the content of International Baccalaureate Diploma courses. These standards represent the first time that IB courses have been
A Correlation of Pearson Baccalaureate Standard Level Chemistry, 2e 2014 to the International Baccalaureate Syllabus for Standard Level Chemistry 4 SE Student Edition International Baccalaureate Standard Level Chemistry Syllabus Pearson Baccalaureate Standard Level Chemistry
GRADUATION 47 Baccalaureate Degree The Baccalaureate Degree in Educa-tion is the degree designed for students to enter the teaching profession. Requirements for the Baccalaureate Degree in Education The Baccalaureate Degree in Educa-tion will be awarded to students who meet the following requirements: 1. Recommendation of the faculty of
The European Baccalaureate Handbook: A Guide for European Baccalaureate Candidates I. Introduction and Disclaimer This handbook is designed to help you during the European Baccalaureate cycle, i.e. s6 and s7. It offers some tips and guidelines, but in no way replaces the European Baccalaureate regulations contained in the following two .
The Essentials of Baccalaureate Education for Professional Nursing Practice (2008) This Essentials document serves to transform baccalaureate nursing education by providing the curricular elements and framework for building the baccalaureate nursing curriculum for the 21 stcentury. These Essentials address the key stakeholders .
Final Exam Answers just a click away ECO 372 Final Exam ECO 561 Final Exam FIN 571 Final Exam FIN 571 Connect Problems FIN 575 Final Exam LAW 421 Final Exam ACC 291 Final Exam . LDR 531 Final Exam MKT 571 Final Exam QNT 561 Final Exam OPS 571
Cambridge International GCE Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced level (AS and A level) 47 Cambridge International General Certificate of Secondary Education (Cambridge IGCSE)/Cambridge International Certificate of Education (Cambridge ICE)/Cambridge GCE Ordinary level (Cambridge O level) 47 Cambridge International Diploma in Business 48 European Baccalaureate (EB) 65 International Baccalaureate .
2272 candidates, from 13 European Schools and 10 Accredited Schools, registered for the European Baccalaureate 2020 session. European Baccalaureate 2020 (marks in June) Registered 2272 Abandoned 7 Participated 2265 Passed 2238 Failed 27 Success rate 98.81% Fail rate 1.19% Overal
ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS The following Architectural Standards have been developed to aid homeowners, lot owners, architects, builders, and other design professionals in the understanding of what are the appropriate details to preserve a timeless Daufuskie Architecture. The existing residents of the island can rely on these guidelines to encourage quality, attention to detail, and by creating a .
