IB - Why did Marlborough, Kings etc drop it?

[MarathonMo]

Kings and Marlborough dropped it, why?

Is IB seen as a harder route, re: grade equivalencies, compared to A'level for access to a 'good' university?

Is IB a differentiator in a positive way? (re: A'level)? Thanks

I am hearing that some universities still misunderstand, not as accepting in UK?

Do you mean King's in Wimbledon or some other King's?

I don't know why they'd drop it but probably money. The teaching time is possibly double of A-Levels(?)

Since the A level reforms, IB isn't as hard! It's not seen to be as good anymore

As far as I understood it is a far harder and more well rounded route to take than 'A'Levels as far as Uni goes.

I would say that though, as DD is doing it and I don't live in the UK. It certainly seems WAY harder as far as I can tell. She needs 3 languages as minimum, Maths, Science etc...

Watching with interest.

IB is definitely 'as' hard, the question is, is it harder? I would say so. But I went to Uni 20 years ago!

IB is harder according to my brother. He had the option to do both at his school (English school in Germany) and IB was way harder

I can't comment on whether the IB is harder, but it can be more expensive to run. A school that I worked at dropped the IB for A-Levels about 2 years ago because of cost, despite having a pass rate higher than the worldwide average. Students study a greater number of subjects for IB (6 for the Diploma) and they couldn't afford to run certain subjects that only had 3/4 students in.

KCS Wimbledon still does IB if that is thr Kings you mean OP?

KCS Wimbledon offers both A levels and IB (first cohort wth A level as an option would have had their results earlier thus year).

I was done so that pupils could make the choice about what curriculum and style of exam they wanted for sixth form when they were older, not when pre-testing at 11 and choosing from conditional offers

I understand the Marlborough dropped IB as they found it didn’t seem as well liked by the top UK universities for those applying for maths and science. They also felt that the IB was too pressurised and limited the amount of extra curriculars the DCs could do outside of the IB compulsory element.

From my experience, IB really suits a good all rounder who wants to keep their university options open or is interested in a liberal arts style education in the US. I’d go for A levels if you DC knows now what they want to study at uni or if they have a definite strength in say the arts or sciences. My DC with a form of dyslexia would never cope with taking essay based subjects to a higher level.

They are not more difficult or easier than one another. They are just different. The IB is more prescriptive over taking a wide range of subjects, which prevents you from concentrating on sciences or languages or humanities or the performing arts in the way you can with A Levels. Also, now A Levels have returned to being non-modular many schools have decided to use these instead of the Pre-U (with the result that the Pre-U is going to cease to exist), so I would imagine schools like Marlborough are returning to just A Levels for the same reason. A Levels now allow for 2 full years of academic development and general maturity and not trying to timetable two parallel curricula is cost effective and may allow them to offer a wider range of A Level choices. King's Wimbledon dropped the IB years ago and explained their reasoning at the time.

or at least I thought they did - the then Headmaster wrote something about it. Maybe they changed their mind.

KCS Wimbledon still definitely doing IB. For a while they only did IB then they reintroduced A levels as well to give pupils the choice between the two.

IB is a bit "marmite" - great for some, not so for others. @Dancingdreamer and @Genevieva have put it very well above. As a generalist, I would have liked IB because I could have continued with more subjects. On the other hand, my son hated the idea of being forced to continue with English and languages when he knew he wanted to specialise in maths and science. Many keen maths / physics students in the UK take A-level Further Maths and IB does not go into as much depth as this.

The IB foundation, and schools that have bought into the IB, will say it's great preparation for university etc. But they are partisan - they would say that. I've yet to hear of any independent body saying the IB is better than the alternatives, but then, truly independent bodies tend to take a more measured view. I really don't see why the heavier workload of the IB is touted as an advantage either - are we not worried about stress and work-life balance for 16-18 year olds? Is it really a virtue to force them to continue with subjects they probably don't need, and the Theory of Knowledge element, and whatever else the IB includes? If a teenager wants to specialise at that age, why force them to spend so much time on these things? If an A-level student wants to do an EPQ, and do volunteering, and maybe their Duke of Edinburgh's Award, great - they can build a tailored curriculum. Why force them to have a set menu when we have a great options à la carte?

The IB is, I've heard, a lot of work for schools as well. Marking is not as transparent as it is for A-levels and in our area there has been some unpredictability on the results of the IB schools.

The Truth About The IB is a website which criticises the qualification and Foundation - don't know how objective it is, but you may find it interesting.

I've had DCs who have done both. A levels are faaaaar easier. IB is fantastic even if you know what you want to do at uni. Just learning to prioritise your workload and organise yourself stands you in good stead. Keeping a breadth of subjects is stimulating and makes you a more knowledgeable person. You may end up doing something totally different than your degree subject and having a bank of knowledge is really helpful. That said, for my DS who couldn't get away from MFLs fast enough, A levels were the right choice. irony alert DS took up French as an elective at uni and realised that he really loved it.

I think TOK is a great subject and it really improved my lateral thinking skills. As a student, I also found A-Levels faaar easier.

DS1 was Kings and they are definitely still sitting IB. They re-introduced A levels a few years ago but co-incidentally their Oxbridge offers have dropped through the floor since then. They currently sit about 50/50.

Kings push IB because they think it is easier to get the top grade "7" than it is to get an A at A level. Before the introduction of A at A level a 7 was an A equivalent. it is much more difficult to get an A than the old grade A at A level but despite no changes at all having been made to the IB grading system a 7 is now seen as equivalent to an A. There are also some very generous IB offers at some unis, e.g. Durham PPE wants A*AA at A level but 666 at HL for IB, with an overall 38. There are some soft options for IB subjects but I think the most abused, e.g. Maths Studies which was no more difficult than GCSE Add Maths, are under review or being removed.

Mirena - I get your point. I spent years listening to the Kings HT waffle on about the "academic rigour" of IB and then a few years later he's telling parents to get their DCs to sit IB in favour of A levels because it's easier to get the top grades. Indys schools HTs tell lies, lots and lots of them.

In was certainly more difficult than the old modular a-level and the top universities still asked for top grades so limited choices. Many students don't want to continue with nsths/languages etc after gcse's.

@cakeisalwaystheanswer I think they lie regardless of the sector. In my area there are two state schools which do the IB and the head of sixth form of one told some porkies too. He was so invested in the IB it seemed like he'd say anything to support it. My DS wanted to do maths at uni so was planning maths and further maths A-levels. Teacher insisted that you could do just as much maths via the IB. I went through specific modules with him and he admitted that OK, it did not cover as much, but if you did maths and physics at higher level then "just" self-taught another couple of A-level maths modules, you'd have caught up by university. No thanks. He went elsewhere and enjoyed being able to do only subjects he actually liked.

@JoJoSM2 that's interesting - did you do both A-levels and IB then?
TOK sounds interesting to me (I've taught critical thinking) , but then you can do AS Critical Thinking or a philosophy - based EPQ. As with continuing a MFL, it's something that some people would love to do or find useful, but the issue with IB is that it's compulsory and so crowds out other things which might be a better use of time for that individual.

I always find these threads a bit depressing, because the focus is so often on which subject or course will get you into university, or which one's easier. Surely education is about so much more than that? How many people even use the specifics of the subjects they studied at school or university in their job? For every nurse or vet, there are hundreds of people doing non-subject-specific jobs (from the admin assistant right up to the prime minister) who haven't given a second thought to their higher level maths or the Wars of the Roses since they left university. But that doesn't mean that the education they got wasn't immensely valuable in teaching them how to think, and write, and discuss, and plan, and communicate. Personally I love the IB and the breadth of subjects it insists on, coupled with the focus on service and critical thinking - but even if it's not the right choice for your child, surely making that choice should be more holistic than thinking about what course they might get onto at university?