Unit Planning Series — Chapter 23 of 24. ← Chapter 22: Annotated Example of a Complete MYP Unit Plan

Through the IB's Building Quality Curriculum (BQC) service, expert reviewers analyze thousands of unit plans globally using the Evaluating MYP unit plans framework. This chapter consolidates the clearest patterns in why unit plans fail to reach "Capable" or "Exemplary" standards — and how to fix each one.

Why This Matters

Educational purpose: the blueprint for meaning-making

A flawed blueprint inevitably leads to a flawed structure. If concepts don't align with assessment, or skills aren't explicitly taught, the opportunity for purposeful meaning-making collapses.

The common misconception: "the planner is a bureaucratic hurdle"

Treating the planner as boxes to fill with "IB jargon" leads to surface-level compliance and retroactively fitting traditional lessons into MYP terminology — "false coverage and forced connections."

What happens if this is ignored?

Misaligned summative tasks produce invalid grades; tokenistic Global Contexts disengage students; and blank reflection sections rob teachers of the data needed to improve.

Core Concepts: The Anatomy of a Planning Mistake

1. The breakdown of constructive alignment

Mistakes occur when Objectives, Assessment Criteria, and Learning Experiences detach from each other — e.g., a conceptual SOI paired with purely factual, lecture-based lessons.

2. Linear vs. iterative planning

Novice teachers fill out the planner top-to-bottom; the IB explicitly states planning is "iterative and interrelated rather than strictly linear."

3. The BQC evaluation scale

Emergent (missing elements, mechanical connections) → Capable (confident, aligned planning) → Exemplary (a model of good practice).

The 6 Most Common Unit Planning Mistakes

Mistake 1: The "Frankenstein" Statement of Inquiry

The mistake: stringing Key Concept, Related Concepts, and Global Context together in a grammatically clunky, incomprehensible sentence. Bad: "The Key Concept of Systems and the Related Concepts of Adaptation and Resources interact in the Global Context of Globalization and Sustainability." Good: "Sustainable economic systems often require communities to adapt their management of natural resources."

Mistake 2: The "Orphaned" Summative Assessment

The mistake: a beautiful conceptual framework paired with a traditional recall test with no connection to the SOI. Fix: design the summative immediately after drafting the SOI, using backward design.

Mistake 3: The ATL "Wishlist"

The mistake: 15 ATL skills selected with zero explicit lesson plans to teach them. Fix: select 1-3 highly specific skills with corresponding explicit mini-lessons.

Mistake 4: Concept Overload (False Coverage)

The mistake: three Key Concepts and five Related Concepts for one 15-hour unit. Fix: one Key Concept, one or two Related Concepts genuinely providing depth.

Mistake 5: Invisible Differentiation

The mistake: "I will provide extra help to struggling students." Fix: document tangible scaffolds — "EAL students receive a bilingual glossary and sentence-framed graphic organizer."

Mistake 6: The "Ghost Town" Reflection

The mistake: "The students enjoyed the project" as the entire reflection. Fix: analyze summative data and document exactly what will change next year.

Practical Classroom Examples: Fixing the Mistakes

Language and Literature. "The Key Concept of Communication and the Related Concepts of Perspective and Theme show how Personal and Cultural Expression works in poetry" becomes: "Poets use creative communication to reveal diverse cultural perspectives and challenge our understanding of universal themes."

Design. A step-by-step birdhouse tutorial (no conceptual transfer) is redesigned using GRASPS: students research a local environmental issue and build a recycled-materials product justified against Criteria A and B.

Mathematics. A statistics unit listing three unused ATL skills is refined to one — "Organize and depict information logically" — with an explicit 20-minute mini-lesson on building data tables.

Individuals and Societies. "Differentiate for ELA students" becomes a "Guided Essay Matrix" with target-language sentence stems and a bilingual glossary, explicitly documented in the Action section.

Reflection Questions

  • If I read my SOI to a 13-year-old, would they understand it, or is it a mechanical list of IB vocabulary?
  • Can I draw a direct line from my summative back to the SOI and MYP Objectives?
  • Have I selected a realistic number of ATL Skills (1-3) with exact teaching plans?
  • Are my Inquiry Questions actually driving my lesson plans, or decorative text?
  • Is my "Reflection: After teaching" section specific enough to help a colleague next year?

Quick Checklist: The Unit Plan Audit

  • ☐ The SOI check — a natural, transferable sentence, not forced.
  • ☐ The assessment check — an authentic performance requiring the SOI.
  • ☐ The objective check — explicit learning experiences for every assessed strand.
  • ☐ The ATL check — 1-3 skills with dedicated instructional time.
  • ☐ The differentiation check — tangible, documented tools.
  • ☐ The reflection check — actionable, data-driven goals.

Key Takeaways

  • Alignment is everything — most mistakes come from disconnected designed, taught, and assessed curriculum.
  • Planning is iterative, not linear — use backwards design.
  • Avoid mechanical compliance — the SOI must be a meaningful, debatable truth.
  • Explicit over implicit — ATL skills must be modeled, scaffolded, and formatively assessed.
  • The planner is a living document that evolves every year based on data and feedback.
← Chapter 22: Annotated Example of a Complete MYP Unit PlanChapter 24: The MYP Unit Planning Checklist →