Chapter 24: The MYP Unit Planning Checklist

Even thoughtful design can hide gaps, accidental misalignments, or unrealistic pacing once translated into a live classroom. Before launching a unit, experienced MYP teachers perform a pre-teaching quality audit — this chapter is that checklist.

Why This Matters

Educational purpose: preventing instructional breakdown

The written, taught, and assessed curriculum operate in an integrated loop. A pre-teaching audit is the preventative bridge between planned and taught curriculum, catching errors — like assessing an untaught strand — while they're still easy to fix.

Common misconceptions

"If every box is filled, the plan is complete" — a planner can be fully populated with IB terminology yet remain internally misaligned. "Checklists are just compliance forms" — used reflectively, a checklist verifies daily strategies actually support inquiry and understanding.

Core Concepts: The Pre-Teaching Audit Framework

The audit breaks the Unit Plan into six components, based on the IB's Evaluating MYP unit plans framework (Emergent → Capable → Exemplary):

1. Conceptual triad and inquiry focus — one Key Concept, 1-2 Related Concepts, a specific Global Context exploration.
2. Statement of Inquiry and questions — transferable, jargon-free, with a clear Factual → Conceptual → Debatable progression.
3. Constructive alignment and assessment — the summative evaluates the SOI, with strands correctly mapped and rubrics ready on day one.
4. Explicit ATL skill integration — 1-3 targeted skills with explicit mini-lessons planned.
5. Learning process and inclusion scaffolds — front-loaded content, tangible EAL/SEN scaffolds, formative checkpoints.
6. Pre-teaching reflection — prior knowledge, misconceptions, and interdisciplinary connections recorded.

Auditing the conceptual triad and inquiry focus

Verify exactly one Key Concept drives the unit, 1-2 Related Concepts add discipline-specific rigor, and a specific exploration (not just the category title) grounds the Global Context.

Auditing the Statement of Inquiry and Inquiry Questions

Check the SOI reads as a clear idea, not a "Frankenstein" sentence of raw IB terminology, and confirm at least one Factual, one Conceptual, and one Debatable question unpack it directly.

Auditing constructive alignment and MYP Assessment

Follow the workflow: identify targeted objective strands → design the authentic summative (GRASPS) → create task-specific clarifications → map daily learning experiences and formative tasks to those exact strands.

Auditing explicit ATL skill integration

Confirm 1-3 targeted skills have a corresponding explicit mini-lesson, formative practice, and summative application pathway — not just a mention in the Inquiry section.

Auditing the Action section and inclusion scaffolds

Check content alignment with standards, low-stakes formative checkpoints, tangible differentiation for EAL/neurodiverse/highly capable learners, and diverse, culturally representative resources.

Auditing pre-teaching reflection

Confirm notes on prior knowledge, language profiles, potential misconceptions, and opportunities for interdisciplinary connections or Service as Action are recorded before teaching begins.

Common Pre-Teaching Unit Planning Mistakes

Mistake	Root Cause	How to Fix Before Teaching
Frankenstein SOI	Forcing raw IB terms into one awkward sentence.	Rewrite as a natural, transferable statement.
Orphaned Assessment	A recall test that ignores the SOI.	Redesign using GRASPS to require applying concepts.
ATL "Wishlist"	15 skills ticked, none explicitly taught.	Narrow to 1-3 core skills with explicit mini-lessons.
Concept Overload	3 Key Concepts, 5 Related Concepts for one unit.	Limit to 1 Key Concept and 1-2 Related Concepts.
Invisible Differentiation	Vague statements like "help EAL students."	Document concrete tools — organizers, sentence stems, glossaries.
Unassessed Objectives	Assessing strands never taught.	Audit every assessed strand against the Action section.
Blank Reflection	Empty pre-teaching reflection box.	Complete it with prior knowledge and language profiles.
Missing Command Terms	Rubric demands "Analysis," class teaches "Description."	Align activity command terms with the assessment's target level.

Practical Classroom Examples Across Subject Groups

Design. Verify word-count constraints (e.g., max 300 words/page) and annotated diagrams for Criteria A and B, avoiding linguistic barriers for EAL learners.

Sciences. Confirm the lab task is open-ended enough for students to independently formulate hypotheses, rather than following a fixed "cookbook" procedure.

Mathematics. Confirm the assessment prompt presents a genuine, unfamiliar scenario (like cafeteria queue logistics) rather than a standard textbook problem.

Individuals and Societies. Confirm an explicit Information Literacy mini-lesson (OPVL or CRAAP test) precedes independent primary-source analysis for Criterion D.

Reflection Questions for Teachers and Coordinators

• If an adolescent reads our Statement of Inquiry, will they understand the core concept without an IB glossary?
• Can we point to the exact lesson where targeted ATL Skills are explicitly taught?
• Does our summative task require applying understanding to an authentic, unfamiliar situation?
• Are our differentiation scaffolds tangible, rather than general statements?
• Have we checked that every assessed strand is explicitly taught before being graded?

Quick Checklist: Master Pre-Teaching Unit Audit

• ☐ Administrative context — teacher, subject group, unit title, MYP year, duration recorded.
• ☐ Exactly one Key Concept, 1-2 Related Concepts, a Global Context and specific exploration.
• ☐ A clear, transferable SOI with Factual, Conceptual, and Debatable questions aligned.
• ☐ Targeted objectives and criteria strands explicitly listed, with an authentic (GRASPS) summative task.
• ☐ 1-3 specific ATL Skills selected, with explicit mini-lessons planned.
• ☐ Content, sequenced learning experiences, formative checkpoints, and tangible differentiation documented.
• ☐ "Prior to teaching" reflection completed — prior knowledge, misconceptions, language profiles.

Key Takeaways

• Pre-teaching audits prevent instructional failure by checking alignment before you're in the classroom.
• Focus on constructive alignment — designed, taught, and assessed curriculum as one integrated loop.
• Explicit ATL instruction is required — skills need a corresponding lesson, not just a mention.
• Scaffolds must be concrete — tangible tools, not vague promises.
• The planner is a living document — the pre-teaching audit is just the first checkpoint.