Print this page
Email this pageIB Asia Pacific Newsletter
April - June 2006
Diploma Programme
CAS (Creativity, Action, Science) – some points to ponder
Over the last few weeks schools have sent in their random CAS samples. It is about this time of year, too, that schools new to the Diploma Programme send in their CAS/PQ forms, which list their CAS programme in the first year of operation. After looking through all these, and after reflecting on the discussions that I have been involved in at recent CAS review meetings, it is obvious that there is an extraordinary variety of activities going on under the umbrella of CAS while, at the same time, the debate continues about what is and is not ‘good’ CAS.
My answer to that question is that, while some activities may clearly fall outside the boundaries of legitimate CAS, most ‘good’ CAS is defined not so much by the nature of the activity itself as by the affect of that activity on the student. CAS is, or rather should be, a learning experience, and, as such, deserves as much promotion, support and acknowledgment in schools as any subject in Groups 1-6. Not without reason, CAS sits at the centre of the hexagon. Yet the tendency is often for schools to promote themselves, at least in the public arena, on the basis of their academic results only. I understand this, and have done it myself, but nevertheless wonder whether the nature of, and commitment to, CAS more clearly, or at least equally, defines a successful Diploma school. We are, after all, promoting lifelong-learning as a goal, yet that learning seems sometimes limited to the academic rather than social arena. As teachers, we are usually enthusiastic advocates of academic learning, yet less readily prone to endorse by deed as well as word the tenets of CAS.
With this in mind, I would like Diploma and CAS coordinators to consider the following, perhaps for comment, perhaps for action. I have been encouraged by how many schools now devote quite some time to helping students learn the skills they will need when taking part in a particular CAS activity. If students are to help kids in a local orphanage, for example, or help with ESL learning in the junior school, or help coach a soccer team, they will need someone to instruct them before they go out, no less than we needed instruction on how to teach. No less important is instruction and advice on how to ‘reflect’ on their learning. Some of the token answers that appear on students’ reflection sheets are as likely to be the result of lack of advice on ‘how’ to reflect as they are a comment on a student’s disinterest in an activity (or the amount of paperwork!).
Of course, none of the above just ‘happens’ in a school, or finds easy time on the timetable. However, the schools I have referred to in the last paragraph see the value of good learning in CAS enough to find that time, whether during pastoral care, or through a designated CAS period each week, or by some other creative means. And, as with everything else in school, it does come down to resources, human and financial! At this point, I will refer to some of the key phrases on page 11 in the current CAS guide: school heads should ‘encourage staff participation’, ‘adequate funding should be allocated to ensure the smooth running of CAS’, and ‘sufficient release time should be allowed to the CAS coordinator’. I realize that the IB, in recognizing the wide variety of school contexts around the world, tends to err on the side of caution in employing the tentative ‘should’ rather than the more provocative ‘must’ in these quotes. Yet the underlying force of ‘should’ must not be ignored, and CAS coordinators who read this article (and I hope there are a few!) might draw necessary comfort and support from those quotes (and from me) if that is necessary in order to invigorate a CAS programme. However, I hope that most CAS coordinators will merely see them as endorsement of what currently happens in their schools. As I stated at the beginning, the variety of CAS in schools is impressive – and the commitment of CAS coordinators astonishing. Yet I occasionally sense that institutional support could be greater in some instances. And if this article has in any way helped to garner that support, I will be more than satisfied.
Nigel Forbes-Harper
The Diploma Review Committee will meet in the Singapore office on 1 – 2 June. Our sincere thanks to the Coordinators who have volunteered to contribute to this work.
Schools due for Five year Review in Year 2007
Five-year review list for 2007 - due 15 April, 2007 (for May session)
Beijing Huijia Private School
Canadian International School
Gandhi Memorial Int'l School
Garden International School
Good Shepherd International School
International School of Tianjin
International School of Ulaanbaatar
Li Po Chun UWC of Hong Kong
Mahindra UWC of India
Pathways World School
Prem Tinsulananda Int'l School
Taipei European School
German International School Sydney (The German School Johannes Gutenberg)
The Regents School
Five-year review list for 2007 – due 15 October, 2007 (for November session)
Carey Baptist Grammar School
Copland College
Geelong Grammar School
Katoh Gakuen Gyoshu High School
St. Peter's College
Trinity Grammar School
Wellington Dioceson School Nga Tawa
Woodcroft College
Laurie Ince, DP Regional Manager
Nigel Forbes-Harper, DP Associate Regional Manager
Deirdre Chang, Personal Assistant
Email: ibapdp@ibo.org