Becoming a new type of teacher: The case of experienced British-trained educators transitioning to the International Baccalaureate Middle Years Programme abroad

Abstract

This paper investigates the experiences of six British-trained teachers who moved from teaching GCSE in state-funded schools in England to teach in two separate English-speaking well-established traditional international schools in Northern Europe where they began to teach the International Baccalaureate’s Middle Years Programme (IBMYP). The nature of the IBMYP, with its student-centred focus and conceptual framework, deviates greatly from the dominant, typically prescriptive approach of the GCSE. The demands of the IBMYP, which are represented in the IB’s institutional pillars, exert significant influence over both new and experienced teachers to induce a change in identity as they gradually shift to becoming an ‘IBMYP Educator’. Using semi-structured interviews and thematic data analysis, this qualitative study examines teacher identity factors and seeks to understand the process of this identity shift. Using Goffman’s Frame Analysis, the themes are presented as metaphors, helping us to realise the experience of transition, as the teachers shifted from feeling temporarily de-skilled to re-skilled. A sense of authenticity and freedom was felt to be the eventual outcome after an initial phase of being ‘adrift’ and in unsettled ‘survival mode’.

The international school teacher

Our paper investigates the way that six experienced British-trained teachers transitioned from teaching General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE: an academic qualification offered to 14-16 years olds in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland since 1988) in a state-funded school in England to teaching an entirely different ‘international curriculum framework’ in an international school abroad. We explore and conceptualise, using metaphors, the way the six teachers realised and framed the transition, and how their identities as professional educators were at first disrupted and then, over time, reformed.

The teachers in our study had left the United Kingdom (UK) and settled to work at two separate well-established schools in the same country (but in different cities) in Northern Europe. The market-intelligence agency ISC Research identified, in July 2024, 14,457 schools and 693,630 teachers delivering a non-national curriculum in English outside an English-speaking nation (www.iscresearch.com), but our study focuses on a much smaller and tighter sub-group of ‘international schools’, numbering about 600, that are accredited by the Council of International Schools (CIS) and are authorised to deliver to the children of largely transient internationally mobile parents one or more of the four programmes of the Geneva-registered International Baccalaureate (IB). As well-established, accredited (by CIS) non-profit led ‘IB World Schools’ (ie schools that have been authorised by the IB Organisation to offer one or more of the IB programmes), we might refer to them as ‘traditional international schools’ (Hayden and Thompson, 2013). Many of these teachers are from the UK, and even as long ago as 2013 (Vaughan, 2013) it was reported that there were 100,000 British teachers working in international schools worldwide. Data gathered in 2018 by ISC Research from 1,020 ‘premium sector’ schools (Robertson, 2018), which would likely include the type involved in our study, revealed that 25% of teachers were then British.

International schools worldwide are continuously growing. ISC Research in July 2014 identified 9,615 schools employing 432,970 staff in the broader field of K-12 English-medium of instruction ‘international schooling’. The 50% growth in numbers of schools and 56% growth in the number of staff between 2014 and 2024 indicate the need to understand the roles, responsibilities, and identities of international school teachers (ISTs). Bailey (2015: 4) acknowledges the dearth of studies on ISTs, noting that this topic ‘remains little theorised’.

The focus on teacher identity

Most teachers are ‘only prepared for their immediate domestic context’ (Snowball, 2007: 247), and the shift from teaching GCSE in England to teaching the IB Middle Years Programme (MYP) overseas is a major change. As the teachers in our study had chosen to take up a teaching post overseas, we cannot refer to them as ‘accidental teachers’ (Bailey & Cooker, 2019). However, as they had sought a post at ‘an international school’ without necessarily intending to teach the MYP (as many international schools offer other programmes for that age range, such as the International GCSE, IGCSE), we might instead term them ‘incidental MYP teachers’.

Definitions of teacher identity emphasise its multiplicity. Edwards and Edwards describe a teacher’s identity journey as ‘complex and idiosyncratic’ (2017: 191), while Mockler suggests that it is ‘formed and reformed constantly over the course of a career’ (2011: 518). Buchanan notes that ‘as it is born of past experiences, and shaped by current circumstances, identity is constantly in motion, developing as teachers engage in their daily practices and reflect on their work’ (2015: 704). The inclusion of an international curriculum, such as the MYP, to a nationally-trained teacher’s career arguably provides significant impetus to reconceptualise their identity.

Teachers are typically trained within national systems to serve the needs of children in that country. Most studies on teacher identity focus on this national context, but investigations into the identity of ISTs are gathering momentum (Bailey, 2015; Arber et al, 2015). An international post is not necessarily a linear step in the development of teacher identity (Day & Gu, 2007) and ISTs are seldom deliberately trained for their roles prior to moving into an international school post. The notion of experienced teachers feeling something akin to ‘de-skilled’ and ‘re-skilled’ in their international contexts forms an important part of our study, as our six participants moved from teaching the familiar National Curriculum for England leading to the GCSE, to the unfamiliar context of the IB’s complex MYP framework.

In their 2021 systematic literature review on IB-related research, Jaafar et al uncovered ‘three main research clusters’, including ‘growing the IB brand’, ‘student success for the IB’, and ‘the international identity of the IB’ (2021: 1). While these form three important areas of study, none explicitly takes account of the fundamental question of who is educating the IB learner. The review draws attention to the growth of the IB, highlighting that ‘understanding the influence of the IB programmes on different aspects of educational development . . . is important to the field of international education’ (Jaafar et al, 2021: 3), a conclusion that we feel should extend beyond the IB learners to the identity of IB educators.

The significance of the study

Our study offers a unique insight into how teachers might adopt a ‘curriculum-based identity’. There is limited research into how teacher identity is influenced by a specific curriculum (Bailey & Cooker, 2019; Tran & Nguyen, 2015) and our study offers an original lens by focusing on experienced ISTs who deliver the IB’s MYP, available to 11-16 year olds since 1994, and covering eight subject groups. Described as ‘under-researched’ (Barker, 2022) and the ‘least understood and researched of the IB programmes’ (Dickson et al, 2021: 137), the MYP strives to ‘develop active learners and internationally minded young people who can empathize with others and pursue lives of purpose and meaning’ (IBO, 2022).

The approach taken to this study is different from that of previous studies. The nature and process of identity change experienced by ‘IB Educators’ has been examined before (Bunnell, Fertig, and James, 2020) but that study largely focused on experienced British teachers who had transitioned into teaching a combination of the IB’s MYP, Diploma Programme (DP) and Primary Years Programme (PYP) in an international school. The emphasis there was on the transition to becoming an ‘IB Educator’ and not a programme-specific educator such as ‘MYP Educator’. The MYP setting is thus an original one in the context of identity change realised by experienced teachers.

We know that the transition to becoming an ‘IB Educator’ in general involves a shift that is deep. Indeed, a previous study of IB teachers suggested that ‘none of the teachers considered that they would move into, or back into, a non-IB World School’ (Bunnell, Fertig, and James, 2020: 256). The relationship of IB World Schools can be analysed within Scott’s (2014) framework of institutionalisation, which examines an institution’s ‘regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive elements that, together with associated activities and resources, provide stability and meaning to social life’ (Scott, 2014: 56). The rule-setting of the IB’s regulative pillar and the values, norms and practices of its normative pillar provide strict boundaries within which MYP and other IB World schools must operate. These include accreditation by external agencies and authorisation by the IB, school management systems, and compulsory IB training to ensure conformance to norms. There is more scope for flexibility within the IB’s cultural-cognitive pillar, which incorporates ‘curriculum documents, lesson plans, and records of student assessments’ (Bunnell, Fertig, and James 2017: 312). This potentially plays a significant role as teachers transition into teaching an IB programme (in the context of this study, the MYP), as the IB’s institutional pillars contribute new dynamics to identity negotiation.

The IB Middle Years Programme

The IB website (www.ibo.org) reveals that as at July 2024 there were almost 6,000 schools in over 160 countries offering one or more of the four programmes offered by the IB (DP, MYP, PYP and the Career-related Programme, CP). Of those, almost one-third (32%) offer the MYP, the vast majority of which are in the United States (772 in total, mainly state-funded) and Canada (a further 165 schools). The extent of growth in recent years is dramatic, considering that ‘in August 2011 the MYP was fast approaching the 1000-school mark (920 schools), with almost 450 of these being in the USA’ (Bunnell, 2011: 263). This evolution reflects shifts in national approaches to education as the MYP is offered in state schools in some countries, and regions, in order to offer an international curriculum for students in a national context (Dickson et al, 2017; Sperandio, 2010). California alone has 72 MYP schools and Quebec has 92.

The programme endorses a student-led, constructivist pedagogy (IBO, 2014: 73) and is developed around eight subject groups to provide what is described as a holistic education. Its concept-based approach to teaching and learning is consistent with the international ethos of all IB programmes, which posit that concepts ‘reach beyond national and cultural boundaries [helping] to integrate learning, build the capacity to engage with complex ideas, and allow transfer of learning to new contexts’ (IBO, 2014: 13). It requires the deliberate teaching of cognitive and affective skills, and the organisation of lesson plans to fit global contexts to provide authentic learning experiences. In this way, ‘the PYP and MYP are curriculum frameworks, whereas the DP is a prescribed curriculum’ (IBO, 2008: 6). Many studies discuss the transition challenges presented by the move from the MYP’s holistic, integrated, inquiry-led curriculum framework to the DP’s prescriptive, assessment-led, pre-university curriculum (Walker & Lee, 2018; Hemmens, 2016; Tarc, 2009; Stobie, 2007). The MYP has been labelled as the ‘middle child’ of the IB’s programmes (Harrison, 2015: 45), evoking connotations of being under-recognised. Conversely, it has been lauded for supporting ‘creativity, critical thinking and international-mindedness’ (Hughes, 2014: 203).

Although the identity of MYP teachers is particularly under-researched, many studies allude to the demands placed by the programme on its educators (Ashworth, 2013; Fail, 2011; Stobie, 2007) from which it is possible to extrapolate significant factors that influence teaching identity. MYP teachers are supported in their roles by material provided by the IB for each discipline, which is designed to be ‘easy to access and consistent, so that the gradual process of consensus-building across the MYP professional community does not amount to different ‘versions’ of understanding that rest upon misconceptions’ (Field, 2011: 70). Furthermore, teachers participate in compulsory workshop training, an essential feature of which is the ‘significant amount of networking amongst participants’ (Phillips, 2011: 37). Exposure to the wider IB community can be ‘an important moment of initiation’ (Bunnell, Fertig, and James, 2020: 251) and teachers new to the MYP are likely energised through meeting educators with established MYP identities.

The research approach

Our paper has evolved from a larger postgraduate study at the University of Bath (Walker, 2021) that explored the catalysts for change in the identity of MYP teachers, including the influence of the IB’s institutional pillars. That study adhered to the ethical standards of both the University of Bath and the British Educational Research Association (BERA). There is no affiliation between the authors and the MYP schools in this study (or the IB organisation), although both authors have previous experience of teaching the MYP in a ‘traditional international school’ setting.

Participants were contacted via a request distributed to their MYP Coordinators (members of staff with responsibility for coordinating all aspects of the MYP at their school), acting as gatekeepers, for help with seeking volunteers to be interviewed. To provide consistency in anchoring points across the participants, inclusion criteria stipulated that they teach at ‘Continuum IB World Schools’ (those offering IB programmes from K-12), had been trained in the UK, taught GCSE prior to the MYP, attended at least one MYP workshop, and taught the MYP for at least one year. These criteria were established to ensure that participants would have gained an understanding of the programme to be able to relate detail-rich accounts of their experiences. All participants took part in the interview process voluntarily, and were guaranteed confidentiality.

The sample was deliberately small. Recommended sample sizes for small-scale phenomenological studies range from three to ten participants (Creswell, 2013; Starks & Trinidad, 2007) and the Walker (2021) study had involved just our six participants. Purposive sampling was appropriate as ‘data from only a few individuals who have experienced the phenomenon—and who can provide a detailed account of their experience—will suffice to uncover its core elements’ (Starks & Trinidad, 2007: 1375).

Our six participants (four female and two male) are all experienced and trained middle years teachers, with over thirty years’ experience between them of both the National Curriculum for England and the MYP. All six had completed their initial teacher training in England and, of less importance, were British-born. They had all taught GCSE for at least six years in state schools in England, providing a strong ‘identity anchor’ (Mockler, 2011: 522), and subsequently had between three and twelve years’ experience of the MYP. They had all been at their current school for at least three years. Two had also previously worked in a traditional international school in a different country, where they taught IGCSE, and two others had taught IGCSE at their current school prior to the school switching to the IBMYP. Between them, the participants taught a number of MYP subjects (sciences, languages, English, design, humanities) and had participated in a number of IB-led workshops and professional development opportunities.

All six also taught the DP, providing them with an opportunity to contrast that experience with the MYP. We know little about their motives for leaving England, or why they chose to move to an international school, but it appears that they did not deliberately seek out an MYP school in their move abroad; as noted above, the transition was seemingly incidental. Neither of the two schools in this study offers the MYP’s optional end-of-programme eAssessment examinations, offered to schools since 2016 as an alternative to the internally-assessed model on which the MYP has traditionally been based.

Data collection took place in February and March 2021. Guided by related studies that recognise the importance of narratives in conceiving, expressing, and researching teacher identity (Mockler, 2011; Søreide, 2006; Beijaard et al, 2004), our study used individual, semi-structured interviews for data collection. Semi-structured interviews allow respondents time and space to conceptualise their ideas, leading to detail-rich stories and accommodating the plurality of teacher identity. Interviews were a means to explore ‘how respondents assign meaning to particular experiences, events, and themes’ (Johnson et al, 2019: 2) and to ‘capture participants’ experiences in their own words and reveal the context and meaning of their actions’ (Seitz, 2016: 229).

At the time of data collection, face-to-face meetings were restricted due to Covid-19, and interviews took place online via a secure videoconferencing platform. All the participants had been engaged in online teaching in the months preceding the interviews and felt comfortable in a virtual environment. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using Thematic Analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2013), with the dataset being initially analysed for word frequency to provide a preliminary overview of the words and concepts mentioned most often. These were categorised on a context-specific basis by allocating each occurrence to an appropriate semantic field; for example, ‘not artificial’ was classified under the category of ‘authentic’, along with ‘genuine’, ‘relatable’ and ‘relevant’.

From this, a series of common metaphors emerged (for instance ‘learning on the job’), revealing the way in which participants expressed their individual experiences. This allowed us to adopt a Frame Analysis (Goffman, 1974) process to understand how the experience was realised, or framed, in metaphorical terms (as used previously by Linstrom & Marais, 2012). We know from Goffman’s notion of dramaturgy that even the most mundane or every-day event may be dramatised metaphorically. Idiomatic expressions used by the teachers in their narratives lend authenticity to recounting of their experiences of becoming MYP educators and reveal how they perceive themselves in their teaching roles.

In the following sections we will begin by presenting two metaphors that suggested teachers had initially felt ‘de-skilled’ (Stirzaker, 2004), even overwhelmed and out of their depth, by the transition to MYP teaching, followed by five metaphors revealing a gradual sense of becoming re-skilled, or even ‘reborn’ both as an individual teacher and as part of a wider MYP community. All names used for teachers in what follows are pseudonyms, to protect the identity of the participants.

The experience as framed through metaphors

The (initial) sense of being de-skilled

The feeling of being ‘in survival mode’

All six of our participants referred to learning to teach the MYP whilst ‘on the job’. Rick, who had previously taught for three years in the UK, found the difference between teaching a Year 11 GCSE class in the UK and the same age group within the MYP context to be like ‘night and day’ and felt like he was ‘in survival mode’. Wendy recalled feeling ‘overwhelmed’ at first, Nina remembered being ‘baffled’, Alexa was ‘nervous’, and Elaine described the MYP as ‘alien’, worrying that her students ‘didn’t have the knowledge, the nuts and bolts’ that she was familiar with from the content-driven GCSE. Rick and Nina both admitted to ‘not really getting the MYP’ at first, and Rick perceived that his ‘initial experience was just teaching how [he] had always taught, but with a few key words layered on top’.

Alexa commented on the amount of work involved in delivering the MYP, finding it significantly more than IGCSE, especially ‘the assessment workload. Doing the MYP is huge’. At 140 mentions across all six interviewees, the notion of ‘demands’ was the second most frequently occurring category, while ‘assessment’ was third with 124 references. Rupert pronounced the MYP to be ‘complex’, stating that ‘the IGCSE actually runs very well – you just take it off the shelf and off you go. But to keep ATLs [Approaches to Learning requirements], global contexts, concepts, learner profile, internationalism, all the balls in the air at once . . .?’. Nina and Rick both agreed that MYP involves ‘much more’ work than GCSE.

The feeling of being ‘adrift’

The absence of compulsory final examinations in the MYP was a big factor to adjust to and Rupert found working with the new form of assessment to be ‘a steep learning curve’. Rick noted that he was conditioned by using as a motivating factor with classes ‘the carrot and stick of an important final assessment. And it was strange having this year that felt like another year of just drifting’. Further concerns were raised regarding the nature of the criterion-based assessment, which was described by Elaine as ‘wide open and vague’ and by Nina as ‘very subjectively interpreted’.

Many participants found the new type of teaching challenging, particularly following their experiences with GCSE. This is perhaps not surprising given Snowball’s suggestion that in international schools ‘it is often left to the individual teacher to implement modifications of internationalizing the curriculum, largely dependent on the extent of his or her own international-mindedness, experience and access to appropriate resources’ (2007: 253). Nina found the ‘internationalism is so not tangible, you can’t put your finger on it’, and described the MYP’s conceptual learning as ‘a double-edged sword’: ‘All that conceptual learning, all the global contexts . . . I’m still not too sure how to materialise that into my classroom’. Even the more experienced teachers Wendy and Alexa still harboured some uncertainties about implementing the MYP, with Alexa, twelve years into teaching the programme, saying: ‘We all like a little bit of reassurance every now and again’.

The (later) sense of being re-skilled

The feeling of being ‘converted’

All the responses were marked by transition phrases revealing a different second impression of the MYP. Rick soon found the lack of examinations ‘liberating’, while Wendy, who had taught MYP for more than eleven years, exclaimed ‘I am the converted!’. Alexa shared that ‘there’s this part where you realise that there’s a lot more to it than just knowing the material’.

Having experienced their first and second impressions of teaching the MYP, and with time for greater reflection, participants articulated how they had changed through teaching the MYP. ‘Change’, or a synonym, was used 163 times, topping the word frequency table. Wendy declared that ‘I have a much broader and deeper understanding of all aspects of teaching and learning now than I did when I was doing GCSE’. Elaine’s personal and professional growth was groundbreaking:

The biggest shift for me was even being aware that there was another way of doing things. Having been born and raised, and been teaching, just in one environment my whole life, one type of curriculum, I didn’t realise that it varied in such a huge way in other parts of the world.

In contemplating a hypothetical return to the GCSE in England, Rick admitted that ‘I dread going back to that’. All the participants reiterated that it takes several years to come to terms with the MYP, with Elaine sharing her head of department’s theory that ‘it takes about four years to get your head around the MYP. Your first year is just ‘Woah, what is this?’. And your second year you’re like, ‘Okay, I think I’m starting to understand it’. And in [your] third year, [you] feel a lot more comfortable with it’. Rick similarly said that after his first year ‘it probably took at least another full year, a couple of years to really reform [his] practice’, while Anne explained that: ‘I definitely leant on what I knew from GCSE and it took me several years to move away from that.’

Reflecting on their adjustment to the programme, all the participants used MYP terminology liberally, suggesting their incorporation of the philosophy into their teaching and how they talk about it. Wendy, Alexa and Rupert, who had all been teaching the programme for over ten years, used the language unconsciously, while Elaine, Nina and Rick, who were newer to the programme, were aware of this change in their speech. Their language revealed the perception of a distinct style, with Alexa mentioning ‘the MYP way’, whilst Wendy identified an ‘MYP approach’ and Rick observed an ‘MYP ethos’. The adoption of MYP language suggests strong institutional branding by the IB.

The feeling that it is ‘all hands on deck’

As teachers reflect on and deal with new identity factors, they begin to cultivate a sense of belonging within their professional communities. Indeed, it is said that ‘teaching is a process of becoming a member in a defined group of practitioners with specific skills’ (Battey & Franke, 2008: 128). All the participants in our study spoke positively of the collaborative nature of the MYP. The ‘implementation of IB programmes requires values and attitudes about curriculum and pedagogy to be shared between teachers’ (Cambridge, 2011: 128) and Elaine described collaborative planning in her department as ‘all hands on deck, everyone pitches in’. Words within the semantic field of ‘collaboration’ were used 101 times, and in their general discourse participants tended to use the first-person plural ‘we’ in expressing themselves and sharing examples of their practice.

A significant benefit of community membership is that teachers draw on ‘the experiences and prior knowledge of others as they construct and reshape their teacher knowledge and identity’ (Edwards & Edwards, 2017: 194). Wendy described how her colleagues ‘bounce off each other’, while Nina cherished being ‘trusted as a member of the team’ and Rupert enjoyed that ‘every time we get a new teaching group together, we learn from each other . . . almost with fresh eyes’.

The feeling that training offered ‘good takeaways’

Throughout their careers, in experiencing ongoing professional development teachers are invited to ‘acquire new knowledge, re-craft identities, and challenge existing cultural and social practices’ (Battey & Franke, 2008: 128). Most participants in our study reflected unprompted and favourably on the training they experienced in their MYP workshops as the category of ‘support’ arose 67 times. Wendy recalled leaving her first MYP workshop with ‘some good takeaways’ while Rupert effusively praised the ‘very educationally sound’ workshop leaders. Elaine felt that ‘there was a huge amount packed in’ at her first MYP workshop.

A common thread relating to workshop attendance was the exposure to other MYP educators. Wendy benefitted ‘from meeting other people and talking to them about how their schools were developing the MYP’ and Rick appreciated the ‘continuous interactions you have with people’. Attendance at IB workshops has been described elsewhere as ‘a rite of passage into the group’ (Bunnell, Fertig & James, 2020: 254), significantly contributing to a collective identity.

The new sense of ‘freedom’

The term ‘liberating’ appeared in interviews, and the new sense of freedom was very noticeable in the fact that the notion of increased agency was mentioned 54 times, particularly in contrast to the GCSE which was seen as ‘prescribed’, a descriptor used 22 times. Rupert labelled the GCSE ‘static’, while Wendy celebrated that ‘with the MYP, you’re not spoon-feeding’. Nina acknowledged that ‘the positive side of the double-edged sword is that freedom that I have to adapt my resources and my content, and to let the lesson flow, to go off on a tangent . . . It’s that freedom, it’s that real freedom’. Rupert revelled in having more ownership over the curriculum, declaring:

I like the flexibility a lot . . . In GCSE, you did it enough times, you practised it enough times, and you would become perfect about one thing. What the MYP has taught me is that you’re never going to be a master of everything, and the variety of things out there which you can try and master is infinite. That’s where the excitement is as a teacher.

Both Wendy and Rick embraced agency particularly with regards to MYP assessment, and positive descriptors in this context occurred 45 times. Rick found the autonomy to design his own assignments ‘such a joy’, saying ‘It’s not ‘How well have you reproduced what was in my head?’, but ‘What was genuinely in your head?’ Wendy enthused that ‘There’s an extraordinary amount of scope that we can give the students and I love the fact that it’s not just essay, essay, essay’.

The sense of becoming an ‘authentic teacher’

This finding emerged strongly as the participants prioritised meaningful and relevant student learning over examination-driven content. Rupert reported that, when he first taught the MYP, he noted the challenge that ‘when the students were saying, ‘Why are we learning this?’, for the first time you had to have a proper answer: ‘Because we’re making it relatable, something that you can see in the world around you’. Parkison (2008: 54) highlights the constraints that teachers face from ‘authorities such as government examining bodies and how these serve to act as stressors which result in teachers feeling unmotivated or alienated’. As Rick reflected:

If you’re being forced to teach Dickens to a classroom full of Bengali children from South London, you’re being asked to enforce a very particular set of cultural values. In the MYP, you’re encouraged to teach in a much more humane way, responding to who’s in front of you.

The idea of responding to students’ interests emerged throughout the data, and words in the semantic category of ‘authentic’ appeared 71 times. Authentic teaching was seen as achievable through the fostering of skills and learning through concepts and inquiry. The semantic field of ‘skills’ surfaced 77 times, with ‘concept’ appearing 43 times, and ‘inquiry’ a further 11. Wendy noted that ‘the big focus is on developing those transferable skills that can help [students] in life’. She repeatedly endorsed the idea that the MYP framework gives students ‘a lot more choice and responsibility’. Alexa appreciated how the MYP allows students ‘to think a little bit more outside the box, to question why they’re learning what they’re learning’. Even Elaine, a teacher who was more sceptical of the MYP, conceded that the global contexts ‘help give a purpose and a point to what we’re teaching’, adding that ‘I slowly came to understand what was meant by the role of the teacher as a facilitator, rather than just imparting knowledge in the way that I had been used to in the UK’.

Another unanimous point raised was the need for the ongoing review of teaching materials to sustain authentic learning. Words in the category of ‘adapt’ appeared 27 times and ‘ongoing’ emerged 36 times. Rick reported that his department frequently asks ‘Is this unit still fit for purpose?’ and Alexa revealed that ‘We find that almost every year we’re changing [our units], because say, this came up with a good result, this didn’t, we need to tweak it’. Elaine’s observation encapsulated this idea: ‘You need to keep on rethinking and rethinking and rethinking’.

Discussion

By transitioning into teaching the MYP, our participants were introduced to an unfamiliar educational framework that is not prescribed and, at their schools, does not culminate in external examinations. For many, this had been antithetical to their understanding of education, and had served as the biggest catalyst for change. Their National Curriculum for England ‘identity anchor’ (Mockler, 2011) had served as a strong institutional force, the regulative pillar of which directs teachers to adhere to government-mandated specifications and external monitoring, as well as observance of a prescribed curriculum (Department for Education, 2014). These carriers of institutionalisation (Scott, 2014) informed what the participants considered a ‘normal’ approach to education, thus scripting the ‘primary framework’ (Goffman, 1974: 21) they had used to make sense of their roles as teachers. The sudden exposure to a new way of teaching and the ‘loss of familiar signs and symbols’ (Halicioglu, 2015: 242) caused a significant disruption to their existing professional identities, leaving them feeling displaced (Parkison, 2008; Day & Gu, 2007).

Much literature raises questions over how well-prepared teachers trained in national systems are for the initial transition into an international context and curriculum (Ashworth, 2013; Fail, 2007; Levy, 2007; Snowball, 2007; Stirzaker, 2004). Our findings echo these questions, with the feeling of displacement and disruption of existing identity derived from the National Curriculum for England leading participants to form an unfavourable first impression of the MYP. In the early stages of the transition from a more prescribed context, when the MYP pedagogical stance may appear more theoretical than practical, teachers may lack the confidence or expertise to assume responsibility for designing and delivering a new conceptual curriculum, leading them to feel out of their depth and potentially even de-skilled. This tension introduces a significant new factor at the ‘intersection’ of career at which teacher identity is negotiated (Day & Gu, 2007), supporting the argument that embarking on an international teaching career is not a linear step in a teacher’s career (Bailey, 2015).

Teachers do not remain in a liminal state for long as they adapt to their new situation, both for their own sake and ‘because the IB demands that educators understand the global context of the curriculum beyond traditional government and national systems’ (Jaafar et al, 2021: 2). When they transitioned to teaching the MYP, our participants’ ‘primary framework’ for teaching was ‘keyed’ or altered. Keying is when ‘the set of conventions by which a given activity, one already meaningful in terms of some primary framework, is transformed into something patterned on this activity but seen by the participants to be something quite else’ (Goffman, 1974: 43). At first, Rick thought the teaching ‘was just the same with some terminology layered on top’ and Nina regarded it as ‘MYP hoops’, consistent with the ‘misconception that teaching is always the same regardless of location’ (Halicioglu 2015: 248).

From this ‘keying’, the participants became ‘regrounded’ (Goffman, 1974: 74), whereby they re-cast themselves in their new roles as MYP teachers. As Elaine noted, ‘I had to completely rewind’. As their knowledge of the MYP became more practical and they began to acclimatise, our participants absorbed MYP terminology and adopted a new way of speaking. This trend in the findings signals a shift in teachers’ institutional allegiance and suggests that they are developing a sense of belonging in their new teaching context (Battey & Franke, 2008). Regardless of any initial resistance to endorse the MYP, their liberal use of MYP terminology serves as a marker of identity and indicates conformity to the programme’s aims, and re-skilling in accordance with these. As teachers begin to identify as ‘MYP teachers’ rather than ‘subject teachers’, their narratives reveal that they are aware of these changes, suggesting that they are consenting to the MYP institutional forces acting on them.

Thus, the participants began to script a new ‘framework’ for their teacher identity, presenting a ‘social front’ (Goffman, 1959: 19) that includes attributes such as being open-minded, reflective, and authentic. As Nina commented: ‘I’ve become much more flexible, lenient’. Wendy added: ‘I have a much broader and deeper understanding of all aspects of teaching and learning now’, while Rick (as a teacher of English) stated: ‘I’ve got a better sense of what I really think English should look like’, and Alexa affirmed: ‘I’ve grown in the way that I think about things . . . by default picking up some of the skills of the intended programme’.

Goffman notes ‘the tendency for performers to offer their observers an impression that is idealized’ (1959: 23), and in our study we note that participants may be projecting the expected attributes of international MYP teachers as they recount their experiences. Rick noted the time it took ‘to become who I think is the type of teacher the MYP envisages’, suggesting that he has a framework in mind for this particular role. However, while the participants were interviewed individually and came from two different schools, we can see that ‘an emergent team impression arises’ (Goffman, 1959: 49). This is not surprising, since all our participants were influenced by similar MYP institutional forces. In this way, the ‘front becomes a “collective representation” and a fact in its own right’ (Goffman, 1959: 17).

The participants generally celebrated their new roles and autonomy, but the findings reveal questions and concerns over the demands of the programme, including how to implement effective teaching and assessment with (limited) guidance from the MYP, a finding not uncommon in research on MYP assessment (Dickson et al, 2020; Villegas, 2016). Our participants were happy to disclose the obstacles they faced in their initial transition to the programme, perhaps because these served as a point of comparison to highlight their later (successful) ‘conversion’ into MYP teachers. There was consensus that a significant period of time was required to experience and come to terms with the changes experienced in becoming authentic ‘MYP Educators’.

Another important aspect of immersion is access to other MYP educators and the wider IB establishment through compulsory workshops, which also act as carriers of institutional forces (Sperandio, 2010). Continuous training or ‘up-skilling’ naturally compels teachers to renegotiate aspects of their existing professional identity. Meeting MYP teachers from other schools at workshops allows teachers to feel reassured, solidifies their understanding of the programme’s expectations, reinforces their practice, and creates a sense of belonging in the wider community. The teachers may have entered teaching the MYP incidentally, but they remain there intentionally.

Conclusions

Research on teacher identity tends to focus largely on teachers entering the profession, with a view to informing training programmes in national systems (Edwards & Edwards, 2017; Buchanan, 2015; Mockler 2011). Alternatively, operating on the premise that teachers may experience significant changes over the course of their careers, it looks at fostering identity through ongoing professional development (Battey & Franke 2008; Day & Gu, 2007). Studies on the identity of international school teachers are emerging, but few as yet focus upon the adjustment to a new curriculum or framework which foregrounds our study.

Our findings illustrate that the participants experienced significant change in identity as a result of transitioning from teaching GCSE in England to teaching the MYP abroad in a ‘traditional international school’. The initial sense of feeling overwhelmed or ‘de-skilled’ in the face of a new educational philosophy and practice challenged preconceived ideas of what teaching is and disrupted established professional teaching identities. Freed from the constraints of a prescribed curriculum, our teachers approached their professional roles more autonomously and authentically.

In this study, we have applied Goffman’s Frame Analysis to unpack identity construction in MYP teachers. With their immersion into the MYP and their re-evaluation of what education means, teachers add to their narratives as educators. Of course, our study relies upon self-reported language, and future research into the topic might include other tools of analysis such as asking teachers to maintain a diary or weekly blog chronicling their change in identity over time.

The commitment to re-skilling suggests a flexibility of mindset among experienced trained teachers. Whilst this is by no means exclusive to MYP educators, our participants specifically attributed the change in their mindset to the particular catalyst of experiencing an educational framework that was new to them; in this case, the MYP. Previous studies have suggested that an international teaching context compels teachers to re-conceptualise how they perceive themselves as professionals (Bailey & Cooker, 2019; Tran & Nguyen, 2014), but the findings in our study point to an even more pronounced influence arising from teaching a specific international curriculum. Compared to a national curriculum, the MYP can be challenging to understand at teacher level and difficult to implement at school level (Fabian, 2016), although ‘the number of teachers who move around the globe happily and confidently demonstrates that such challenges can be surmounted’ (Halicioglu, 2015: 252). It seems important that we begin to understand why teachers in international schools can survive and thrive amidst the challenges encountered.

It is true that the MYP’s approach to education is not unique to the IB philosophy; nevertheless, it is a common framework through which teachers may be exposed to such ideas for the first time. Our study is based only on ‘incidental MYP teachers’ (those who moved from the National Curriculum for England and teaching GCSE in state-funded schools to international schools abroad that offered the MYP), but in reality MYP teachers come from and teach in countries all over the world. Since the MYP is probably not the first curriculum a trained teacher delivers, as for most their teacher training takes place in a national context, the institutionalising forces of the MYP exist for most teachers who transition into the programme. While the conclusions of this study may be more generally applicable in this regard, further research into the experiences of MYP teachers in different schools worldwide is nevertheless recommended.