MYP Enhancements 2026
The IB shared significant MYP enhancements at the 2026 Global Conference in Mumbai. Official guidance is still being consolidated. This tool organises what was presented to help educators make sense of the changes.
When Do the Changes Happen?
Four Areas of Change
The overarching aims of the MYP have been condensed into four foundational themes: Knowledge and transfer, Engagement, Skills and competencies, and Self-directed learning.
Includes updated requirements for interdisciplinary learning, skill development (ATL), community engagement, and self-directed projects.
Covers structural flexibility schools now have: flexible scheduling and assessment flexibility in Years 1–3.
- Replacing "Statement of Inquiry" with "Central Idea"
- Renaming "Global Contexts" to "MYP Themes"
- Introducing "Specified Concepts"
Explicitly teacher-facing guidance, narrative planners, and practical classroom strategies to move from abstract concepts to hands-on instruction.
Shift to a unified three-criterion model (Investigating, Applying, Evaluating) for almost all subjects.
Schools choose between "subject-generic" criteria in early years (Y1–3) and "subject-specific" criteria in later years (Y4–5).
Fewer strands, asset-based language, and built-in command terms throughout the new rubric design.
Shift away from static PDFs to the new interactive IB Exchange platform, launching in 2027.
New accessible guidance and resource toolkits designed explicitly for teachers, students, and parents.
The Integrated Core
Four essential elements that every MYP school must deliver: interdisciplinary learning, skill development, community engagement, and self-directed projects. What has changed is not whether schools do them; it is the degree of freedom schools have in how.
All four elements remain required components of the MYP. Schools cannot skip them.
The IB has moved away from a strict compliance model. Schools now have total freedom in how they design and deliver each element.
The rigid requirement to timetable a full traditional interdisciplinary unit has been removed. Schools can now design multiple intentional interdisciplinary experiences in formats that fit their context.
Schools must conduct at least one planned assessment per year using interdisciplinary criteria. Everything beyond that one requirement is flexible by design.
The 5 main ATL skill organizers remain, but the further categorization into 10 sub-clusters has been removed to reduce the compliance burden on teachers.
Teachers no longer need a separate ATL planning chart. Simply identify the specific skills being explicitly taught and integrate them directly into the MYP curriculum overview.
The focus shifts from superficial service activities toward genuine dialogue, relationship-building, and reflexivity. Students collaborate with communities to co-create solutions and respond to shared challenges.
Learning outcomes reduced to four. Engagement can take distinct forms: advocacy, action research, social entrepreneurship, participation, or community-building.
Aligned more closely with the Personal Project. Learning objectives reduced from four to three. Formal assessment criteria are no longer used to evaluate the Community Project.
Students evidence their learning through a learning journal, a story, and a final exhibition, shifting emphasis from rubric compliance to authentic documentation of process.
In short: You still have to do the Integrated Core, but it is no longer a rigid, box-ticking exercise. As long as schools provide the opportunities and assess what is required, it is entirely appropriate to design those experiences in whatever way best fits your campus.
MYP Themes
was: Global ContextsSix new themes replace the previous Global Contexts, shifting from a fixed taxonomy toward culturally responsive, locally relevant framing. Their primary role is to help educators contextualise learning in ways that are personally meaningful and globally connected.
During unit planning, the chosen MYP Theme works alongside the Central Idea to inspire the Lines of Inquiry students will explore. Themes set the human context; the Central Idea names what is being understood.
The IB is providing an alignment guide for existing units. If a current Global Context works well for a unit, teachers can replace it with the relevant MYP Theme; no full rewrite required.
Concepts Explorer
12 suggested concepts replace the old "key and related concepts" system: a helpful guide, not a prescription. Schools can adapt them freely to fit their mission, local context, and connections to PYP or DP.
Assessment Changes
Universal changes apply to every subject. Flexible pathways let schools choose when to transition to subject-specific criteria. Select a subject below to see its criteria and specific changes.
- 3-Criterion Model: All subjects move from four criteria to a simplified three-criterion model.
- Built-in Command Terms: Definitions are now embedded in achievement level descriptors; no separate glossary memorization required.
- "I Can" Statements: Asset-based language introduces student-friendly statements to support reflection and goal-setting.
- Flexible Pathways: Subject-generic criteria may be used for MYP 1–3; subject-specific criteria apply in Years 4–5.
- Reduced Strands: Assessment strands are broadened and reduced in number to simplify evaluation for teachers and students.
- Central Idea: "Statement of Inquiry" replaced by "Central Idea," which can be a statement or an open question.
- Specified Concepts: "Key and related concepts" replaced by 12 specified concepts per subject group. Schools can add, exclude, or adapt them freely.
- MYP Themes: "Global Contexts" renamed to "MYP Themes" to encourage more culturally responsive, locally grounded exploration.
- Lines of Inquiry: The requirement to label inquiry questions as factual, conceptual, or debatable has been removed.
- Interactive Platform: Static PDF subject guides replaced by IB Exchange, a teacher-facing digital platform launching in 2027.
The new flexible pathways give schools the autonomy to decide when their students are ready to transition from foundational skill-building to more rigorous, subject-specific evaluation.
Designed to ease younger learners into the assessment process. Instead of 120+ highly specific strands, generic criteria narrow the focus to approximately 10 transferable strands shared across subjects.
Model: Three shared criteria (Investigating, Applying, and Evaluating) applied across all subjects using consistent, foundational expectations.
Example: Students investigate to establish facts, demonstrate knowledge in context, present with clarity, and evaluate by weighing strengths and limitations.
As students mature, they transition to criteria that reflect the unique skills, processes, and conceptual understandings of each discipline: what the IB calls disciplinary authenticity.
Purpose: Prepares students for 16+ pathways (DP/CP) and aligns with formal external validations, including MYP eAssessments in Year 5.
Example: Designing a scientific investigation in Sciences, or analysing literary techniques in Language & Literature.
| Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Year 4 | Year 5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Option 1 | Generic | Generic | Generic | Specific | Specific |
| Option 2 | Generic | Generic | Specific | Specific | Specific |
| Option 3 | Generic | Specific | Specific | Specific | Specific |
| Option 4 | Specific | Specific | Specific | Specific | Specific |
Language & Literature
Language Acquisition
Individuals & Societies
Sciences
Mathematics
Arts
Physical & Health Ed
Design
Language & Literature
- Analyse how techniques shape meaning for the text or audience
- Structure texts to serve the context or purpose
Grading citations will be removed from the rubrics
Language Acquisition
- Demonstrate understanding of information in authentic spoken and written texts
- Use spoken language with a sense of organization, structure and coherence
This is the only subject that will use subject-specific criteria across all five years of the programme
Individuals & Societies
- Design an investigation process to address a topic
- Discuss concepts, issues, models, representations or theories
Grading citations will be removed from History rubrics
Sciences
- Explain scientific knowledge to communicate understanding
- Design scientific investigations
Grading citations will be removed from the rubrics
Mathematics
- Apply mathematics to solve problems in familiar and unfamiliar situations
- Explain the validity of solutions with evidence
N/A
Arts
- Investigate a movement or genre through research and critique related artworks
- Evaluate the success of their artwork or performance
Shares exact assessment criteria with Design and PHE to boost coherence. Features parallel strands across departments
Physical & Health Education
- Design a plan to achieve a personal health, fitness, or performance goal
- Evaluate the success of their plan and process to reach their goal
Shares exact assessment criteria with Arts and Design. Features parallel strands across departments
Design
- Design a plan for a design solution and explain how success will be measured
- Demonstrate skills and techniques through their design solution
Shares exact assessment criteria with Arts and PHE. Assessment strands drastically reduced from 16 strands to just 6
Questions from the Field
Still working through these myself. Sharing them because I suspect I'm not the only one. Click any question to read more.
"Four pathways to choose from: how does your leadership team actually make that decision together?"
The IB guides schools to weigh learner confidence, campus structure, and DP readiness. In my experience as a coordinator, that conversation also involves timetabling constraints, department readiness, and how you communicate the change to parents, none of which the current materials address. I'd want to know: who owns this decision at your school, and what review process kicks in if the chosen pathway isn't working by Year 3?
"If citations are no longer graded, how do we build the habits students will need for the DP Extended Essay, especially in the age of AI?"
The IB notes academic integrity "remains important," and the ATL framework asks students to recognise Gen AI's falsehoods and bias. But removing citations from rubrics means feedback on attribution becomes informal. For schools running a continuum into the DP, where the Extended Essay demands rigorous sourcing, I find myself thinking: what replaces the accountability structure? This isn't about policing; it's about building genuine habits before students reach 16+.
"The IB says prioritise authentic conceptual understanding, but eAssessment tasks are built around the official specified concept list. How does your school hold both?"
The IB's advice is pedagogically sound: don't force prescribed concepts into lessons just to tick an exam box. But for eAssessment schools, the specified concepts aren't optional. Each on-screen task will be built around identified concepts, and the practical challenge is curriculum mapping: have students encountered those specified concepts deeply enough, across enough contexts, to draw on them authentically under exam conditions? Schools that exercise flexibility in concept selection will need a clear record of how they've ensured that coverage.
"Without rubrics, what does it mean for a student to have genuinely completed the Community Project?"
A learning journal, a story, and a final exhibition are richer evidence than a rubric score. The shift in philosophy here is one I find genuinely compelling; moving community engagement away from criterion scoring feels right. The practical question sits at the school accountability level: without a shared benchmark, how does a less-experienced teacher know whether the evidence is sufficient? For schools with parents accustomed to seeing criterion scores, the transition will benefit from thoughtful change management planning.
"The IB provides the pedagogy, but not the logistics. How does your school actually build the collaborative conditions that make authentic interdisciplinary learning possible?"
The parallel assessment strands across Arts, Design, and PHE are a genuinely smart move; cross-department planning becomes much more natural when subjects share criteria. For most other pairings, finding a ready partner still means finding a colleague whose specified concepts and learning objectives genuinely intersect with yours. What I keep returning to is the conditions side: how schools create the shared planning time and curriculum mapping structures that make authentic collaboration possible in the first place.
"What happens to a student who enters MYP Year 3 in 2028, when first teaching under the new model begins?"
The IB's rollout is clear at programme level: platform in 2027, first teaching 2028, first eAssessments 2030. A student starting Year 3 in 2028 would reach Year 5 and those first eAssessments in exactly that window. What schools are still waiting on is the logistical roadmap: do mid-programme cohorts transition cohort by cohort, or all at once? That guidance will be important for coordinators planning with confidence.
"The IB is moving PD onto IB Exchange in 2027. What does retraining actually look like for your existing team before first teaching begins in 2028?"
The shift from static documents to an integrated digital platform is genuinely promising; having professional learning embedded directly in the new subject guides is a more connected way to support teachers. What I'm still thinking through is the transition itself: will currently MYP-trained teachers need to complete new certification workshops, and if so, what does that cost the school? How will authorization visits be handled during the 2028 to 2030 window? These feel like practical questions school leaders will need answered well before 2027.
