A step-by-step guide to planning PYP units of inquiry. Covers central ideas, lines of inquiry, transdisciplinary themes, and assessment integration with practical templates for IB coordinators and classroom teachers.
Units of Inquiry are four-to-eight-week studies focused on a Central Idea. This idea links to PYP themes (Crocker, 2012). Three Lines of Inquiry narrow focus for each learner. Learner questions, not teachers, should guide investigations (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005).
Dewey (1938) argued learning through questions and experience builds better understanding. Bruner (1960) suggested revisiting core concepts in a spiral curriculum. PYP units use this principle, linking ideas across years. Learners explore ideas again with more complexity as they grow.
The IB Organisation (2018) states the Unit of Inquiry helps the PYP develop learners' international awareness. Learners experience at least six units yearly across transdisciplinary themes. Year 6 or 7 includes the Exhibition unit (IB Organisation, 2018).
PYP teachers must see a Unit of Inquiry as collaborative learning, not just topic lessons. Research by Wells (1986) and others shows teachers and learners investigating together boosts unit quality. Engaging learners in inquiry helps improve their grasp of the topic (Kuhn, 2007).
Murdoch (2015) sees inquiry as recurring processes, not fixed stages. Learners tune in by using prior knowledge and asking questions. They then find out by researching and gathering information. Learners sort out information and go further to deepen understanding. Next, learners make conclusions and take action (Murdoch, 2015).
The cycle is recursive, not linear. A student researching water scarcity might find out that their initial question was poorly framed and loop back to generate better questions. A class discussion in the sorting-out phase might reveal a significant gap in understanding that sends students back to research. This is not a failure of planning: it is the inquiry process working as intended.
Teachers who understand the recursive nature of inquiry are better positioned to plan flexibly. Rather than scripting each day's activity, effective PYP teachers identify the key processes they want students to practise in each phase of the unit and prepare multiple possible activities for each. This requires questioning strategies that help teachers assess where students are in the cycle and what move would be most productive next.
Claxton (2002) says flexible teaching builds 'learning power' with resourcefulness and reflectiveness. Learners gain resilience and reciprocity when teachers respond well to their needs. Units of Inquiry build these capacities unlike tightly scripted lessons.
One practical tool for managing the inquiry cycle is a class question board, where students post questions as they arise. The teacher's role is to categorise these questions, draw attention to the most productive ones, and help students recognise when a question has been answered versus when it requires further investigation. This makes metacognition in the classroom visible and shared rather than an invisible internal process.
The six PYP transdisciplinary themes provide the organising framework for all Units of Inquiry. They are: Who We Are, Where We Are in Place and Time, How We Express Ourselves, How the World Works, How We Organise Ourselves, and Sharing the Planet. Each theme is broad enough to encompass genuine complexity while focussed enough to give units direction.
When planning a unit, the first decision is which theme it sits within. This is not always obvious. A unit on migration might fit within Where We Are in Place and Time (historical and geographical), How We Organise Ourselves (social and political systems), or Sharing the Planet (human impact and shared responsibility). The choice shapes the Central Idea and the Lines of Inquiry that follow, so it warrants careful discussion within the planning team.
The IB Organisation (2018) says transdisciplinary learning differs from topic work. Topic work keeps subject boundaries, adding separate content. Transdisciplinary learning dissolves those boundaries during investigation. Learners might use maths, science, geography, and economics together, not separately (IB Organisation, 2018).
Transdisciplinary units require teamwork. Teachers struggle to plan multiple subjects solo. PYP schools schedule joint planning with specialists (Drake, 2004; Lattuca, 2001). Without team planning, units risk becoming mere topic work.
| Transdisciplinary Theme | Example Central Idea | Key Subject Connections |
|---|---|---|
| Who We Are | Identity is shaped by personal history, culture, and the choices we make | PSHE, History, Language |
| Where We Are in Place and Time | Migration shapes the identities of people and places | Geography, History, Language, Art |
| How We Express Ourselves | The arts communicate ideas that words alone cannot convey | Art, Music, Drama, Language |
| How the World Works | Natural systems maintain balance through interdependence | Science, Geography, Mathematics |
| How We Organise Ourselves | Economic systems reflect the values and priorities of societies | Economics, Mathematics, History |
| Sharing the Planet | Human choices have consequences for future generations | Science, Geography, Ethics |
The Central Idea is key when planning. It's a statement showing transferable understanding. A strong Central Idea is relevant for learners and age appropriate. Learners can reasonably debate its meaning (Wiggins and McTighe, 2005).
Weak Central Ideas describe facts, not concepts. For example, "Rainforests have many species" isn't a Central Idea. Conceptual ideas, like "Biodiversity depends on connected systems," transfer better. Learners apply understanding of concepts in new situations later (Erickson, 2002; Wiggins & McTighe, 2005).
Lines of Inquiry break the Central Idea into three investigable threads. They typically address form (what it is), function (how it works), and causation or change (why it matters or how it develops). A unit on economic systems might have Lines of Inquiry addressing how markets function, why goods and services have different values, and how economic decisions reflect social priorities. Together, the three lines should be sufficient to generate understanding of the Central Idea without being exhaustive.
Good Lines of Inquiry need clear thought, like learning objectives. Use Bruner's (1960) spiral curriculum principle. Does each Line of Inquiry revisit simpler concepts? Does it open to more complex ideas later? This approach brings coherence and builds learner confidence.
Research by Vygotsky (1978) suggests scaffolding inquiry learning can be tricky. Open inquiry can make giving support hard without limiting learners. Offer varied support around a common task, say Hmelo-Silver et al (2007). Don't assign different tasks, say Tabak (2004).
PYP differentiation targets resource complexity, research structure, and final communication. Learners needing support receive templates and simpler texts. More advanced learners critique sources, spot gaps, and explore counterarguments (Tomlinson, 2001). All learners explore the same central idea.
Scaffolding is the key mechanism here. Effective scaffolds in inquiry learning are temporary and fading: they provide the support students need to access the inquiry without doing the intellectual work for them. A graphic organiser that prompts students to record what they know, what they want to find out, and what they have learned is a scaffold. A worksheet that tells students what to look for and where to find it is a substitute for inquiry, not a support for it.
Cognitive load theory helps with differentiation. Learners with less knowledge find inquiry tasks harder, increasing cognitive load. Simplify early investigations; this manages challenge, not expectations. This aids learning, acknowledging working memory limits (Sweller, 1988).
Collaborative learning helps differentiate in PYP. Mixed-ability groups with assigned roles need real interdependence. Learners contribute at different levels during investigation (Vygotsky, 1978). A learner catalogues evidence, while another builds arguments (Johnson & Johnson, 2009). Both contribute to inquiry, but at varied cognitive levels (Piaget, 1936).
The IB Organisation (2018) states assessment informs learning, not just for reports. Teachers gather evidence and adapt lessons. Research shows this formative approach boosts learner progress more than just marking work (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Hattie, 2012).
PYP uses observation, performance tasks, portfolios, and conferencing for assessment. Portfolios stand out; see Primary Years Programme for details. Learners select work to show growth, including strong pieces and inquiry evidence. Learners reflect on why they chose each item.
Conferencing lets teachers check learner understanding. Teachers meet learners individually or in small groups (Vygotsky, 1978). This helps assess concepts, not just recall. A learner linking the Central Idea to real examples shows deeper knowledge (Bruner, 1966). Simply stating research findings proves less (Piaget, 1936).
Using Bloom's taxonomy aids teachers in planning suitable assessment (Bloom, 1956). Initially, assess a learner's recall and understanding (Bloom, 1956). Later, assessment should target analysis, evaluation, and creation (Bloom, 1956). A unit lacking higher order thinking misses the point (Bloom, 1956).
Kath Murdoch (2015) says inquiry teachers research, plan, model, facilitate, and reflect. This is unlike teachers who simply transmit knowledge as experts. Inquiry requires truly engaging with learners' questions, not just pretending to know.
Teachers adjust their role during units. At the start, they build safe spaces for questions, as suggested by Rosenshine (2012). Teachers activate prior knowledge and find learner misconceptions. Activating existing knowledge, even in inquiry, is vital (Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007).
During the investigation phase, the teacher's role is to ask questions that deepen thinking rather than confirm it. The shift from "what did you find out?" to "why does that matter?" to "what would have to be different for that not to be true?" represents a progression in the kind of thinking the teacher is probing. Growth mindset research by Carol Dweck shows that students in environments where questioning and uncertainty are normalised take on more challenging intellectual work than students in environments where the teacher's role is to provide correct answers.
Modelling the inquiry process is a specific and underused teacher strategy. When a teacher says, out loud, "I don't know the answer to that question. Here is how I would go about finding out," they are demonstrating exactly the intellectual behaviour the programme is trying to develop. This connects to the IB's learner profile attribute of being 'inquirers': students who approach unfamiliar problems with curiosity and method rather than anxiety and avoidance.
After the unit, the teacher's role is to evaluate the quality of the Central Idea, the Lines of Inquiry, the assessment tasks, and the level of student agency that was achieved. A reflective log kept during the unit provides the evidence needed for this evaluation. Units that are revised based on genuine evidence of student learning improve substantially over successive cycles.
If you are planning a new unit, start by writing three possible Central Ideas for it and testing each against this question: is this a statement that a student could disagree with, or is it simply true? Discard any that are merely descriptive or factual. The one that survokes the most genuine debate is usually the strongest.
If you are currently teaching a unit, spend ten minutes before your next session listing the questions students have generated so far. Sort them into two groups: questions that research can answer, and questions that require judgement, values, or interpretation. Plan your next session around one of the second type. These are the questions that develop the kind of thinking the PYP is designed to build.
For your assessment practice, try one structured conference with three or four students this week. Ask each student to explain the Central Idea in their own words and give you an example from outside the unit that illustrates it. The quality of these responses will tell you more about conceptual understanding than any written task.
When planning, review previous unit's Lines of Inquiry. Did each Line create true investigation? Did they narrow answers too quickly? Revising Lines based on evidence, (Wiggins and McTighe, 2005), benefits planning, (Hattie, 2008). This improves learner inquiry, (Wells, 1986).
Use inquiry-based learning in your team's professional learning. Share a surprising learner reflection and discuss their understanding of the Central Idea. Consider what you would change in your unit planning, following Vygotsky (1978). Collaborative reflection builds your school's ability to run quality inquiry units.
Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University Press.
Claxton, G. (2002). Building learning power: Helping young people become better learners. TLO.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Kappa Delta Pi.
International Baccalaureate Organisation. (2018). Learning and teaching in the IB. IBO.
Inquiry empowers learners; Murdoch (2015) explores teaching with curiosity. This approach uses creativity and purpose in classrooms today. It helps learners thrive.
Units of Inquiry are four-to-eight-week studies focused on a Central Idea. This idea links to PYP themes (Crocker, 2012). Three Lines of Inquiry narrow focus for each learner. Learner questions, not teachers, should guide investigations (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005).
Dewey (1938) argued learning through questions and experience builds better understanding. Bruner (1960) suggested revisiting core concepts in a spiral curriculum. PYP units use this principle, linking ideas across years. Learners explore ideas again with more complexity as they grow.
The IB Organisation (2018) states the Unit of Inquiry helps the PYP develop learners' international awareness. Learners experience at least six units yearly across transdisciplinary themes. Year 6 or 7 includes the Exhibition unit (IB Organisation, 2018).
PYP teachers must see a Unit of Inquiry as collaborative learning, not just topic lessons. Research by Wells (1986) and others shows teachers and learners investigating together boosts unit quality. Engaging learners in inquiry helps improve their grasp of the topic (Kuhn, 2007).
Murdoch (2015) sees inquiry as recurring processes, not fixed stages. Learners tune in by using prior knowledge and asking questions. They then find out by researching and gathering information. Learners sort out information and go further to deepen understanding. Next, learners make conclusions and take action (Murdoch, 2015).
The cycle is recursive, not linear. A student researching water scarcity might find out that their initial question was poorly framed and loop back to generate better questions. A class discussion in the sorting-out phase might reveal a significant gap in understanding that sends students back to research. This is not a failure of planning: it is the inquiry process working as intended.
Teachers who understand the recursive nature of inquiry are better positioned to plan flexibly. Rather than scripting each day's activity, effective PYP teachers identify the key processes they want students to practise in each phase of the unit and prepare multiple possible activities for each. This requires questioning strategies that help teachers assess where students are in the cycle and what move would be most productive next.
Claxton (2002) says flexible teaching builds 'learning power' with resourcefulness and reflectiveness. Learners gain resilience and reciprocity when teachers respond well to their needs. Units of Inquiry build these capacities unlike tightly scripted lessons.
One practical tool for managing the inquiry cycle is a class question board, where students post questions as they arise. The teacher's role is to categorise these questions, draw attention to the most productive ones, and help students recognise when a question has been answered versus when it requires further investigation. This makes metacognition in the classroom visible and shared rather than an invisible internal process.
The six PYP transdisciplinary themes provide the organising framework for all Units of Inquiry. They are: Who We Are, Where We Are in Place and Time, How We Express Ourselves, How the World Works, How We Organise Ourselves, and Sharing the Planet. Each theme is broad enough to encompass genuine complexity while focussed enough to give units direction.
When planning a unit, the first decision is which theme it sits within. This is not always obvious. A unit on migration might fit within Where We Are in Place and Time (historical and geographical), How We Organise Ourselves (social and political systems), or Sharing the Planet (human impact and shared responsibility). The choice shapes the Central Idea and the Lines of Inquiry that follow, so it warrants careful discussion within the planning team.
The IB Organisation (2018) says transdisciplinary learning differs from topic work. Topic work keeps subject boundaries, adding separate content. Transdisciplinary learning dissolves those boundaries during investigation. Learners might use maths, science, geography, and economics together, not separately (IB Organisation, 2018).
Transdisciplinary units require teamwork. Teachers struggle to plan multiple subjects solo. PYP schools schedule joint planning with specialists (Drake, 2004; Lattuca, 2001). Without team planning, units risk becoming mere topic work.
| Transdisciplinary Theme | Example Central Idea | Key Subject Connections |
|---|---|---|
| Who We Are | Identity is shaped by personal history, culture, and the choices we make | PSHE, History, Language |
| Where We Are in Place and Time | Migration shapes the identities of people and places | Geography, History, Language, Art |
| How We Express Ourselves | The arts communicate ideas that words alone cannot convey | Art, Music, Drama, Language |
| How the World Works | Natural systems maintain balance through interdependence | Science, Geography, Mathematics |
| How We Organise Ourselves | Economic systems reflect the values and priorities of societies | Economics, Mathematics, History |
| Sharing the Planet | Human choices have consequences for future generations | Science, Geography, Ethics |
The Central Idea is key when planning. It's a statement showing transferable understanding. A strong Central Idea is relevant for learners and age appropriate. Learners can reasonably debate its meaning (Wiggins and McTighe, 2005).
Weak Central Ideas describe facts, not concepts. For example, "Rainforests have many species" isn't a Central Idea. Conceptual ideas, like "Biodiversity depends on connected systems," transfer better. Learners apply understanding of concepts in new situations later (Erickson, 2002; Wiggins & McTighe, 2005).
Lines of Inquiry break the Central Idea into three investigable threads. They typically address form (what it is), function (how it works), and causation or change (why it matters or how it develops). A unit on economic systems might have Lines of Inquiry addressing how markets function, why goods and services have different values, and how economic decisions reflect social priorities. Together, the three lines should be sufficient to generate understanding of the Central Idea without being exhaustive.
Good Lines of Inquiry need clear thought, like learning objectives. Use Bruner's (1960) spiral curriculum principle. Does each Line of Inquiry revisit simpler concepts? Does it open to more complex ideas later? This approach brings coherence and builds learner confidence.
Research by Vygotsky (1978) suggests scaffolding inquiry learning can be tricky. Open inquiry can make giving support hard without limiting learners. Offer varied support around a common task, say Hmelo-Silver et al (2007). Don't assign different tasks, say Tabak (2004).
PYP differentiation targets resource complexity, research structure, and final communication. Learners needing support receive templates and simpler texts. More advanced learners critique sources, spot gaps, and explore counterarguments (Tomlinson, 2001). All learners explore the same central idea.
Scaffolding is the key mechanism here. Effective scaffolds in inquiry learning are temporary and fading: they provide the support students need to access the inquiry without doing the intellectual work for them. A graphic organiser that prompts students to record what they know, what they want to find out, and what they have learned is a scaffold. A worksheet that tells students what to look for and where to find it is a substitute for inquiry, not a support for it.
Cognitive load theory helps with differentiation. Learners with less knowledge find inquiry tasks harder, increasing cognitive load. Simplify early investigations; this manages challenge, not expectations. This aids learning, acknowledging working memory limits (Sweller, 1988).
Collaborative learning helps differentiate in PYP. Mixed-ability groups with assigned roles need real interdependence. Learners contribute at different levels during investigation (Vygotsky, 1978). A learner catalogues evidence, while another builds arguments (Johnson & Johnson, 2009). Both contribute to inquiry, but at varied cognitive levels (Piaget, 1936).
The IB Organisation (2018) states assessment informs learning, not just for reports. Teachers gather evidence and adapt lessons. Research shows this formative approach boosts learner progress more than just marking work (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Hattie, 2012).
PYP uses observation, performance tasks, portfolios, and conferencing for assessment. Portfolios stand out; see Primary Years Programme for details. Learners select work to show growth, including strong pieces and inquiry evidence. Learners reflect on why they chose each item.
Conferencing lets teachers check learner understanding. Teachers meet learners individually or in small groups (Vygotsky, 1978). This helps assess concepts, not just recall. A learner linking the Central Idea to real examples shows deeper knowledge (Bruner, 1966). Simply stating research findings proves less (Piaget, 1936).
Using Bloom's taxonomy aids teachers in planning suitable assessment (Bloom, 1956). Initially, assess a learner's recall and understanding (Bloom, 1956). Later, assessment should target analysis, evaluation, and creation (Bloom, 1956). A unit lacking higher order thinking misses the point (Bloom, 1956).
Kath Murdoch (2015) says inquiry teachers research, plan, model, facilitate, and reflect. This is unlike teachers who simply transmit knowledge as experts. Inquiry requires truly engaging with learners' questions, not just pretending to know.
Teachers adjust their role during units. At the start, they build safe spaces for questions, as suggested by Rosenshine (2012). Teachers activate prior knowledge and find learner misconceptions. Activating existing knowledge, even in inquiry, is vital (Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007).
During the investigation phase, the teacher's role is to ask questions that deepen thinking rather than confirm it. The shift from "what did you find out?" to "why does that matter?" to "what would have to be different for that not to be true?" represents a progression in the kind of thinking the teacher is probing. Growth mindset research by Carol Dweck shows that students in environments where questioning and uncertainty are normalised take on more challenging intellectual work than students in environments where the teacher's role is to provide correct answers.
Modelling the inquiry process is a specific and underused teacher strategy. When a teacher says, out loud, "I don't know the answer to that question. Here is how I would go about finding out," they are demonstrating exactly the intellectual behaviour the programme is trying to develop. This connects to the IB's learner profile attribute of being 'inquirers': students who approach unfamiliar problems with curiosity and method rather than anxiety and avoidance.
After the unit, the teacher's role is to evaluate the quality of the Central Idea, the Lines of Inquiry, the assessment tasks, and the level of student agency that was achieved. A reflective log kept during the unit provides the evidence needed for this evaluation. Units that are revised based on genuine evidence of student learning improve substantially over successive cycles.
If you are planning a new unit, start by writing three possible Central Ideas for it and testing each against this question: is this a statement that a student could disagree with, or is it simply true? Discard any that are merely descriptive or factual. The one that survokes the most genuine debate is usually the strongest.
If you are currently teaching a unit, spend ten minutes before your next session listing the questions students have generated so far. Sort them into two groups: questions that research can answer, and questions that require judgement, values, or interpretation. Plan your next session around one of the second type. These are the questions that develop the kind of thinking the PYP is designed to build.
For your assessment practice, try one structured conference with three or four students this week. Ask each student to explain the Central Idea in their own words and give you an example from outside the unit that illustrates it. The quality of these responses will tell you more about conceptual understanding than any written task.
When planning, review previous unit's Lines of Inquiry. Did each Line create true investigation? Did they narrow answers too quickly? Revising Lines based on evidence, (Wiggins and McTighe, 2005), benefits planning, (Hattie, 2008). This improves learner inquiry, (Wells, 1986).
Use inquiry-based learning in your team's professional learning. Share a surprising learner reflection and discuss their understanding of the Central Idea. Consider what you would change in your unit planning, following Vygotsky (1978). Collaborative reflection builds your school's ability to run quality inquiry units.
Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University Press.
Claxton, G. (2002). Building learning power: Helping young people become better learners. TLO.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Kappa Delta Pi.
International Baccalaureate Organisation. (2018). Learning and teaching in the IB. IBO.
Inquiry empowers learners; Murdoch (2015) explores teaching with curiosity. This approach uses creativity and purpose in classrooms today. It helps learners thrive.
{"@context":"https://schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https://www.structural-learning.com/post/ib-pyp-unit-inquiry-planning-guide-teachers#article","headline":"ib-pyp-unit-inquiry-planning-guide-teachers","description":"Learn about ib-pyp-unit-inquiry-planning-guide-teachers. A comprehensive guide for teachers covering key concepts, practical strategies, and classroom...","datePublished":"2026-03-19T16:34:52.920Z","dateModified":"2026-03-25T09:07:23.492Z","author":{"@type":"Person","name":"Paul Main","url":"https://www.structural-learning.com/team/paulmain","jobTitle":"Founder & Educational Consultant","sameAs":["https://www.linkedin.com/in/paul-main-structural-learning/","https://www.structural-learning.com/team/paulmain","https://www.amazon.co.uk/stores/Paul-Main/author/B0BTW6GB8F","https://www.structural-learning.com"]},"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Structural Learning","url":"https://www.structural-learning.com","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/5b69a01ba2e409e5d5e055c6/6040bf0426cb415ba2fc7882_newlogoblue.svg"}},"mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://www.structural-learning.com/post/ib-pyp-unit-inquiry-planning-guide-teachers"},"wordCount":3141,"mentions":[{"@type":"Thing","name":"Metacognition","sameAs":"https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1201994"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"Cognitive Load Theory","sameAs":"https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5141551"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"Working Memory","sameAs":"https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q899961"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"Scaffolding (education)","sameAs":"https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1970508"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"Formative Assessment","sameAs":"https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5470023"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"Bloom's Taxonomy","sameAs":"https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q530397"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"Mindset","sameAs":"https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5612012"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"Differentiated Instruction","sameAs":"https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5275788"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"Inquiry-based Learning","sameAs":"https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3152062"},{"@type":"Thing","name":"Direct Instruction","sameAs":"https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5280280"}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https://www.structural-learning.com/post/ib-pyp-unit-inquiry-planning-guide-teachers#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https://www.structural-learning.com/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Blog","item":"https://www.structural-learning.com/blog"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"ib-pyp-unit-inquiry-planning-guide-teachers","item":"https://www.structural-learning.com/post/ib-pyp-unit-inquiry-planning-guide-teachers"}]}]}
