Updated on
September 21, 2026
PYP Exhibition: A 6-Week Scaffolding Plan for Teachers
A week-by-week scaffolding plan for the PYP Exhibition, from choosing a central idea to research, making connections and preparing the final presentation.
The PYP Exhibition is the culminating, collaborative inquiry completed by learners in the final year of the Primary Years Programme. A clear six-week sequence can make it manageable, but six weeks is a planning model rather than an IB rule. The strongest exhibitions keep learner agency visible while giving teachers, coordinators and mentors explicit checkpoints for research, action, safeguarding and reflection (Medwell et al., 2017).
This guide turns that principle into a practical weekly plan. For example, a teacher can check a group's source trail in week two without choosing its conclusion. UK schools may run the exhibition in Year 6, but the internationally accurate term is final-year PYP learners.
| Week | Learner focus | Adult checkpoint | Evidence worth keeping |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Frame a worthwhile inquiry | Purpose, scope and safeguarding | Concept map and first questions |
| 2 | Research and test sources | Source range and reliability | Research log and notes |
| 3 | Connect perspectives | Claims, evidence and missing voices | Revised explanation |
| 4 | Choose responsible action | Need, consent and feasibility | Action rationale and plan |
| 5 | Shape the sharing experience | Audience clarity and accessibility | Draft, feedback and revision |
| 6 | Share and reflect | Learning, impact and next steps | Reflection and selected artefacts |
Key takeaways
- Start with a shared process and common milestones, not a list of adult-selected topics.
- Use one short mentor check-in each week with the same core prompts, then record only decisions and next steps.
- Treat action as a thoughtful response to learning, not as a fundraising contest or a last-minute performance.
- Let learners choose an appropriate way to share. A display board is one option, not a universal requirement.
- Assess the quality of inquiry, reflection and agency across the process, not the polish of the final event alone.
The PYP Exhibition Explained
The Exhibition is a sustained inquiry in the final year of the PYP. It brings together collaboration, research, action and communication for a real audience. It is both a learning experience and an opportunity for the school community to see how learners use the knowledge, concepts, skills and dispositions developed across the programme. The official PYP curriculum framework should remain the source of truth for programme requirements (International Baccalaureate, 2026).
The Exhibition is not simply a long project, a science fair or a collection of decorated boards. It should reveal an inquiry cycle: learners notice and question, investigate, connect ideas, respond through action, communicate and reflect. The stages may overlap. A useful plan makes that movement visible without pretending every group will progress at the same speed.
An IB-commissioned international study described the Exhibition as a defining experience and reported perceived development in critical thinking, international-mindedness and learner profile attributes. The study included seven schools across five countries, so it offers useful insight rather than a promise that every exhibition automatically produces the same outcome (Medwell et al., 2017). That distinction matters. Quality depends on the teaching, time, school culture and support around the event.
If staff are new to the programme, begin with our International Baccalaureate overview and Primary Years Programme guide. They clarify where the Exhibition sits in the wider PYP rather than treating it as an isolated annual performance.
Before the Six-Week Plan Starts
The six-week clock should not start until adults have settled the conditions learners cannot reasonably control. Confirm the available timetable, spaces, mentor capacity, research access, safeguarding routes and final sharing window. Decide how learners will store evidence and how staff will identify a group that needs more support. Publish those decisions in one short staff brief.
Agree a small set of common milestones. For example: a focused inquiry by the end of week one, a usable research trail by the end of week two, an evidence-informed action decision by the end of week four and a rehearsed sharing format during week five. Milestones protect time. They should not force identical products or identical inquiries.
Choose how groups will form. Learner choice is valuable, but friendship alone is a weak organising principle. Ask learners to identify issues they care about, then look for compatible interests and workable group sizes.
Make a transparent plan for learners whose interests do not neatly match. Explain that collaboration includes negotiating a shared direction rather than every person getting their first choice.
Finally, define the adult roles. The coordinator maintains the overall rhythm and resolves system problems. Teachers teach research, thinking and communication explicitly.
Mentors question, listen and help learners notice gaps. Families may provide context or access, but they should not design the inquiry or manufacture the final product.
Week 1: Frame the Inquiry
The first week turns a broad interest into a focused, investigable direction. Start with issues, patterns or opportunities that matter to learners. Use the PYP transdisciplinary themes as lenses for connection, not as boxes into which a topic must be forced.
Ask each learner to produce three things: what they currently notice, what they think may be happening and what they genuinely need to find out. A concept map or simple systems diagram helps reveal causes, effects, people and relationships. Good adult questions include: “Who is affected?”, “What may we be assuming?”, “What is within your influence?” and “What evidence would change your mind?”
Groups can then draft a central idea or shared proposition and several possible inquiry questions. The wording does not need to be perfect on day one. It needs to be clear enough to guide research and open enough to permit discovery. Check that it is not merely a topic label such as “plastic pollution” and not a predetermined conclusion such as “everyone must stop using plastic”.
The week-one checkpoint should test purpose, scope and safety. Can the group explain why the inquiry matters? Is the question small enough for the available time?
Could research involve personal data, vulnerable people, travel, online contact or distressing material? Address those issues now. The evidence to keep is modest: a concept map, the current inquiry wording and the next research questions.
Week 2: Research and Source Checks
Week two is for building a credible picture, not accumulating links. Teach learners to compare source type, date, authorship, evidence and purpose. A local interview may add lived experience, an official dataset may establish scale and a research paper may explain a mechanism. None is automatically sufficient on its own.
Give groups a research log with four fields: source, useful claim, evidence or example, and what remains uncertain. This prevents copy-and-paste note taking. It also makes misconceptions visible early.
For younger or less confident researchers, provide a bounded starting set and gradually widen choice. That is purposeful scaffolding, not a reduction in intellectual demand.
Use graphic organisers to compare sources or classify findings. The tool should serve the thinking. A comparison grid is helpful when two sources disagree; a cause-and-effect map is better when learners are tracing a system. Avoid requiring every group to complete the same decorative template.
At the checkpoint, ask learners to bring one strong source, one source they rejected and one unresolved question. Mentors should be able to see how the group's thinking changed. Keep the research log and a short note about gaps.
Do not reward the largest bibliography. Reward thoughtful selection, accurate paraphrase and a willingness to revise.
Week 3: Connect Ideas and Perspectives
Research becomes inquiry when learners use evidence to make and test connections. Ask groups to explain the issue from at least two perspectives, identify a relationship between causes and consequences, and state one conclusion they can defend. Then ask what their explanation leaves out.
This is a good point to make Approaches to Learning explicit. Learners may be practising information literacy, perspective taking, communication, organisation and reflection at the same time. Name the particular skill in use and show what competent performance looks like. Avoid a generic checklist covering every skill.
One useful routine is claim, evidence, limitation. The group states a claim in one sentence, identifies the evidence that supports it and adds a boundary such as “in our local survey”, “for this age group” or “based on the sources available”. This keeps confidence proportional to evidence and makes the eventual presentation more trustworthy.
The checkpoint tests whether the inquiry still matches what learners have discovered. A group may need to narrow, combine or abandon an early line of inquiry. That is progress, not failure.
Keep a revised explanation and one example of a perspective that changed the group's thinking. Studies of thinking in PYP classrooms highlight questioning, thinking organisers, metacognitive reflection and collaboration as common supports for deeper thinking (McGuinness et al., 2016).
Week 4: Choose Responsible Action
Action grows from understanding. It may involve changing a personal habit, informing a defined audience, improving a school process, designing a useful resource, supporting an existing community effort or advocating responsibly. The most visible action is not necessarily the most valuable.
Ask groups to connect the proposed action to a demonstrated need. Who has identified the need? Who should be consulted?
What could unintended harm look like? What permission is required? A fundraising idea, for example, still needs a clear rationale, an appropriate organisation and realistic handling of money.
A public campaign needs accurate claims, consent and a plan for comments or contact.
Use a simple action test: relevant, informed, feasible, ethical and reviewable. If an idea fails, learners can redesign it rather than receiving an adult replacement. Sometimes the responsible conclusion is to support work already being done instead of launching something new.
The checkpoint is an approval conversation, especially where safeguarding, external communication, money, images or personal information are involved. Keep the rationale, the agreed action, adult approvals and a realistic measure of progress. Do not ask learners to claim impact they cannot evidence.
Week 5: Shape the Sharing Experience
Week five turns the inquiry into an experience an audience can follow. Learners should decide what the audience needs to understand, what evidence supports the main message and what they want people to think or do next. Only then should they choose a format.
A display board can work well, but it is one option. Groups may use a conversation station, short talk, demonstration, model, audio story, digital explanation, guided activity or a combination. The format should fit the content, audience, space, accessibility needs and available technology. The Exhibition is not improved by making every group look identical.
Teach editing. Ask learners to identify the one sentence every visitor should understand, the three pieces of evidence that carry the explanation and the one limitation they should acknowledge. Remove material that does not serve those decisions. This is where the IB learner profile can become visible through communication, principled source use, open-minded engagement and thoughtful reflection rather than labels placed on a poster.
Rehearse with a small, unfamiliar audience. Listeners should explain what they understood, name a question they still have and identify any inaccessible element. Learners then choose which feedback to act on.
Keep one draft and a short revision note. Avoid adults redesigning slides or displays after learners leave.
Week 6: Share, Reflect and Close
On Exhibition day, protect the learners' role. Adults can manage logistics, welcome visitors and respond to safeguarding issues, but learners should explain choices, answer questions and acknowledge uncertainty. Build in breaks and an alternative way to contribute for learners who find sustained public interaction difficult.
Collect feedback that supports reflection rather than popularity. Useful prompts include: “What did this group help you understand?”, “What evidence was convincing?” and “What question would you ask next?” Avoid public rankings of presentation polish.
Reflection should cover both outcome and process. Ask what learners now understand, how their view changed, which collaboration decision helped, where evidence was weak and what they would do differently. Reflections from learners, mentors and teachers were central to continual improvement in the international Exhibition study (Medwell et al., 2017).
Close the process deliberately. Thank community contributors, complete any promised follow-up, store only appropriate evidence and tell learners what will happen to their work. Select a few artefacts that demonstrate learning rather than retaining every worksheet. Celebrate persistence, responsible action and changed thinking alongside the final sharing.
A Coordinator Timeline That Protects Teacher Time
Run one common rhythm across groups: a short weekly teaching input, protected group work, one mentor checkpoint and a coordinator review of exceptions. This reduces repeated explanations and helps staff notice where several groups share the same barrier.
| When | Coordinator decision | Escalate only when |
|---|---|---|
| Before launch | Confirm timetable, roles, evidence store and safeguarding route | Capacity or policy is unresolved |
| End of week 1 | Check every group has a viable inquiry | Scope, group relationships or safety prevent progress |
| End of week 2 | Identify shared research gaps | A group lacks safe or credible access to evidence |
| End of week 4 | Approve actions requiring adult oversight | Money, contact, travel, data or public communication is involved |
| Week 5 | Test rooms, access and audience flow | A learner cannot participate equitably |
| After sharing | Review evidence and improve next year's system | Commitments, incidents or data handling remain open |
The downloadable pack below puts this rhythm on one page and adds a learner and mentor check-in sheet. It complements, rather than replaces, the school's current programme documents and PYP unit planning process.
Mentoring Without Taking Over
A mentor's job is to improve the learner's noticing and decision-making, not to become a second project manager. Use consistent prompts: What has changed since we last met? What evidence supports your current view?
What is blocking progress? What will you do next, and who owns it?
There is no evidence-based magic duration for a mentor meeting. Schedule enough time for the group and context, and meet often enough to spot drift. Record only the decision, named owner, next step and any safeguarding concern. A lengthy adult narrative can make the process look accountable while obscuring learner agency.
When a group is stuck, adjust support in small steps: restate the milestone, model one thinking move, offer two workable tools, help the group divide the next task, then step back. The EEF's current guidance describes metacognitive and self-regulatory approaches as most effective when embedded in curriculum and subject teaching, with explicit support for planning, monitoring and evaluating learning (Education Endowment Foundation, 2025).
What to Do If the Exhibition Is Behind
When the Exhibition is behind, diagnose the single barrier that is stopping progress and protect the core learning before reducing the final product. Narrow an overbroad question, provide a bounded source set where evidence is weak, agree a group decision rule, or scale an action down to a feasible and responsible response.
Protect the core in this order: a clear question, credible evidence, an explained connection, responsible action or response, and reflection. Reduce the scale of the product before reducing the quality of thinking. A concise conversation supported by three well-chosen artefacts can demonstrate more learning than a hurried display packed with text.
Create a recovery plan with three columns: essential by the next checkpoint, useful if time allows and stop doing. Give each task one owner. Review it within two school days. Do not quietly transfer unfinished learner work to teachers or families.
Building Exhibition Readiness Before the Final Year
The best preparation is normal PYP practice across preceding years. Learners need repeated opportunities to ask productive questions, find and compare information, collaborate, reflect and take age-appropriate action. The Exhibition should combine familiar processes at greater depth, not introduce an entirely new way of learning.
Plan a simple progression. Younger learners may distinguish observation from inference and explain where a fact came from. Later, they can compare sources, identify perspective, summarise without copying and choose evidence for a claim. Across all years, make the thinking visible in ordinary lessons rather than saving special templates for the Exhibition.
Schools moving from a more subject-separated model can use the PYP transition guide to phase in inquiry routines without discarding useful curriculum sequencing. Readiness is not measured by how independently learners decorate a board. It is measured by whether they can make increasingly responsible choices about questions, evidence, collaboration, action and reflection.
Limitations and Safeguards
A six-week plan creates clarity, but it cannot remove differences in timetable, language, staffing, resources or learner need. Some schools need more time; some groups need a different sequence. Preserve the milestones and adapt the calendar.
Community-facing action brings real responsibilities. Follow local safeguarding, consent, data protection, travel, finance and communication policies. Do not require learners to disclose personal experience, contact organisations independently or publish images and names as proof of authenticity.
Be cautious when evaluating impact. The Exhibition research reports positive perceptions and rich case-study evidence, but it was not designed as a controlled comparison proving a standard causal effect for every learner (Medwell et al., 2017). Use multiple forms of evidence and acknowledge context.
Finally, ensure access. Offer alternative communication modes, explicit vocabulary support, accessible spaces and technology, structured roles and appropriate breaks. Keep expectations intellectually ambitious while varying the route through which learners participate and demonstrate understanding.
Download the PYP Exhibition Coordinator Pack
The free two-page pack contains the six-week coordinator timeline and a reusable learner and mentor check-in sheet. It is designed for adaptation. Add your school's dates, local approval routes and current PYP expectations before use.
Frequently Asked Questions
These answers cover the timetable, final-year terminology, sharing formats, mentor records and assessment. Schools should apply their current PYP guidance and local safeguarding policies when turning the planning model into their own Exhibition process.
Does the IB require the PYP Exhibition to last six weeks?
No. Six weeks is a practical planning model used in this guide, not a universal IB-mandated duration. Adapt the sequence to the school's calendar, learners and current programme guidance.
Is the PYP Exhibition always completed in Year 6?
No. It takes place in the final year of a school's PYP. That may be Year 6 in a UK primary setting, but age and year-group labels differ internationally.
Must every group produce a display board?
No. A board is one possible sharing format. Learners can choose an accessible format that fits their inquiry, audience, context and school resources.
What should a PYP Exhibition mentor record?
Keep a light record of the group's current decision, the next step, its owner and any concern that needs teacher or coordinator action. The record should support learner agency, not replace it.
How should teachers assess the Exhibition?
Use evidence gathered across the process. Look at inquiry, source use, conceptual connections, collaboration, responsible action, communication and reflection. Do not let presentation polish dominate the judgement.
References and Further Reading
These four sources support the current programme description, the international Exhibition findings, the metacognitive teaching guidance and the PYP thinking practices used in this plan. Coordinators should also check the current Programme Resource Centre material available to their school.
- International Baccalaureate (2026). Primary Years Programme curriculum framework.
- Medwell et al. (2017). The impact of the PYP Exhibition. International Baccalaureate and University of Nottingham.
- Education Endowment Foundation (2025). Metacognition and Self-Regulated Learning, second edition.
- McGuinness et al. (2016). Thinking and learning in the PYP transdisciplinary framework. International Baccalaureate.
