Part C — Curriculum & IB Continuum Policies (C.1–C.47)

1. Language of instruction is English across all programmes. Academic English is every coach's responsibility, not only the language department's.
2. National language. Mongolian language, literature, and culture are taught K–12 in compliance with national law (A.14) and as a matter of identity, not mere compliance: students graduate fully literate in the national language, and the house names themselves carry it.
3. Mother tongue. Every student's mother tongue is an asset. HIS supports mother-tongue maintenance through the library collection (C.13), self-taught DP Language A pathways where eligible, and family guidance (R.11).
4. Additional languages. Language acquisition pathways run K–12 with placement by proficiency, not age alone; the school publishes which DP language courses it staffs.
5. EAL. Admission and support follow B.5/E.8; EAL learners access the full curriculum with scaffolding, and exit support by published criteria.
6. Review. The Language Committee (coordinators, EAL lead, national-language lead) reviews this policy annually against the school's actual language profile data.

↑ Contents

1. Purpose. Assessment at HIS answers three questions: What can this student do? What should they attempt next? And is our teaching working? It is designed for learning first, measurement second, ranking never.
2. Practice across the continuum. Criterion-related assessment throughout: PYP evidence portfolios and conferences; MYP criteria with standardization; DP/HCP per IB and HCP regulations. No norm-referenced grading against classmates; a student is measured against the standard, not each other.
3. Authentic assessment. Because HIS teaches through real work, real work counts: projects, lab research, performances, ventures, internship evaluations, and public products are assessed with published rubrics and carry weight alongside tests (E.1). The doer portfolio (E.18) accumulates this evidence K–12.
4. Failure protection. Formative attempts are for learning: early drafts, failed experiments, and first ventures are feedback territory, never graded punitively. Summative assessment is announced, calendared (C.30 discipline school-wide), and never used as behavior management.
5. Feedback standards. Every summative assessment returns actionable feedback within published timelines; grades without commentary are not feedback.
6. Integrity of data. Coaches record assessment honestly (M.4 §1); moderation and standardization occur per programme; assessment data feeds the ISDP (E.17) and reporting (E.1, E.16).

↑ Contents

1. Principle. In a sandbox, the attempt must be real — work that is not the student's own is not an attempt at all. Integrity violations are treated as conduct matters (F.1 §6.1), and in DP/HCP as IB malpractice with external consequences the school cannot reverse.
2. Definitions (taught explicitly from upper PYP): plagiarism, collusion (vs. legitimate collaboration — the distinction is taught, since HIS works in teams constantly), duplication, fabrication of data (including lab and research data — a cardinal violation in a research school), and assessment misconduct.
3. AI use. AI tools are part of the Life Tools curriculum (D.4) and legitimate in learning. The rule is declaration: any AI contribution to submitted work is cited like any source, per the grade-band AI standards (K.3). Undeclared AI work is plagiarism. Coaches design assessment so that authentic capability is visible (oral defenses, in-class components, process evidence).
4. Citation. One school-wide referencing convention per division, taught by the library (C.13) and required in every subject.
5. Research integrity. Student research follows D.24 ethics review; data fabrication, uncredited use of others' work, and misrepresentation of results are violations regardless of the venue where work appears (including public showcases, D.58).
6. Responses follow F.1 levels: education-first for developmental lapses in younger years; formal consequences rising with age and stakes; documented per IB requirements in DP/HCP. Honesty when confronted always mitigates (F.1 §7.3).
7. Adults model it. Coach and expert conduct is governed by M.4 §1; the school's own materials cite their sources.

↑ Contents

1. Principle. Every admitted student (B.6: admitted = we can serve them well) accesses the full sandbox — academics, mastery, projects, internships — with reasonable adjustment. Inclusion at HIS means access to attempts, not exemption from them.
2. Identification. Universal screening at entry and transition points; referral pathways open to coaches, parents, and students; assessment by qualified staff; findings recorded in the Individual Support Plan inside the ISDP (E.17).
3. Provision. Tiered support (E.7): quality differentiated teaching for all; targeted intervention; intensive individual support. Support serves the goal of independent capability, and is reduced as capability grows.
4. Access arrangements. IB inclusive access arrangements are requested and documented per IB rules, mirrored in internal assessment so students practice under their real conditions.
5. Extension. Inclusion includes the highly able (E.6): extension through depth, acceleration per E.3, expert mentorship (M-III), and open project ceilings — the sandbox has no maximum.
6. Signature-program access. Mastery pathways (D.37–38), labs, and internships are adjusted, not waived: the school finds the art, sport, and placement each student can master. Waiver is a Head of School decision reserved for documented impossibility.

↑ Contents

The IB-required admissions policy is maintained as B.1, supported by B.2–B.12. B.1's principles binding on curriculum: age-cohort placement, honest capacity-to-serve decisions (B.5/B.6), need-blind selection, and placement into programmes per B.7/C.42.

↑ Contents

1. One written curriculum K–12, vertically articulated across PYP → MYP → DP/HCP, documented in the school's curriculum platform; no undocumented course exists.
2. Every subject maintains: scope & sequence, unit planners in programme formats, assessment maps, and explicit links to Part D strands (which Life Skills, Tools, character traits, and project opportunities each unit carries — D.0).
3. The written curriculum is a professional obligation: what is planned is what is taught, and gaps between plan and reality are surfaced in review (C.7), not hidden.
4. STEM emphasis is structural: laboratory/workshop hours, research skills, and computational thinking are mapped K–12 (D.23), not left to electives.

↑ Contents

1. Rolling review: every subject area fully reviewed on a [4]-year cycle; annual light review of results, unit feedback, and moderation data everywhere.
2. Review asks the sandbox questions: Is this real? Do students do with it? What did their attempts show? — alongside standards alignment and results.
3. New courses and programme changes require Director of Learning approval with a written rationale, resource plan, and pilot design (C.47 where experimental).
4. Emerging-field responsiveness: the cycle includes an annual horizon scan (AI, biotech, and beyond) so a cutting-edge school's curriculum actually cuts.

↑ Contents

1. IB ATL skills (thinking, research, communication, social, self-management) are mapped K–12, taught explicitly, and assessed formatively — they are the learnable machinery of the doer.
2. HIS extends ATL with the Timeless Skills framework (D.33); the two are integrated in one skills map, not run in parallel.
3. Every unit planner names its ATL targets; Head Coaches see ATL growth across subjects in the ISDP.

↑ Contents

1. The IB Learner Profile is the shared language of character across programmes, integrated with the HIS Character Framework (D.32): one vocabulary, posted, taught, and used in reporting — not laminated decoration.
2. International-mindedness is practiced, not preached: multilingualism (C.1), global problems as PBL material (C.37), expat and local coaches working as one profession, and houses named for species whose survival is a global responsibility.

↑ Contents

1. Teaching at HIS is conceptual and inquiry-driven in all programmes: units are built on concepts and real questions, not coverage lists.
2. Direct instruction is used deliberately and unapologetically where it is the best tool (foundational skills, safety training, technique) — inquiry is the frame, not a dogma.
3. Signature pedagogies (C-VI) sit on top of this base; the C.34 time expectations govern their proportion.

↑ Contents

1. All planning lives in the designated platform, visible school-wide to coaches and leadership; planning is collaborative (C.13) and versioned.
2. Documentation standards per programme (PYP planners, MYP unit plans, DP/HCP outlines) are maintained as coordinators require for authorization and evaluation (A.11).
3. Documentation exists to improve teaching and survive staff transitions — a coach's departure must not take a course's memory with it.

↑ Contents

1. Coaches propose; subject leads and coordinators approve against criteria: alignment, quality, currency, cultural balance, and cost.
2. Primary sources, real datasets, professional tools, and case materials are preferred over textbooks wherever feasible — sandbox realism extends to materials.
3. Challenged materials (family or staff concerns) follow a written reconsideration procedure ending with the Director of Learning; materials are not withdrawn on complaint alone.

↑ Contents

1. Timetables protect weekly collaborative planning per team (E.15); collaboration is a professional duty, not a preference (M.4 §3).
2. Co-teaching is used deliberately: EAL and support push-in, expert-and-coach pairs (M.21 transitions), and interdisciplinary units (C.23).
3. Reflection is built into every unit's close; unit feedback feeds C.7 review.

↑ Contents

1. Mandatory for all, K–12. Mathematics and English run through every grade and both diploma pathways: DP students carry both to diploma level; HCP students carry English (Language A) and Mathematics in their academic core (C.44 §1a) — no pathway design may thin them.
2. Excellence, not passage. The standard is excellence relative to each student's trajectory: every student carries explicit Mathematics and English targets in their ISDP (E.17), reviewed each term by the Head Coach with the Subject Coaches. Coasting at a comfortable grade is treated as seriously as struggling — both trigger action (extension or intervention, E.5/E.6).
3. Early force. The foundation years are decisive: K–5 numeracy and literacy are systematically taught (C.15 §2), universally screened, and gaps are closed early and aggressively — no student is allowed to carry a reading or number deficit quietly into MYP.
4. Excellence infrastructure. Both subjects maintain: extension ladders into competition and advanced study (C.49), diagnostic tracking across years, and coach-capability investment (M.7) as first-priority departments.
5. Accountability. Cohort Mathematics and English outcomes — including growth, not just attainment — are reported to the Board annually as headline indicators of the school's academic health.

↑ Contents

1. For every student. Enrichment at HIS is not a gifted-track privilege: every student, at every level, has a path to go further in something. The gifted provision (E.6) is one lane of this policy, not its whole.
2. The enrichment ladder, published annually per subject and program: academic competitions and olympiads (mathematics, sciences, informatics, debate, linguistics — P.8), advanced and accelerated coursework (E.3, online university-level study where earned), expert mentorship attachments (M-III staff and external professionals under J.2 §8), research placements (D.24), masterclasses and intensives in arts, sport, and pathway fields (D.40), and summer programs (S.4).
3. Structural, not incidental. Timetabling protects enrichment access (E.15); cost never excludes an aided student (B.9 §5); coaches are credited for enrichment coaching in workload (M.8); the school enters external competitions deliberately, prepares students seriously, and treats results as it treats sports results — celebrated, analyzed, never the point in themselves.
4. Routing. The Head Coach owns each student's enrichment picture inside the ISDP: every student's plan names at least one current enrichment commitment; the mix is reviewed termly for load against D.15 wellbeing calibration.
5. Talent responsibility. For exceptional talent in any field — mathematical, artistic, athletic, entrepreneurial — HIS accepts an explicit duty to provide world-level runway: individual programs (D.40), external partnerships (C.41, D.28), and schedule accommodation, governed by the same fairness rules as everything else (A.16).

↑ Contents

1. The POI is reviewed annually by the PYP team for balance, vertical articulation, and local/global relevance; every transdisciplinary theme is represented per IB rules.
2. HIS flavor: each grade's POI includes at least one unit that ends in a real attempt — something made, grown, staged, or given to a real audience beyond the classroom.

↑ Contents

1. Single-subject teaching (languages, music, PE, arts) integrates with units of inquiry wherever authentic; specialists sit in POI planning.
2. Skills with their own progressions (reading, mathematics, instrumental technique, swimming) are taught systematically even when a unit link is thin — integration serves learning, not the reverse.

↑ Contents

1. The G5 Exhibition is the first great public attempt: student-led inquiry into a real issue, mentored by coaches and older students, presented publicly (D.58 standards, child-appropriate).
2. Exhibition feeds the ISDP and portfolio (E.18) and initiates the project ladder that runs to the Personal Project, HCP capstone, EE, and passion/impact projects (D.56).

↑ Contents

1. Early Years learning is play-based by design: play is the first sandbox. Environments are built for exploration, making, and risk that is managed, not eliminated (S.1).
2. Early literacy and numeracy are taught intentionally within and alongside play; outdoor learning is daily, weather permitting broadly defined.

↑ Contents

1. Agency is structural: children co-construct essential agreements (F.1 §4.1), make real choices in units, and take action that is their own — noticed, documented, and never manufactured for display.
2. Action is assessed by its authenticity, not its size: a K student re-sorting the recycling because they understood why is the real thing.

↑ Contents

1. HIS teaches all MYP subject groups per IB rules; design and sciences carry enhanced hours (D.23 STEM spine).
2. Flexibility provisions (subject-group exemptions in G9–10 where IB permits) are used to protect mastery and HCP-preparation time deliberately, documented per IB.

↑ Contents

1. Every G10 student completes the Personal Project per IB rules, supervised by a trained coach; HIS strongly steers projects toward the student's mastery field, research interest, or venture — the project should be a real rung on that student's ladder, not an isolated exercise.
2. Process journals, supervisor meetings, and academic integrity per C.3; public presentation per D.58; the project enters the portfolio (E.18) and informs G11 pathway choice (C.46).

↑ Contents

1. HIS runs the Community Project at G8 for all students, in teams, house-linked where natural (T.5 conservation projects are a favored channel).
2. Standards mirror C.20 scaled to age; service integrity per C.22.

↑ Contents

1. Service is integrated into MYP units and student life, documented by students, and verified for authenticity — hours-counting theater is explicitly rejected; impact and reflection are the measures (D.36).
2. Service connects to the impact-project ladder (D.56) and CAS (C.28) so one ethic runs K–12.

↑ Contents

1. At least [one] planned IDU per grade per year, per IB requirements, co-planned and co-assessed by the contributing subjects (C.13).
2. IDUs are a natural home for case studies and PBL (C.34–C.36); real problems rarely respect subject boundaries, and the curriculum admits it.

↑ Contents

1. The school's position on MYP eAssessment / external moderation is set by the Director of Learning and reviewed [annually] against cost, benefit, and validation needs; current position: [participate / not participate].
2. Regardless of position, internal standardization follows MYP requirements, and G10 outcomes are validated sufficiently to anchor DP/HCP placement (C.42).

↑ Contents

1. The published DP offering guarantees the sciences, mathematics AA/AI, and computer science every year (STEM identity), alongside the full diploma structure; low-enrollment courses run by published viability rules, with self-taught/online IB options where eligible.
2. Subject selection happens in G10 through the C.46 guidance process — student, family, Head Coach, and DP coordinator — anchored to pathway intent, not prestige.
3. Course changes are permitted within published windows (normally first [6] weeks of G11); later changes require coordinator approval and an honest feasibility assessment.

↑ Contents

1. EE per IB rules: trained supervisors, reflection sessions, integrity per C.3. HIS students are steered toward EEs using the school's real research capacity — lab data, workshop builds, field studies (D.24) — over purely literature-based essays where a real investigation is feasible.
2. Supervisor loads are capped (E.15); the EE calendar sits inside C.30.

↑ Contents

1. TOK per IB rules, staffed by trained coaches, calendared across G11–12.
2. HIS treatment: TOK is the reflective heart of Wisdom and Action — how do we know, and how do we know enough to act? TOK draws its examples from students' own labs, ventures, internships, and projects.

↑ Contents

1. CAS per IB rules: strands, CAS project, interviews, portfolio evidence.
2. Integration: mastery training (D.37–38) evidences Creativity/Activity; impact projects and house conservation work (D.56, T.5) evidence Service; internships may evidence CAS learning outcomes where genuinely reflective. Integration never dilutes CAS's own requirements — the coordinator guards the line.

↑ Contents

1. The full IB Diploma is the default expectation of DP-track students; Courses candidacy is a considered decision (student, family, Head Coach, coordinator) made for the student's real interest — including combination with HCP elements (C.42) — never a quiet demotion.
2. Courses candidates carry full HIS graduation requirements (E.4) regardless.

↑ Contents

1. One master IA/EE/TOK calendar per cohort, published at G11 entry, spreading load deliberately (D.15 wellbeing calibration); no coach sets summative deadlines outside it.
2. Deadline discipline mirrors the real world: published process for extensions with cause; missed internal deadlines trigger support first (E.5), penalties per published scale, and IB rules where external deadlines bind.

↑ Contents

1. Predictions are evidence-based, moderated within departments, and honest (M.4 §1) — optimism is not kindness when a university offer hangs on it.
2. Students and families are told predictions and their basis; a written review channel exists for a contested prediction, reviewed by the coordinator with the subject lead against the evidence.

↑ Contents

1. Examinations run exactly per IB regulations: secure storage, trained invigilators, seating, timing, access arrangements (C.4), incident reporting.
2. The DP coordinator is the authority during examination sessions; no school interest overrides examination integrity.

↑ Contents

1. Results are released to students per IB process with counseling available the same day; the school analyzes cohort results annually into C.7 review.
2. EUR and retake decisions are made with coordinator advice on realistic prospects; costs per N.9; the school supports retakes with a study plan, not just an entry.

↑ Contents

1. The commitment. A defined, rising proportion of instructional time runs through attempt-based pedagogies — project-based learning, case method, design thinking, structured inquiry: PYP [30]% · MYP [40]% · DP/HCP [50]% (guideline figures, audited through unit planners in C.7 review, adjusted by evidence not enthusiasm).
2. The attempt cycle is the common spine of all of them: frame a real problem → attempt → fail or succeed honestly → reflect → attempt again → ship. Coaches design for at least one full cycle per unit; failure inside the cycle is protected (C.2 §4).
3. Choosing tools. PBL for sustained authentic problems; case method for judgment under incomplete information; design thinking for human-centered making; direct instruction whenever foundations or safety demand it (C.10 §2). Pedagogy serves the problem, never the reverse.
4. Coach capability. Every coach is trained in at least one signature pedagogy to practitioner level within [2] years of joining (M.7); expert-track staff bring their fields' real methods (lab practice, studio critique, kitchen brigade, sprint rituals) into the classroom as legitimate signature pedagogies of their disciplines.

↑ Contents

1. Every unit calling itself PBL meets six published standards: (a) a genuinely open problem worth solving; (b) sustained inquiry over weeks, not a decorated worksheet; (c) student voice in framing and method; (d) critique-and-revision cycles built in; (e) a public product for a real audience (D.58); (f) disciplinary rigor — the project teaches the subject, not around it.
2. "Dessert projects" — decorative activities after the real teaching — do not count toward C.34 proportions. The Director of Learning audits annually against the rubric.
3. Assessment per C.2 §3: process (journals, critique participation) and product both count; team projects assess individual contribution visibly.

↑ Contents

1. Cases run age-adapted from upper PYP (story-based dilemmas) through MYP (structured decision cases) to DP/HCP (full case teaching with cold-calling norms agreed in class culture).
2. The HIS Case Library is a strategic asset: cases written from sister-company decisions, local industry, school ventures (with permission and anonymization as needed), and global sources — maintained by the Director of Learning, contributed to by expert-track staff as part of their role (M.20).
3. Case teaching trains the specific doer skill of deciding with incomplete information and defending the decision — discussion norms reward reasoning and changed minds, not performance.

↑ Contents

1. The school actively sources real problems as teaching material: an annual problem-sourcing round with sister companies, industry, government, NGOs, and the school's own operations (the campus itself is a legitimate problem set — energy, food, logistics).
2. Partner engagements are governed by agreement: scope, student data protection (O.6), IP in student solutions (D.27), safeguarding for any student–partner contact (J.2 §8), and the partner's commitment to engage with results — students must present to someone who can actually act.
3. Partners never direct curriculum or assessment; coaches translate problems into units. A problem with a predetermined answer is not a real problem and is not accepted.

↑ Contents

1. Four capstones mark the ladder of attempts: G5 PYP Exhibition (C.16) · G8 Community Project (C.21) · G10 Personal Project (C.20) · G12 the Graduation Capstone — for DP students, integrated with the EE or a passion/impact project (D.56); for HCP students, the professional capstone (C.45).
2. Each capstone is public (D.58), portfolio-anchored (E.18), and reviewed by a panel including at least one external or expert-track assessor from G10 upward.
3. The capstone ladder is audited as one system: each rung must demand visibly more agency, rigor, and reality than the last.

↑ Contents

1. Purpose. The HCP is HIS's second diploma pathway (G11–12, with K–10 preparation via C.46): for students whose talent and direction point to a profession — culinary arts, performing and visual arts, sport, technology, design, business, and beyond — it combines rigorous academics, professional qualification, real workplace practice, and the full HIS core.
2. Parity of esteem is policy, not sentiment: HCP and DP appear identically in school communications, ceremonies, and university counseling; the HCP capstone stands beside the EE at graduation; resourcing per student is comparable; any staff member speaking of HCP as the "lesser" track is corrected under M.4 §5. The Head of School reports annually to the Board on parity indicators (applications, resourcing, destinations).
3. Structure. Four components (C.44): the academic core (DP courses), the career-related study (C.41 qualifications), the professional practice strand (C.43 placements), and the HCP core (skills, service, language, reflective capstone) — deliberately a superset of the IB CP frame.
4. Relationship to IB CP. [HIS pursues IB CP authorization and extends it / HIS operates the HCP as a proprietary program benchmarked to CP standards] — decision recorded here; either way, external benchmarking per C.45 §3 is mandatory.
5. Governance. HCP Director reports to the Director of Learning; an external advisory panel of industry professionals reviews pathway standards annually.

↑ Contents

1. Pathways open when four tests pass: student demand (viable cohort), professional standard (a recognized qualification or industry benchmark exists — C.41), capability (facilities and expert staffing per Q.3, M-III), and placement depth (real internship hosts per D-XI). Current offerings are published annually.
2. Founding pathways: Culinary Arts · Visual & Performing Arts · Sport (with D-X integration) · Technology & Engineering · Business & Entrepreneurship · Design. Additions (and closures, with teach-out protection for enrolled students) are Head of School decisions on HCP Director recommendation.
3. A pathway is never closed to a student on grounds of prestige — the chef's pathway is defended as fiercely as the engineer's. That defense is this policy's reason to exist.

↑ Contents

1. Each pathway anchors to at least one recognized external credential or benchmark (vocational qualifications of BTEC type, industry certifications, conservatory standards, federation coaching/performance levels), so an HCP graduate holds currency the world outside HIS recognizes.
2. Partner institutions (culinary institutes, conservatories, universities, certifying bodies) are engaged under written agreements: quality standards, assessment roles, credit recognition, data protection (O.6), and safeguarding (J.2 §8) — vetted per COM/D.51 standards.
3. Credit recognition maps (what external credit each qualification carries, where) are maintained and shown to families honestly during pathway selection.

↑ Contents

1. Entry at G11 through the C.46 guidance process: evidence of sustained interest and aptitude in the pathway field (the K–10 portfolio and mastery record are the evidence base), family conference, and HCP Director approval. Entry is selective the way B.2 is selective — for fit and readiness, never as an academic consolation prize; a student fleeing DP difficulty without pathway conviction is counseled honestly.
2. Movement windows. DP ↔ HCP transfers are possible within the first [6] weeks of G11 with coordinator and Director approval; later transfers are exceptional and feasibility-tested against qualification timelines.
3. Hybrid enrollment. Where timetable and workload allow (D.15 guard), students may combine elements (e.g., DP candidate with one career-related module); hybrid loads require Head Coach sign-off.
4. External applicants to G11 HCP follow B.7 with pathway assessment added.

↑ Contents

1. Professional practice is the HCP's spine: a minimum of [X] placement hours across G11–12 in the pathway field, structured through the D-XI internship ladder (on-campus → sister company → external), rising in responsibility.
2. Placements follow every D-XI safeguard: legal compliance (D.52), safeguarding (J.2 §8, D.50–51), learning agreements and assessment (D.53), safety (D.54).
3. Each HCP student has a professional mentor in their field (vetted per J.2 §8) alongside their Head Coach; mentor evaluations feed C.45 assessment.
4. Placement quality is audited: a placement that uses students as free labor without learning is withdrawn from the program.

↑ Contents

1. Every HCP student completes: (a) the academic core — at least [2–3] DP courses, always including English (Language A) and Mathematics at an appropriate level (C.48 — non-negotiable in every pathway); (b) the career-related study (C.41); (c) professional practice hours (C.43); (d) the HCP core: personal & professional skills, service learning (D.36 ethic), language development (C.1), and the reflective capstone (C.45).
2. The HIS graduation requirements (E.4) — mastery of an art and a sport, portfolio, project ladder — apply to HCP students in full. The HCP is more than DP-with-a-trade; it is the whole HIS graduate, professionally aimed.
3. Workload is calendared under C.30/D.15 discipline like any DP load.

↑ Contents

1. Assessment combines: DP course results (IB-assessed), external qualification results (C.41 bodies), professional practice evaluations (C.43 mentors + school supervisors), and the professional capstone — a substantial real work in the field (a service, a production, a build, a season, a venture) presented publicly (D.58) and assessed by a jury including external professionals.
2. The HIS Career Diploma is awarded on completion of all C.44 components at published standards; it appears on the graduation stage with the IB Diploma, and its supplement documents every credential and placement for universities and employers (E.18 integration).
3. External benchmarking. Every [2] years, an external panel reviews sample capstones and standards against industry and CP-equivalent benchmarks; findings go to the Board (C.39 §5).

↑ Contents

1. Career exposure is K–10 curriculum, not a G10 event: PYP visits and "doer stories" (parents, alumni, expert staff presenting their real work), MYP rotations through labs, studios, kitchens, and workplaces, G9–10 structured exploration (tasters, shadowing, the C.20 project as a probe).
2. The G10 Pathway Conference — student, family, Head Coach, and counselors — reviews the whole record (ISDP, portfolio, mastery, exploration evidence) and produces an informed G11 choice: DP, HCP (which pathway), or hybrid (C.42 §3).
3. Guidance is honest in both directions: a gifted academic is told so; so is a gifted maker. Neither is steered by parental prestige pressure — the R.2 §5 boundary applies, and the E.10 university counseling team supports all destinations: university, conservatory, academy, industry, venture.

↑ Contents

1. The school is itself a sandbox. HIS runs deliberate, governed experimentation on its own practice: pedagogy pilots, program prototypes, assessment innovations, and research on learning — much of it led by expert-track staff (M-III) for whom this is contracted work (M.20).
2. Pilot governance. Every pilot has a written design: hypothesis, scope, duration, success measures, and a stop rule. Pilots touching students require Director of Learning approval; those collecting research data require ethics review (D.24 board) and family consent per O.1.
3. Protection both ways. Students in pilots never risk their formal outcomes (IB assessment and graduation requirements are never experimental variables); coaches running well-designed pilots that fail are protected per M.4 §Commitment 4 — a negative result honestly reported is a contribution.
4. Knowledge out. Results — positive and negative — are written up internally; publication under the HIS name follows M.20/R.9. What works is absorbed into C.7 review; what doesn't is recorded so the school never repeats it unknowingly.
5. The Head of School reports the R&D portfolio to the Board annually — a cutting-edge school shows its edge, or admits it has none.

Part C is reviewed annually by the Director of Learning with Programme Coordinators and the HCP Director; C.1–C.5 are re-ratified before each IB evaluation cycle (A.11). Bracketed values are set at first adoption. The version on the school policy platform is authoritative. Where a translation is provided, the English version prevails.

↑ Contents