From IB Dominance to Diversification
Hello everyone, I’m Saori.
I recently read an interesting article in Toyo Keizai Online. While the Japanese government’s goal of 200 International Baccalaureate (IB) schools has been achieved, Cambridge International schools are rapidly increasing.
IB is a globally respected curriculum, but many schools are giving up due to the heavy operational burden. On the other hand, Cambridge International is relatively easier to implement and is expanding across Japan.
Having lived in Malaysia for three and a half years, my children attend an international school, and I’ve seen both IB and Cambridge curricula up close. Today, I’d like to use this news as a springboard to think about international education options.
The Achievement of the IB 200-School Plan and Its Costs
Since 2013, the Japanese government has promoted increasing IB-accredited schools, reaching the 200-school target. With support from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), IB is even being introduced in public schools.
For example, Omiya Elementary School in Kami City, Kochi Prefecture, became the first public elementary school to receive IB PYP (Primary Years Programme) accreditation. It’s gaining attention as a case of a small school in a rural area transforming education through inquiry-based learning.
However, as the article points out, introducing IB comes with significant costs. Teacher training, curriculum development, the accreditation process—both initial investment and ongoing maintenance are expensive.
Even in Malaysia, where I live, IB school fees are on the higher side. For instance, Uplands in Penang has annual fees of around 80,000 to 120,000 ringgit (approximately $17,000 to $25,500 USD, based on 1 MYR = 0.21 USD as of June 18, 2026). It’s certainly not cheap.
Why Cambridge International Is Gaining Popularity
So, why are Cambridge International schools increasing now?
The biggest reason is “ease of implementation.” Cambridge International focuses on IGCSE (International General Certificate of Secondary Education) and A-Levels (university entrance qualifications), without requiring all subjects to shift to an inquiry-based model like IB. You can start by adding English-language instruction to existing subject-based curricula.
Cost-wise, it’s often more affordable than IB. The accreditation process is relatively simpler, and the burden of teacher training is lighter.
My eldest daughter, Hikari (7), and son, Zen (5), attend an IB school, but many of my friends’ families in Malaysia choose Cambridge schools. Their reasoning is often, “When considering university admissions, A-Levels are sufficient to aim for top global universities.”
Choosing a Curriculum for Education Migrants
When considering education migration to Malaysia, curriculum choice is a key factor.
IB’s strengths lie in “inquiry-based learning” and “developing critical thinking skills.” Students can acquire university-level learning skills, such as TOK (Theory of Knowledge) and EE (Extended Essay), from high school.
On the other hand, Cambridge International’s strengths are “deep subject understanding” and “easier exam preparation.” A-Levels allow students to delve deeply into specific subjects, which is said to be advantageous for those aiming for science or medical fields.
From my experience, there’s no single right answer. The best curriculum depends on a child’s personality, learning style, and future path.
Hikari is naturally curious, and IB’s inquiry-based approach seems to suit her. Meanwhile, a Japanese friend in her class who “prefers to learn thoroughly from textbooks” transferred to a Cambridge school.
The Future of International Education in Japan
What’s noteworthy in this news is that IB and Cambridge are beginning to “coexist” rather than “compete.”
The Japanese government’s IB promotion has achieved certain results, but the burden on schools cannot be ignored. The increase in Cambridge International schools is evidence that an environment is emerging where schools can choose “an international curriculum that fits them.”
In Malaysia, diverse curricula—IB, Cambridge, Australian, American, and others—have long coexisted. For parents, the appeal lies in the variety of options to match their child’s future vision.
If this trend accelerates in Japan, the option of “receiving an international education domestically” will become more realistic for families considering education migration.
Conclusion: More Options Are a Good Thing
The achievement of the IB 200-school plan and the surge in Cambridge International schools are signs of Japan’s international education diversifying.
To those considering education migration, I encourage you not to assume “IB is better” or “Cambridge is better,” but to choose a curriculum that suits your child.
In Malaysia, you can actually compare multiple curricula. Visit local schools or try trial classes to see your child’s reaction. I’m sure you’ll find the best option.
Until next time!
Comments