Some myths to begin with. That IP classes must have student presentations and group works.
Literature class was mostly the teacher leading the students in a discussion of the themes and motifs in Dracula the novel by Bram Stoker. Students contributed ideas, asked questions, expressed their thoughts freely, sometimes awkwardly, most of the time, confidently. So not all classes are dominated by student presentations. In this Literature class, the teacher facilitated the lesson with provocative probes, leading questions, and constantly drew student responses back to the framework ISATS-SWISS (Initial Impressions, Speaker, Audience, Time-Strucutre, Word Choice, Imagery, Symbolism, Sound devices).
This impression is once again confirmed in Physics. The teacher went through the test papers, asked student questions, corrected student impressions and concepts. Students freely asked questions. IP students are just as concerned about marks and getting the right answers. However students are not just marked right or wrong based on whether they got the correct answers. There was the element of rewarding thinking and confidence in their answers. Correct answers (sure 2 marks, quite sure 1.5, not quite 1, guessing 0.5marks). Similarly Wrong answers (sure -1.5, quite sure -1, not too sure -0.5, guessing 0). This instrument teases out the 2x2 matrix of knowing x what i know & not knowing x what I don't know.
A learning point for me is that IP lessons can be taught. The question is what theoretical framework has been built into encouraging thinking even when teaching is going on, on a continual and sustained basis. The question is what instruments are introduced to measure thinking even when correct answers are important.