Schools will sometimes boast about their ‘integrated curriculum’, typically promoting their STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) classes, the crossover between art and nearly any other core subject area, language acquisition through science and music, or worse – ‘topics’ that the teachers have chosen to run over a term, presented through all lessons.
Curriculum integration [CI] is often mistaken to be just about overlapping subject areas. These lines certainly intersect – and later I will discuss this further – but it is not a complete picture of a misunderstood teaching method. What we see is just scratching the surface of CI, if at all.
What is ‘real’ curriculum integration?
Let’s look at what CI is NOT. It does not centre itself onto how many areas you can cover in one go. It does not remove a set of facts or experiences from their place in the world to present it based on the areas that need to be covered in the classroom. It is not presented as a ‘theme’ or ‘topic’. It is not irrelevant to the children’s lives or not linked by some very fragile thread that can barely be justified as a ‘personal connection’.
CI centres itself around the children, but also gives teachers the role of facilitator. CI has real context personally related to students’ lives, experiences and heartfelt passions. CI is conceptual, based on principles or issues rather than disconnected facts. CI is a negotiation between teachers and students about how to address these ideas in a practical way, through the curriculum.
The role of the teacher
As the adult with the most curriculum knowledge, the teacher plays a key role in scaffolding students. They are not there to direct the learning, but they will step in with a higher order question to keep momentum going if needed. Depending on the students’ needs and skills, the teacher can decide how much direction they need to give and how much they let the students take the reins. Even if the teacher is required to help focus the direction, they rarely take the lead.
So how is this any different from the ‘topics’ teachers have chosen, you may ask? Well that’s just it. In a misguided application of CI, the teacher fully plans a unit or topic and implements it from start to finish, nicely coinciding with specific holidays or days of awareness. A theme is prescribed from the teachers with the hope that it somehow connects to the students.
It would be imperceptive to dismiss the fact that CI is a great time-saver in terms of content coverage in the classroom. CI has its place when teachers need to tick these boxes. I believe this may be why CI has mutated into what it is today and how it is now portrayed by schools and social media. In any case, teachers should tick those boxes where they can but try not to force a connection to a subject area in the opposite direction that their students are taking the inquiry. Find another way to bring necessary content into the classroom, otherwise the students may feel you do no trust their vision as you undermine the pathway they want to explore.
Curriculum integration is conceptual, based on principles or issues rather than disconnected facts.
Moving forward
Some key advice would be to 1) pay attention to the issues, not the facts; and 2) don’t get swept up in mass holidays and awareness days.
Why focus on the issues? Because then you won’t be tempted to TELL students the facts, rather ASK them questions. This takes the teacher out of centre of a CI inquiry and puts students first. It stimulates conversation which then finds its own direction. From there, record the curriculum areas as the class is covering them.
Also, I’m not saying to ignore Halloween or Conservation Week. But are you dressing up the classroom or your lessons because YOU love those events? Or did the students dream up a way to recognise or celebrate them? How meaningful and relevant are the lessons you have planned? Understandably, if the school culture has the expectation that you acknowledge these events then it is more difficult to effect the truest, richest form of CI. In that case, I would personally find a way to compromise so that students still had some agency in their learning during these times.
Clearly, CI is a very blurred concept in education. Next time you look at what other awesome ‘themes’ or ‘topics’ teachers have done, before rushing to instigate them in your own classroom pause to ask yourself – did this come from my desire to run this lesson or is it based on the students’ inquisitions and the potential for meaningful learning? If it’s the latter, you’re closer to CI than the former.
Comments