Interdisciplinary curriculum

Interdisciplinary Curriculum
Design and Implementation

Summary of Chapters 1 to 3
Prepared by Fadi Sukkari

Introduction
This book describes a variety of curriculum
integration options ranging from
concurrent teaching of related subjects to
fusion of curriculum focus to residential
study focusing on daily living.
A step-by-step approach is presented,
proceeding from selecting an organizing
center to a scope and sequence of
guiding questions to a matrix of activities
for developing integrated units of study.

Distinction is made between curriculum-
content and metacurriculum - those
learning skills helpful in acquiring the
curriculum content and developing the
capacity to think and learn independently.

These chapters illuminate the value of
higher-order thinking and learning skills and
provide a vehicle for their integration into
curriculum.

I- The Growing Need
for Interdisciplinary
Curriculum Content

Students frequently complain that school
is irrelevant to the larger world:

The school day division is commonly
perceived as arbitrary and the subject
areas as separate bodies of knowledge
with little relationship to one another.

According to Elvin “Nature does not confront
us for three quarters of an hour only with
flowers and in the next only with animals. It
is possible, however, to sit and pick up the
flowers for three-quarters of an hour and
learn a great deal.”

The problem is that in school we do not
consider both perspectives as necessary
components of education, so planning
interdisciplinary courses frequently lacks
power.

Two problems in content selection often plague
courses:
1.The Potpourri Problem
Many units, being a sampling of knowledge
from disparate disciplines, interdisciplinary
design lacks inherent scope and sequence, so
developers must design a content scope and
sequence for any unit.

2.The Polarity Problem
One of the problems of interdisciplinarity is that
of polarity which results in a lack of clarity, and
real tensions among teachers as some feel
highly threatened when new views are
promoted.

To resolve these problems, effective
interdisciplinarity must meet two criteria:

a- having carefully conceived design
features: a scope and sequence, a
cognitive taxonomy to encourage thinking
skills, behavioral indicators of attitudinal
change, and a solid evaluation scheme.

b- using both discipline-field-based and
interdisciplinary experiences for students in
the curriculum.

Designers also have to avoid wrestling with
the conflicts resulting from interdisciplinary
work and should take time to reflect on
some fundamental questions.

This chapter tackles these questions in
order to (1) establish the need for
interdisciplinary possibilities, (2) define the
terms used in the field, and (3) present a
set of assumptions to guide effective
practice.

I.1. The Need for
Curriculum Integration

I.1.1. The Growth of Knowledge
Knowledge is exponentially growing, putting
pressure on curriculum designers pertaining
to what should be taught. New laws also
require the curricula to cover new areas or
topics such as AIDS.
These critical topics add pressure to the
school schedule, while, over the last century,
the length of the school day has stayed
basically about the same.

I.1.2. Fragmented Schedules
Schools divide time into blocks to parcel out
specific responsibilities and to maintain
accountability.
A good means of assessing a school day is
to follow one student through the day: eight
times a day, students change classes every
forty minutes and rush for five minutes to
another setting, subject, instructor, and set
of classemates.

I.1.3. Relevance of the Curriculum
Increasingly, students drop out every year
because of the irrelevance of their course
work to their lives out of school. Most of
their instruction is based on textbooks used
in isolation from its applications. The
fragmentation of the day compounds the
dilemma.
Thus, schools need to create learning
experiences that periodically demonstrate
the relationship of the disciplines.

Add to this the ignorance of the school
population and the lack of cultural literacy.

There should be a body of knowledge,
which deals with the basics of culture:
history and arts, although this might lead to
polarity problems.

Yet, polarity could be avoided by creating
active linkages between these fields of
knowledge.

I.1.4. Society's Response to Fragmentation
People cannot be trained in specializations and
then cope with the multifaceted nature of their
work, so highly specialized schools are providing
courses from other majors.

Although, we live in a specialized world, we
may draw from the range of fields to better
serve our specific fields. The renewed trend in
schools toward interdisciplinarity will help
students better integrate strategies from their
studies into the larger world.

I.2. Definitions that Clarify Practice

We need to unify curriculum terminology
among teachers, to reach some agreement
on the meanings of the words used to
describe the plan that emerges from the
design efforts and to avoid confusion.
The following are some terms whose
definitions attempt at illustrating the shades
of nuance between conceptions of
knowledge.

a- Discipline Field: A teachable knowledge
with its own background of education, training
procedures, methods, and content areas: “…
each discipline asks different questions and is
a form of knowledge with distinct
characteristics. Within each form are unique
concepts that have tests to validate their
truth.”
The emphasis on discipline-field curriculum
rests on instructional effectiveness, inherent
conceptual cohesion, and socially sanctioned
community base.

b- Interdisciplinary: an approach that
applies methodology from more than one
discipline to examine a central theme.
In contrast to a discipline-field view of
knowledge, interdisciplinarity stresses
linkages. Meeth (1978) notes that, “… the
emphasis is on deliberately identifying the
relationship between disciplines.” It is a
holistic approach concerned with the ideal of
unity, that nurtures a different perspective,
with focus on life experience.

c- Cross-disciplinary: Viewing one
discipline from the perspective of another.

d- Multidisciplinary: The juxtaposition of
several disciplines focused on one problem
with no direct attempt to integrate (Piaget
1972, Meeth 1978).

e- Pluri-disciplinary: The juxtaposition of
disciplines assumed to be more or less
related.

f- Transdisciplinary: beyond the scope of
the disciplines; that is, to start with a
problem and put forward knowledge from
the disciplines (Meeth 1978).
Decisions regarding the curriculum should
be made with a consensus as to the kind
of discipline-field emphasis that will occur;
otherwise, there is will be tendency toward
the confusion of the potpourri.

I-3- Support for an Interdisciplinary Curriculum

The work of the curriculum developer, is like
that of architects: they might face
unexpected events that oblige them to adapt
their plans. They are responsible for choices
that reflect a cohesive and lasting quality in
the educational experience they are
attempting to build.
The following beliefs and assumptions are to
be taken into account when creating one’s
statement of philosophy for interdisciplinary
work.

1- To fully benefit from interdisciplinary
studies Students should have a range of
curriculum experiences that reflect both a
discipline-field and an interdisciplinary
orientation, in order to acquire a solid
grounding in the various disciplines that
interdisciplinarity attempts to bridge
(Jacobs and Borland 1986).

2. To avoid the potpourri problem, teachers
should be active curriculum designers and
determine the nature and degree of
integration and the scope and sequence of
study.
They should be empowered to work as
designers to shape and to edit the
curriculum according to the students'
needs.

3- Curriculum making is a creative
solution to a problem; hence,
interdisciplinary curriculum should only be
used to face the problems of fragmentation,
relevance, and growth of knowledge.
4- Curriculum making should not be
viewed as a covert activity. The
interdisciplinary course should be
presented to all members of the school
community. Parents should also be well-
informed so that they feel less suspicious.

5- As early as pre-school, students should
tackle epistemological issues such as "What is
knowledge and How can we present it in the
schools?" (Jacobs and Borland 1986). Relevance
begins with the rationale for educational choices
affecting the school life of the student.
6- Interdisciplinary experiences provide an
opportunity for a more relevant, less fragmented,
and stimulating experience for students. A
well-designed curriculum leads students to break
with the traditional view of knowledge and foster a
range of perspectives that serve them in the
larger world.

7- Students should be involved in the
development of interdisciplinary courses
since their interest in the units is often
enhanced by their involvement in the
planning process (Jacobs and Borland
1986).

By understanding the need for curriculum
integration programs, clarifying the
terminology to be used, and articulating a set
of guiding assumptions, solid and lasting
designs will emerge.

II- Design Options
for an Integrated Curriculum
by Heidi Hayes Jacobs

School administrators tend today to think
of content design as one of two options:
either discipline field specialization or
interdisciplinary integration.
Polarity should be avoided for a long-term
curriculum design. This chapter tackles
the issue of continuum of design options
that explain the choices of program
planning.

Continuum of Options for Content Design

II.1.1. Discipline-Based Content Design
a- Characteristics: A traditional approach
with no attempt for integration. In secondary
programs, these general academic areas
break down into more specific fields.
There are some variations of block
scheduling and the way the week is
programmed; nevertheless, knowledge is
presented in separate fields without attempt
to show relationship among them.

b- Advantages: It is the most widespread
format, to which students, teachers, and
parents are used. It is efficient because
courses of study are available in each field
through all grades, and curricula, and
supplementary materials exist for each field.

Focusing on each discipline provides
students with specialized skills in each field,
especially that specialized training gives
teachers greater depth of knowledge.

c- Disadvantages:
- The fragmenting effect on the student’s who
must move from one subject/space to
another.
- Teachers plan activities according to
allotted time rather than to students’ needs in
relation to the content.
-It does not reflect the reality of life outside
school. Students do not learn how the
perspective of one discipline relates to
another.

II.1.2. Parallel Discipline Designs
a- Characteristics: Teachers sequence
their lessons in parallel to the same area in
other disciplines. The content itself does not
change, only the order in which it appears.
The goal is a simultaneous effect as
students relate the studies in one subject
with the others. Teachers working in a
parallel fashion are simply resequencing
their existing curriculum in the hope that
students will find the implicit linkages.

b- Advantages: It is a concurrent teaching
of related subjects; teachers are not
changing the design of the curriculum
except for one variable: the time of year in
which it is taught, so a chronological course
such as history cannot be resequenced.
c- Disadvantages: Missed opportunities for
deliberate, in-depth integration. To a
degree, students are still studying concepts
in isolation and must uncover for
themselves the relationships among fields
of knowledge.

II.1.3. Complementary Discipline Units or
Courses
a- Characteristics: Suggests that certain
related disciplines be brought together in a
formal unit to investigate a theme or issue.
Here the focus stays on the prescribed
scope and sequence of each discipline. It is
possible to design units that bring together
two disciplines of seemingly different
characters, as long as the questions shed
light on and complement one another
(Ethics in Science).

b- Advantages: It requires less effort than an
interdisciplinary unit. Given the links between
fields of knowledge, the design process is
easier. When working in team, teachers often
are more comfortable working in related
disciplines and even some publishers have
started packaging complementary courses.
c- Disadvantages: Any curriculum design that
brings change in schedules, and costs money
for staff training can prompt resistance.
Students will need to reconsider their traditional
view of knowledge. If teachers are willing to
wrestle with this kind of resistance from
students, the challenge can be rewarding.

II.1.4. Interdisciplinary Units/Courses
a- Characteristics: In this design, periodic
units deliberately bring together the full
range of disciplines in the school’s
curriculum.
The designers attempt to use a full array of
discipline-based perspectives. The units are
of specific duration: a few days, or a
semester. This option does not claim to
replace the discipline-field approach; rather,
they are mutually supportive.

b- Advantages: It fosters a comprehensive
stimulating experience for students.
Teachers can plan their interdisciplinary
work around themes and issues that
emerge from their curricula. Scheduling can
be adapted to the school setting and
teachers’ needs. In short, units can be
flexibly designed to fit any time constraint.
c- Disadvantages: It requires effort and
change and is generally flawed by the
“potpourri” approach. There are steps that
can enable designers to create well
orchestrated programs, yet this entails lots
of funds, time, and planners’ energy.

II.1.5. Integrated-Day Model

a- Characteristics: A full-day program
based primarily on problems emerging from
the student’s world. The emphasis is on an
organic approach to classroom life that
focuses the curriculum on the student’s
questions and interests rather than on
content determined by a school syllabus.

b- Advantages: It is a natural day during
which time is structured according to the needs
of the students, rather than institutional
demands. Motivation is high because the
areas of study are directly linked to the
students’ lives.
c- Disadvantages: It entails hard work by
teachers since it is not based on an existing
curriculum. The classroom management
requires specific training. There are no
assurances that basic core curriculum
requirements will be met, for older students.

II.1.6. Complete Program
a- Characteristics: The most extreme form
of interdisciplinary work, based on the
students’ life on campus. Students live in
the school environment and create the
curriculum out of their day-to-day lives.
Perhaps A.S. Neil’s Summerhill is the most
widely known example of such an
approach. It is a totally integrated program
where the student’s life is synonymous with
school.

b- Advantages: It is the most integrated
program in which the life of the student is the
focus for the school. Students reported feeling
empowered by a sense of independence and
self-direction in contrast with the dependency
fostered in more traditional approaches.
c- Disadvantages: It is a radical approach to
integration that requires the commitment of
families and school. Being residential,
adolescents rather than young children would
be involved. There is no guarantee that
students be exposed to standard curriculum.

II.2. Factors to Consider
when Selecting an Option

The continuum of options allows to choose the
design that best suits a school’s situation.
1- The flexibility of the schedule to encourage
rearranging the subjects, time being valuable in
education.
2- Support from the staff who should be
enthusiastic about integration, motivation being
the key to success provided that change comes
gradually. Starting with parallel planning would
be a good start.
3- The nature of the curriculum
requirements, since curricula vary in terms of
how subjects are presented and depend on the
flexibility in the institution’s philosophy.

Institutions using a combination of options that
meet the students’ needs manifest greater
success. A possibility might be to group in one
afternoon an integrated social studies unit then
schedule on the next day a reading program that
supports that integrated unit.
Other institutions might teach certain subjects in a
complementary fashion while keeping other areas
discipline-based. Yet, ownership is widespread
here.
High school is usually the most rigid institution
with strict schedules and graduation requirements.
Only elective courses in such schools reflect the
interdisciplinary orientation. Time constraints will
always be a hindrance to such options.

Conclusion
We tried to study the available options for
integration:
-To avoid the trap of polarity, we must
consider the feasibility of changes in an
institution’s system.
- The continuum of options has proved a
helpful tool if the planners are ready to
weigh their options carefully.
-It is important that they diagnose the needs
and prescribe the combination that best
suits the students and institution’s needs.

III- Intellectual and Practical Criteria
for Successful Curriculum Integration
by David B. Ackerman

This chapter aims at providing a framework
for curriculum developers deliberating over
whether to adopt a curriculum integration
approach for some portion of their
instructional program. The framework
consists of two questions and some criteria
that can be used to answer them:
- Does it make intellectual sense to
integrate certain parts of the curriculum?
- Does it make practical sense, all things
considered?

To answer these questions, curriculum
developers need to test the interdisciplinary
option against a set of conditions or criteria,
among which is that knowledge gained in one
subject strengthens the understanding of
concepts in other subjects. Among possible
pragmatic criteria are the anticipated attitudes
of key individuals – teachers, parents, and
the principal – toward what may be regarded
as an atypical organization. Yet, it is not
always sensible to interconnect disparate
pieces of the curriculum.

III.1. Intellectual Criteria
We saw in Chapter 1, in the case of the
potpourri problem, that students are offered a
sampling of related experiences from different
disciplines, but are not guided to see how
these chunks of knowledge are coherent.
With the polarity problem, curriculum designers
adopt an antidisciplinary attitude overlooking
vital discipline-based concepts. Before
producing a curriculum, the developers need to
take into account four criteria that are a series
of tests that guide the team’s deliberation.

III.1.1. Validity within the Disciplines
One or more subject among the proposed
interdisciplinary themes might not be
relevant to the school’s program over a
given period of time. However, each subject
should devote a portion of time to the
interdisciplinary project. Validity within the
disciplines requires teachers from each
discipline to verify that the identified
concepts are related to their subjects.

III.1.2. Validity for the Disciplines

Some concepts might be relevant to two or
more subjects, so it would be wiser not to
integrate them in the same multidisciplinary
unit. By comparing a concept from one
subject to an analogous one from the other,
the student will have the chance to learn
these two concepts better. This leads us to
the concept of evidence.

(1) Science teachers talk to their students about
the empirical data that underlie textbook
knowledge; (2) History teachers acknowledge the
importance of archival records; (3) Language
teachers urge their class for textual evidence; and
(4) Geometry teachers ask their students
“Beginning with this axiom what can we prove?”
The discipline-centered approach takes little
notice of the evidence in the curricula of these
four subjects. Students should be able to compare
and contrast the nature of evidence across the
curriculum. There is a belief that students might
better grasp the distinctive features of knowledge
thanks to a mere juxtaposition of the perspectives
of the different disciplines.

The discipline-centered approach takes little
notice of the evidence in the curricula of
these four subjects.
Students should be able to compare and
contrast the nature of evidence across the
curriculum.
There is a belief that students might better
grasp the distinctive features of knowledge
thanks to a mere juxtaposition of the
perspectives of the different disciplines.

III.1.3. Validity beyond the Disciplines
Valid curriculum integration assembles a
number of parts from different subjects for a
better learning. An integrated curriculum
has besides the disciplinary parts a hub to
which it is connected: we call it here
evidence.
Power will derive from the interplay of
disciplines in an attempt to illuminate
complex phenomena. Students learn the
usual concepts but also get a
metaconceptual bonus, a kind of cross-
cutting idea that may be of great value.

III.1.4. Contribution to Greater Outcomes
Interdisciplinary education shapes the learners’
overall approach to knowledge, fostering a more
flexible thinking, and a better understanding of
their own limitations. Designers shall look forward
to build into their instructional plans explicit
identification, modeling, and discussion of the
desired habits of mind, to apply concepts beyond
the scope of the course. Before adopting an
interdisciplinary curriculum, it is legitimate to
assess its potential contribution to the
development of the desirable intellectual
development of the students.

III-2- Practical Criteria
III.2.1. Nuts and Bolts
The three essential practical considerations are:
time, budget, and schedule.
a- Time is important because designers need to
conduct research, to write new tests or modify the
existing ones. Time is also needed for
communication and coordination among
colleagues during and after planning.
b- To support all this, budget is needed. Designing
material from scratch is a very expensive option
when commercial materials are not available.
c- The schedule is an important factor. Teachers
and students should be available for each other
as required by the design of the course.

III.2.2. Political Support
Political support is essential because
interdisciplinary education is not the
traditional way of doing things in schools.
Sometimes, hostile colleagues might
discourage designers through peer
pressure. Parents may also prevent their
own children from participating in
interdisciplinary programs.
A determined support-building effort is
needed to launch a program especially
through community and political support.

III.2.3. Personal Concern

When teachers decide to venture into the
interdisciplinary realm, they should expect a
lot of pressure and anxiety because of
resistance from others. Being involved in an
interdisciplinary team, might be highly
rewarding and bring about a lot of
stimulation; yet, it could be a source of
vexation if the others feel that their territory
is compromised.

Conclusion
Curriculum integration has high rhetorical
appeal and presents a lot of challenges,
especially when seen as the counterpart of
subject-based curricula. The intellectual
and practical criteria presented in this
chapter can be used as a series of tests for
cross-disciplinary considerations, and to
revise the ideas that have some potential.
With its promise to unify knowledge and
modes of understanding, interdisciplinary
education presents the summit of
curriculum development.

Interdisciplinary curriculum

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to Interdisciplinary curriculum

Interdisciplinary curriculum