I am now able to see how integrated curriculum can actually heighten students awareness of the scope and depth of each individual subject. This awareness comes from the explicit skill and ability to make meaningful connections between subjects and between the subject and daily life. Integrated units and curriculum allow for broader themed projects or community based projects, for example, which give students immediate use for the skills and knowledge acquired in a method that connects to them personally. This immediate tangible knowledge can assist with the inevitable question, "Ms. Taylor when am I ever going to use this in real life?"
In order to find the common themes and threads that can relevantly link material to practice comes from careful consideration and brainstorming on the part of the collaborating educators. I will insert another verbatim Chapter 5 quote here;
"Typically, there may be territorial conflict about what knowledge and skills are front and centre. The backward design process facilitates a process where all collaborators can find a substantive place for their subject areas by providing a way to discover what is common across them" (Drake, Reid & Kolohan 2014).
Changing the educator territorial and subject specific niches from a rigid to an interchangeable one can impact the approach students take to school work. Collaborative learning that happens at all levels of learning and education (curriculum development, teacher training, daily classroom teaching and daily classroom learning) will permeate and trickle through to daily learning routines.
I would like to clarify that the emphasis placed on the wording of Chapter Five "yet" is meant to highlight and examine educational discourse for the purposes of refining my own practice. It was not meant as a negative critique of the literature.
ReplyDelete