Science
Updated: Feb 2000
 |
|
|
Science, Mathematics & Technology
Introduction
  The Integration of Science, Mathematics & Technology in the Middle Years of Schooling In Australia, as in many other parts of the world, children enter high school around 12 years of age after several years of primary schooling. Typically, transition is marked by several changes for students, from a relaxed to a highly discipline-based organisation of content, and from one teacher teaching in the same classroom to an environment where students are taught by many teachers in many classrooms. These curricular and structural changes impact on the teacher-student relationship and make the middle years of school potentially stressful and alienating and hence of considerable educational concern (Cormack, 1996; Hargreaves, Earl & Ryan, 1996; Speering & Rennie, 1996). One of the most contested areas of middle schooling is the nature of the curriculum (Cumming, 1993). A multitude of approaches have been proposed including discrete subjects and disciplines (Fleming, 1993), thematic approaches to the teaching and learning of content and skills (Drake, 1991; McDonald & Czerniak, 1994), and an emphasis on local community problems (Tchudi, 1993; Williams & Reynolds, 1993). By far the loudest voice, however, comes from those advocating a middle school curriculum which is relevant, negotiated and integrated (Cumming, 1996; Eyers, 1992; Schools Council, 1993). The purpose of this booklet is to examine integrated teaching in the middle school years in the state of Western Australia with a particular focus on integration of science, mathematics and technology.
Bean (1991) presents an evocative analogy for traditional school structures where the curriculum is organised around discrete disciplines: Given a pile of jigsaw puzzle pieces and told to put them together, no doubt we would ask to see the picture they make. It is the picture, after all, that gives meaning to the puzzle and assures us that the pieces fit together, that none are missing and that there are no extras. Without the picture, we probably wouldn't want to bother with the puzzle.... To students, the typical curriculum presents an endless array of facts and skills that are unconnected, fragmented, and disjointed. That they might be connected or lead toward some whole picture is a matter that must be taken on faith by young people (p. 9).Traditional subject disciplines, according to Bean (1991), are territorial spaces carved out by academic scholars for their own purposes (p. 9), their boundaries limiting student access to broader meanings. In order to provide a curriculum that motivates students, Bean advocates addressing real life questions of interest to them through an integrated curriculum that promotes wholeness and unity rather than separation and fragmentation. Several authors have classified integrated teaching practice into various models, stages and continua, with a variety of associated terminology. Fogarty (1991), for example, proposed ten models of integration, ranging from the traditional fragmented model to those that connect, sequence, nest, share, web, thread, integrate, network or immerse the learner in curricular integration. Reflecting on the experience of a team of teachers who worked with her on an integrated project, Drake (1991) describes a progression in the process of curriculum development through multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches. Marsh (1993) suggests that the various forms of curriculum integration can be considered as a continuum beginning with discipline-based options with separate subjects taught at different times. The first step towards integration is parallel-disciplines where content is sequenced to correspond with related content in other disciplines. Marsh then describes multi-disciplinary thematic approaches where the various subjects contribute to a central theme and interdisciplinary concepts and topics where discipline concepts are chosen because of their direct relevance to the theme. Internal orientation encompasses activities which are jointly planned and implemented by students and teachers and the final variation of curriculum integration on the continuum is whole school integration which involves a total transformation of the learning environment as practiced in Waldorf schools (Barnes, 1991). Panaritis (1995) advises that teachers should be careful not to be driven by models such as those proposed above because the underlying distinctions are often either fundamentally irrelevant or hopelessly arcane (p. 627). Panaritis suggests that it is demoralising for teachers to have their efforts classified as merely parallel or not truly interdisciplinary (p. 627). Another criticism comes from Case (1994), who warns that policies advocating curriculum integration are little more than slogans. The kinds of programs which result can be ill-conceived and disconnected from real academic subjects (Brophy & Alleman, 1991). There is conflicting evidence about the success of integrated programs. According to Vars (1991), since the 1940s more than 80 normative or comparative studies have reported that students in various forms of integrated programs performed better, or as well, on standardised achievement tests than students enrolled in separate subjects. Marsh (1993) tracked some of the major research studies on integration from the USA, the UK and Asia over the past half century and concluded that although the earlier studies gave the impression that curriculum integration had many positive elements over single discipline teaching, there is a dearth of evidence of a positive or negative nature over recent years (p. ii). While some empirical studies have shown that students can learn science and mathematics concepts in an integrated manner (Richie & Hampson, 1996; Roth, 1993), there also is evidence that some students have difficulty in grasping the content of integrated courses (Richie & Hampson, 1996; Wicklein & Schell, 1997). Internationally, the past decade has seen several influential documents advocating integration of science, mathematics, technology and other content areas. In the USA, Science for All Americans (Rutherford & Ahlgren, 1990), Everybody Counts (National Research Council, 1989), Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics (National Council for Teachers of Mathematics, 1989), and the National Science Education Standards (National Research Council, 1996) all stress the interrelatedness of mathematics and science and the implications for curriculum and instruction (Lonning & DeFranco, 1994). Several other documents discuss the natural relationship between science, mathematics and technology and the contextual base that technology can provide for the learning of science and mathematics (Hamm, 1992; LaPorte & Sanders, 1993; Sanders, 1994; Sinn, Walthour & Haren, 1995). In the United Kingdom, the National Curriculum Council distinguishes cross curricular elements in terms of dimensions, skills and themes (Nixon, 1991). Similar trends are evident in Australia, for example, in the recently published Curriculum Framework for Western Australia (Curriculum Council of Western Australia, 1998). The Western Australian framework describes science, mathematics and technology and enterprise as three of eight separate learning areas and advocates an integrated approach to curriculum delivery. While eight learning areas have been identified, knowledge, skills, understandings, values and attitudes should be integrated across all learning areas. Students should be given frequent opportunities to see the connections between different areas of knowledge and endeavour. They should be encouraged to understand the contingency of any division of knowledge into learning areas, subjects or other categories, and to appreciate the interconnectedness of all knowledge and the indissoluble relationship between knowledge and values (Curriculum Council of Western Australia, 1998, p. 27). While the new Western Australian framework exhorts teachers to teach in a more integrated way, the culture of the middle years of schooling in this State remains predominantly discipline-based in high schools and to some extent in the upper years primary schools. There are, however, some interesting exceptions - schools which have managed to incorporate aspects of integration into their programs. It is these exceptions which form the focus of this booklet of integrated teaching of science, mathematics and technology in Western Australian classrooms in Years 6-9.
| |
