Science
Updated: Feb 2000
 |
|
| Science, Mathematics & Technology Case Studies of Integrated Teaching Issues Arising from Integrated Practice Interviews with teachers from the 16 schools raised several issues about integration including the process of getting started, implications for teachers, structural implications, implications for students and the breakdown of departmental structure. Each of these issues is discussed below.
  Teachers mentioned several factors that helped initiate the process of integration. Some of these factors included prior planning involving all participating teachers. This was said to create a collective vision and promote collegiality. The importance of administrative support from people like the principal and Education Department personnel was mentioned as an important factor for motivating change. Further still, one principal felt that the school philosophy needed to embrace the notion of integration. A care ethos was regarded by some teachers at one school as a positive factor enabling the process of integration, because such an approach to schooling encouraged better relationships between students and teachers and promoted the holistic education of individual students. Teachers felt it was important to identify those student outcomes that could be integrated across the learning areas. Professional development was regarded highly by teachers who had the opportunity to visit other schools where integrated approaches had been used.
Teachers felt that commitment and passion were necessary to integrate across learning areas. The willingness to take risks also was mentioned as a desired quality because of the need for teachers to leave behind their time-honoured practices, often established over long teaching careers. The ability to work effectively in teams was considered to be important for integration especially in high school situations because of the necessity to work closely with teachers from other learning areas. Being recruited into a school knowing that integration was something that would be encountered was said to be an advantage because teachers knew what they were in for. Teaching experience in integrated situations and an intimate knowledge of the outcome statements also were recognised as factors that enabled integration. One principal noted that successful integration requires teachers to manage a complex and delicate balance between knowing their own learning area deeply and knowing the specifics and commonalities between the different learning areas. Teachers felt that they benefited by working in integrated environments because they could choose content to motivate and interest their students. Integration was an economical way of achieving outcomes, it helped them to co-operate and develop professionally and they enjoyed working with teachers from other learning areas. Some teachers expressed frustration at the slow process of implementing integrated practices, the trial and error nature of the task and the increased work-load on top of their normal teaching duties. These factors sometimes led to tiredness and disillusionment, especially for those teachers in their first year of teaching.
Ongoing collaborative planning time built into the school timetable was probably the most frequently mentioned factor necessary to enable successful integration. A designated area where teachers could meet to discuss integrated approaches was also highly recommended. A flexible timetable allowed teachers to take students on excursions, to team teach, and swap, extend, or shorten lessons when necessary to allow for more integrated practices. Sharing materials with other schools, subject departments or learning communities and designating responsibilities to individuals in teaching teams was said to help reduce the heavy workload. Principals from two country schools with high numbers of new teachers each year highlighted the importance of providing induction sessions to orientate the new staff to integrated curriculum approaches.
Teachers noted several advantages of integration for their students. The contextualised nature of problem-solving was regarded highly as a benefit of integration, especially by mathematics teachers. Some teachers noticed their students had a better understanding of mathematics and science concepts when they had applied their knowledge to a practical task in technology and, conversely, the technology products were said to be of a better quality when the students were able to use mathematics and science skills and knowledge to improve their designs. Teachers commented that they also appreciated the worldly application of the concepts. According to some of the teachers, working in an integrated situation meant that students could see the common threads between the separate learning areas and that they could better transfer knowledge and skills between subjects. Teachers were able to reinforce similar ideas in different teaching contexts and they could also come to a consensus on how to teach common concepts. Other benefits for students working in an integrated environment were noted by teachers including the enhancement of group working skills and creativity, increased co-operation and collaborative learning, successful behaviour modification in some students, increased levels of responsibility in their own work and the increase of mentoring between students of different ages. Difficulties for students were that some lacked the ability to plan and manage their time effectively for long-term integrated projects, that some students didn't enjoy the work and that other students didn't work hard enough to accomplish the tasks that had been set.
Traditional Subject Departments The most frequently mentioned issues related to integrated teaching practice were associated with traditional subject departmental structure in high schools. When working in integrated teaching teams, teachers often missed the specialist professional support of the traditional subject departmental groupings. These teachers often found themselves working outside their subject speciality. Many expressed a lack of confidence in their ability to teach outside their subject speciality and they raised concerns about the implications for student learning. The teachers in one primary school were concerned about integration because they valued science, mathematics and technology as different subjects with different orientations including processes, concepts, conventions and attitudes. The teachers were concerned that teaching in an integrated way might lead to science, mathematics and technology becoming an amorphous mass. They explained that teachers needed to be explicit and clear about what they were teaching in each lesson, what outcomes were to be achieved and to which learning area these outcomes applied. They suggested that, firstly, there is a need to attend to specific outcomes and, secondly, richness of the learning experience comes from the application and contextualisation through integration. High school teachers, especially those with a mathematics background, expressed concern at the heterogeneous nature of integrated classes and the difficulty of changing from the traditional arrangement where classes are streamed into homogeneous ability level groups. Some high school science teachers felt that, before integration was attempted, it was necessary for students to have basic content courses in subjects like chemistry. Other teachers lamented that the integration seemed contrived and imposed and therefore the links between the subject areas were superficial and unrealistic.
| |
