|
|
 |
|
|
|
Home > Features > Interdisciplinarity in K-16 Education
|
Interdisciplinarity in K-16 Education
|
|
| |
by Julie Thompson Klein
Wayne State University
Detroit, Michigan
|
|
| | AP Central's Lawrence Charap spoke with Julie Thompson Klein, editor of Interdisciplinary Education in K-12 and College: A Foundation for K-16 Dialogue (New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 2002).
A Move Toward Integrative Study
In your book's introduction, you discuss how the idea of "interdisciplinary" education can be interpreted in different contexts. Can you explain what you mean by this term, and what it means in practice for K-12 teachers?
At bottom, I would say that in all contexts the word "interdisciplinary" connotes the use of more than one academic discipline or school subject in order to study a theme, question, issue, or problem that is too complex to understand from one perspective alone. That basic definition would hold up across the different design models, which create greater or lesser degrees of integration for different purposes.
Still, one of the challenges that I faced in the book was the fact that the term "interdisciplinary" had parallel but not always identical histories in K-12 and college. I thus sought to sort through the dense thicket of information in the K-12 and college literature to provide basic definitions that acknowledge similarities while not ignoring differences.
The term "integration" is more common in K-12, because the academic disciplines assume a more defined and customary form in high school and even more so in college. Yet, even "integration" always attempts to bring together different elements for a purpose or task that
is greater than any one contribution can meet. In each case -- "interdisciplinary" and "integration" -- the objective will be more than simply transmitting what we know in a particular discipline or subject. Specialized knowledge and information will be put to "use" in a larger context.
What is the status of interdisciplinary education in college as opposed to K-12 education? What kinds of implications does this difference have for how subjects should be taught
in K-12?
There is a heightened presence of interdisciplinarity and greater diversity of forms in college, because that is the level at which new research knowledge is produced. It thus often enters the curriculum sooner at that level. Since students in AP classes are college-bound, it is important for teachers in both K-12 and college to be alert to the points where their interests intersect.
In her contribution to the book, Beth Casey calls for an interdisciplinary "pre-culture" that enables students to move toward integrative study as they progress along the continuum of school and college. Teachers at all levels should be aware of students' prior experiences with integrative learning and vice versa, with expectations at later points in all aspects of education, from learning communities and integrative pedagogies to new interdisciplinary fields. Given that, as Joan Fiscella and Stacey Kimmel report in my book Interdisciplinary Education: A Guide to Resources (1999), the "contemporary life" of disciplines and school subjects is a major topic of discussion in the K-12 and college literatures on interdisciplinarity, it also behooves all teachers, at all levels, to stay on top of the best practices in their subjects/disciplines.
As mentioned in the introduction to Interdisciplinary Education in K-12 and College, educators are keenly aware that their areas have changed since they were in college and even over the course of their careers. The knowledge from interdisciplinary fields is entering classrooms in the form of new topics and new foci. For many educators, the motivation for changing the curriculum is simply to keep up with these changes. The heightened problem-focus of the curriculum is an added catalyst for interdisciplinary approaches. In K-12, the demand is reinforced by state mandates to include problems of drug use, AIDS prevention, sex education, and family life in the curriculum.
How has the concept of interdisciplinary education been affected by the changes
now taking place in the educational system? How has it been affected by, for example,
the movement for teaching standards?
The movement for teaching standards creates impediments at the same time that it invites new dialog between K-12 and college around the best assessment practices. New discipline-based content standards and some state mandates for K-12 reinforce the authority of disciplines. At the same time, national reports in all areas call for greater inclusion of interdisciplinary frameworks, integrative and collaborative skills, and teaching "big ideas." Thinking about assessment has also changed, with widening recognition that standardized tests alone cannot do the job. National and local instruments are being combined, along with qualitative and quantitative approaches.
The definition of effective and thoughtful learning is also being widely linked with a range of performances that demonstrate understanding, not recognition and recall. Contrary to popular, and erroneous, belief, interdisciplinary approaches do not sidestep the importance of having adequate knowledge and information from pertinent disciplines/subjects. Many of the best practices in K-12 and college literature combine conventional measures with performance-based assessment, including portfolios. Some of the major models combine discipline-based concepts and skills with common learning skills, concepts, and attitudes that appear across multiple content areas. Discipline-based educators gain measurable results of content acquisition as well as evidence of students' ability to make connections and to think critically and creatively for themselves.
As more teachers use a results-oriented approach to instruction that emphasizes learning, Rebecca Burns predicts in her contribution to the book, they will use a wider variety of assessment methods. They will make instructional decisions based on student needs and assessment data. They will move away from teacher-dominated mimetic instructional methods, curricula limited to facts and information, segregation of disciplines, and separation of school learning from applications. With assessment moving to center stage in educational reform, John Clarke adds, the marriage of "performance" and "standards" is a rare opportunity for gathering around a common cause. Competing forces are being brought into confluence, forcing all parties to focus on shared goals.
Are there specific ways that AP teachers can build greater interdisciplinarity into their courses without sacrificing the need for subject depth?
The first strategy is to stay on top of the changes in their individual disciplines/subjects, in tandem with the rich resources that AP produces. A second is to make use of the literature on interdisciplinary approaches. At many points, it intersects with reforms of discipline- and subject-based education and in common curricular areas, such as American cultural studies and studies of science, technology, and the environment.
A third is mentoring. AP teachers are also among the most vital mentors in the educational system. As they model how to teach, they can be explicit about the multi- and interdisciplinary dynamics of their subjects, providing a form of on-the-job professional development. Finally, teachers can press their own professional organizations to have formal liaisons with counterpart professional groups at the college level, leading to greater exchange of information in newsletters and online discussion groups, the hosting of special K-16 sessions at annual meetings, joint projects such as producing classroom materials in common areas, and regional and local school/college partnerships.
A reviewer of your volume points out that the Advanced Placement Program, organized as it is around AP Exams in particular subject areas, has long been perceived as an obstacle to greater interdisciplinarity. Do you agree?
I disagree. In the three years that I served on the Academic Advisory Council of the College Board, I was consistently impressed by the caliber of AP courses (and related exams) that incorporate interdisciplinary developments, not just in obvious examples such as environmental studies, world history, and human geography (whose proponents on the Council spoke with conviction about their interdisciplinary character) but in the revising of biology, language and literature, and the arts.
To take just biology, here is a striking example of where new scholarship on biology's relationships with chemistry and physics is being incorporated into the way that the discipline/subject is being taught. I don't dispute that conventional categories of disciplines and subjects retard the progress of interdisciplinary approaches. However, we are often duped by the continuing use of old labels. The most exciting curriculum revisions across K-16 are incorporating -- not ignoring -- interdisciplinary changes in knowledge.
Of added note, the College Board has published two of the first books that address the topic of interdisciplinarity across K-16 in a sustained fashion -- my book and Interdisciplinary Education: A Guide to Resources. Fiscella and Kimmel provided the first comprehensive bibliography of resources across the K-16 continuum on interdisciplinary foundations; curriculum; faculty, teacher, and team development; pedagogy and student support; and administration. In the past, teachers were limited by the lack of information on how to go about designing, implementing, and evaluating interdisciplinary curricula. Fiscella and Kimmel have rendered the resources visible.
Julie Thompson Klein is professor of humanities in the Interdisciplinary Studies Program at Wayne State University. Dr. Klein is past president of the Association for Integrative Studies (AIS), the author of a number of books on interdisciplinary education, and former editor of the AIS journal Issues in Integrative Studies. |
|
|
|
|
|
Course Home Pages