Integrated Curriculum Practice: An Inclusive and Creative Practice (original) (raw)

ACADEMIA | Letters

Integrated Curriculum Practice: An Inclusive and Creative Practice

Madan Rijal, Kathmandu University

Different Curriculum Images and our Recent Curriculum Practice

While defining or explaining the curriculum, different scholars or academicians have been using different metaphors or images to describe their understanding of it in their best manner. Some of the metaphors such as - curriculum as cooking, curriculum as traveling, curriculum as dancing, curriculum as art and so many others are found to be in use. Amid all these curriculum metaphors, Schubert (1986) also has presented eight different curriculum images/metaphors which are much renowned in the educational research field. The eight different curriculum metaphors which Schubert has presented are - curriculum as content or subject matter, curriculum as experience, curriculum as currere, curriculum as agenda for social reconstruction, curriculum as a program of planned activities, curriculum as intended learning outcomes, curriculum as cultural reproduction and curriculum as discrete tasks and concepts.

If we try to see the resemblance of our prevailing curriculum document and practice with these eight curriculum images then a distinct picture can be seen. This picture indicates that our curriculum image is very much aligned with two metaphors of the curriculum. They are - curriculum as content or subject matter and curriculum as cultural reproduction. According to these images, knowledge is a static body that cannot be created but should be transmitted through the compartmentalized approach or separate subject approach (Beane, 1995). Taking this definition and looking into our pedagogical practices then it seems that our practices are largely based on instrumental approach or technical interest guided (Habermas,1972). In such

a learning environment, the teacher acts as the ‘sage on the stage, takes complete control of the learning program being an authoritarian person. In other part, students act as passive recipients of those transmitted knowledge or information. Learners’ viewpoints, experiences, and consents are not taken into count but they are compelled to rote learning in the traditional nature of schooling. In this regard, knowledge, and information are forced to reproduce rather than generate by connecting them with real-life complex and challenging situations.

Moreover, our recent curriculum practices give priority to the industrial curriculum structure and delivery model which seems to be lacking credibility and the capacity to generate various higher-level competencies such as - critical thinking, effective communication, technological skills, and complex problem-solving skills, and others (Spady & Marshall, 1991). Considering the future as a given thing, students are taught through a compartmentalized and sit-for-test approach. Even the issues of future-driven exit outcomes are rarely been addressed.

Integrated Curriculum: Vision of Future Curriculum

Being critical on the compartmentalized or separate subject curriculum does not mean that the prevailing curriculum is a complete waste. Rather my argument is about minimizing the existing isolated or separated disciplinary approach in pedagogical practices. It is about valuing the experiences and opinions of the learners in real-life contexts. Essentially, I am emphasizing using an integrated curriculum approach in our pedagogical practices which are not subjectcentric like - Mathematics, Science, English, Social Studies, and others but theme-centric where different disciplines work in a complementary manner. It is because our real-life situations are complex. People need more than one disciplinary collaboration for solving those challenging situations.

While discussing curriculum integration, we need to start our journey from our assumptions and belief about knowledge. Our traditional outcome-based education was focused on the objective nature of knowledge and the compartmentalized approach in pedagogical practices. It had assumed that the future is given. In this regard, the emphasis was on making our learners ready inside the four walls of the classroom with all the compartmentalized knowledge. Schools were considered the only place where knowledge can be achieved. In this way, a kind of top-down version of the curriculum has been practicing to date. The focus has been on ‘ends’ rather than ‘means’.

While reducing the hegemony of prevailing, century-old, industrial curriculum structure, instruction models, and assessment practices, the introduction of the integrated curriculum in our practice can be an essential step towards transformational outcome-based education. The integrated curriculum is not a simple organization of teaching content or lessons rather it

is about creating various real-life situations as themes and encouraging learners to involve in knowledge creation through solving those real-life problems. The curriculum that I envision for my classroom would have mainly three key features. They are - valuing and supporting the individual differences as well as experiences of the learners (Gardner, 1991), focusing on learning process ‘means’ rather than end product orientation ‘end’ (Beane, 1995) and acquiring different transdisciplinary skills such as - critical and creative thinking, personal and social capabilities, ethical understanding and intercultural understanding - for engaging in building productive, sustainable and just society (Taylor & Taylor, 2019). In this regard, the integrated curriculum which I am envisioning for my pedagogical practices would be highly aligned towards the curriculum images namely - curriculum as experience, curriculum as agenda for social reconstruction, and curriculum as currere.

The incorporation of the curriculum images - curriculum as experience, curriculum as an agenda for social reconstruction, and curriculum as currere will help me to challenge the prevailing curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices. Also, it will help me to reflect and re/examine socio-cultural practices and various disempowering factors that are creating disciplinary egocentrism in pedagogical practices (Conner et al., 2015). After this critical stance, my curriculum focus will be on equipping all the learners with the knowledge, competence, and orientations that are needed for success after they leave school. And I am very much sure that these images as the foundational base for my integrated curriculum help me to achieve these goals at an optimum level. In this way, the new curriculum approach will help me critically reflect on various assumptions and pedagogical practices. Also, I will help me to come out from the illusion of aa “one-size-fits-all” approach and share the learning environment with my students.

Integrated Curriculum for 21st Century Learners

Autonomy and responsibility are the very essential characteristics of the learners. I have seen and been experiencing that my learners are somehow forced to be passive recipients of objective knowledge or information. Different content knowledge and information are transmitted to them in a compartmentalized approach with the understanding that they will need those things for the test or next year. In this dreadful scenario, the evolving integrated curriculum will help them to see the horizon by coming out from the hegemony of an isolated disciplinary approach. According to Beane (1995), the central focus of the integrated curriculum is the search for self and social meaning. In this regard, the new integrated curriculum will help my students in two very essential aspects. One, it will help learners understand oneself that means helps to ponder into their strength and limitations. Second, it will help in taking a

critical stance about ongoing socio-cultural practices. Further, it will be helpful for learners to have a glocal (global + local) (Luitel, 2013) understanding of the various subject matters which will lead them to put their views and opinions among others and create knowledge through collaboration and cooperation in real-life contexts.

Moreover, differ from isolated disciplinary approach, the integrated curriculum will create a diverse space for individual differences where learners will be encouraged to explore and take a critical stance about the various subject matter. They will unpack their ideas, share their experiences, critically assess their practices, raise their voices against different hegemonic practices and give their opinion for creating a socially just and meaningful practices. Hence, through such practices our connected learners will be empowered in the connected world to engage themselves in rich collaborative environment and create knowledge (An, 2020). These thematic educational practices under integrated curriculum will be helpful for learners in acquiring various transversal skills which are the ultimate goal of our education (Larraz, 2017).

Discussion and Implication

The ongoing practice of compartmentalized or separate subject curriculum has been demoralized in different times and contexts due to its rigid structure, process and assessment system. The curriculum instruction, pedagogical procedures and assessment practices are strict and rigid in nature. Not being totally against but some changes are seemed to be essential in our educational practices with respect to the upgrowing and developing world. The world is growing fast towards science and technology but the prevailing curriculum is century old and serving through an industrial approach in knowledge reproduction largely rather than encouraging learners to create through their experiences and envisions. In this regard, our learners are found to be ill-skilled to use their classroom compartmentalized knowledge in their reallife situations. Their responses to study different subjects would be test-oriented or need for next year’s study. It is true that once the technical approach was the need of the industrial society and it would not be wrong to say that curriculum as subject matter or content, cultural reproduction, or intended learning outcomes were the appropriate images of our curriculum. It was the beginning of formal education so these concepts were acceptable. But arriving at this time, things have been changed and is changing rapidly. At present, though those three images of the curriculum are necessary but insufficient and limited to prepare our learners for this new information and technology age. In this regard, the prevailing traditional compartmentalized curriculum approach needs to be transformed into an integrated curriculum approach where knowledge construction is considered not only within the constraints of four

Academia Letters, August 2021 ©2021 by the author — Open Access — Distributed under CC BY 4.0
Corresponding Author: Madan Rijal, madan@kusoed.edu.np
Citation: Rijal, M. (2021). Integrated Curriculum Practice: An Inclusive and Creative Practice. Academia Letters, Article 3324. https://doi.org/10.20935/AL3324.

walls of the classroom or school, through the accumulation of objective knowledge in an authoritarian environment but valuing the learners’ prior experiences, their active engagement and shared understanding in maker space. So that through such involvement, each learner will get enough opportunity to equip themselves with various skills (Hendriana, 2017) and make them perpetual real-life complex problem solvers through creative and critical reflective approach (Larrivee, 2000) besides learning for the sake of achieving good grades in exams.

References

An, S. (2020). The impact of STEAM integration on preservice teachers’ disposition and knowledge. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning.

Beane, J. A. (1995). Curriculum integration and the disciplines of knowledge. The Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8), 616-622.

Connor, A., Karmokar, S., & Whittington, C. (2015). From STEM to STEAM: Strategies for enhancing engineering & technology education.

Gardner, H. (1991). Intelligence in seven steps. Quarterly Journal. New Horizon.(on-line), Available: http://www. newhorizens.org.

Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interests. London: Heinemann Educational.
Hendriana, H. (2017). Teachers’ hard and soft skills in innovative teaching of mathematics. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 15(2), 145-150.

Larraz, N., Vázquez, S., & Liesa, M. (2017). Transversal skills development through cooperative learning. Training teachers for the future. On the horizon.

Larrivee, B. (2000). Transforming teaching practice: Becoming the critically reflective teacher. Reflective practice, 1(3), 293-307.

Luitel, B. C. (2013). Mathematics as an im/pure knowledge system: Symbiosis,(w) holism and synergy in mathematics education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(1), 65-87.

Schubert, W. H. (1986). Images of the curriculum. Portrayal: curriculum field. Curriculum: perspective, paradigm, and possibility, 25-35.

Spady, W. G., & Marshall, K. J. (1991). Beyond Traditional Outcome-Based Education.

Educational leadership, 49(2), 67-72.

Taylor, P. C., & Taylor, E. (2019). Transformative STEAM Education for Sustainable Development. In Empowering Science and Mathematics for Global Competitiveness: Proceedings of the Science and Mathematics International Conference (SMIC 2018), November 2-4, 2018, Jakarta, Indonesia (Vol. 125). CRC Press.

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.