When we think of integration we can think of a folding together of ideas to gain a fuller understanding of something. If we are teaching a mathematics concept such as multiplication with two digits we may bring into the learning experience some manipulatives such as concrete arrays, or a multiplcation rectangle, or base ten blocks. These concrete manipulatives help children to access the concept. They are resources or tools used in the learning experience. We are not focused on students having a deep understanding of base 10 blocks--they are tools in the process of learning, the focus being on base 10, and specifically on multiplication. These tools are thus considered to be integrated into the learning experience to enable students to have a better understanding of the concept.

Almost all of our work in integration has started with curriculum concepts. We always ask the question "what is it that we should teach, for example, Grade 3 children (specific Grade 3 children in a specific school)." Almost as soon as we ask the curriculum question we are adapting the curriculum for a specific group of children. All of the different types of integration are really different types of curriculum integration, from a simple one-subject form of integration (as in the above example) to a variety of subjects organized around a common concept.

Some people might consider integration to occur when two subject areas are taught together, focused on the same topic. For example, we might combine science and mathematics in a dinosaur study, where the science component could explore dinosaur habitats, and the mathematics component could explore the lengths and heights of dinosaur bodies. Together, these two subject areas contribute unique and specific understandings to an overall understanding of dinosaurs. If we take this two-subject area idea a bit further we can combine a variety of subject areas--even within the dinosaur unit. We can study science, mathematics, art, language, social studies, drama, etc all in connection with dinosaurs, with the intent of deepening and extending the understanding of dinosaurs. Dinosaurs is the focus of study and each activity is designed to help students understand specific dinosaur-related aspects. Each activity may well be from a different subject area, with a different conceptual focus, a different set of learning objectives, different tools or resources, and different outcomes and products. In our work with thematic units we have found that this is the type of unit most often designed by our students. If we were to storyboard the design phase of the unit planning process we would most likely see our students poring over a concept map with dinosaurs and grade 3 (for example) at the core. they would have open before them a variety of different Grade 3 curricula and they would be searching for objectives, content, and resources that fit with their unit on dinsoaurs. This concept map is somewhat like a jigsaw puzzle; the students want to fit into the puzzle as many different subject area pieces as possible; they want variety in content and they want variety in teaching approaches, learning experiences, and assessment. This type of unit is certainly thematic, addressing curricula at the appropriate level, and undoubtedly the children will learn something about dinosaurs; after all dinosaurs are the focus of study. BUT, the different subject area concepts and the entire unit is probably not designed in a conceptually-integrated manner. We will come to conceptual integration a little later.

Sometimes the connection between subject areas is not so obvious. A pumpkin display in the middle of a room might signify that pumpkins are being studied. This display may be accompanied by pumpkin drawings, pumpkin seed roasting, pumpkin soup, jack-o-lanterns, and so on, but the pumpkin may not in itself be the focus of study. It is the excuse for different classroom activities associated with pumpkins. The pumpkin thus becomes an object around which different activities occur.

Sometimes our students are involved in designing a celebration. They form groups and select a celebration of the world (e.g., Chinese New Year). They explore all aspects of this celebration (music, art, dress, food, social activities, dance, and so on) and then they design a celebration for their class at the university. During the celebration the class experience the entire celebration as an event. They learn a dance, taste the food, create artwork, sing, and generally learn quite a bit about the people, their customs, their art and so on. This becomes for the students a holistic event-oriented experience. All of the activities integrate into a whole to demonstrate the experience. These experiences are always debriefed and it is truly amazing how much the class learns about the celebration from the variety of experiences that they have engaged in.

We have been involved over the past 5 years in developing conceptual units. These units are of course also addressing the curriculum. However, they differ from the above dinosaur unit. These conceptual units take a single or closely connected concepts and employ carefully crafted activities, each of which extends the same concept (or related concepts). By the end of the unit the students have a very deep and solid understanding of that concept. We have designed such units for (1) grids and coordinates, (2) pattern, (3) symmetry. All of these units have been designed by us, first for our preservice teachers, and then, with their input, for children in schools. they have been thoroughly field-tested and we have found that both our preservice teachers and the children have been amazed at how much they know about the concept by the end of the unit.

More recently we have been involved in exploring and determining the best way to enable our preservice teachers to experience technology in appropriate child-centred, curriculum-related ways. Again, we must begin with the curriculum and the children who will be advantaged or disadvantaged by the form and use of technology in learning. As teachers we can plan quite sophisticated teacher-directed technology experiences, which will have learning impact, perhaps more so than straight lecturing would. But how can we design and employ rich technology experiences where children have hands-on learning through the technology. The technology, like the manipulatives in the first example, are simply tools or resources to enable learning. Just how can we as teachers structure a learning environment to maximize the potential learning impact from the technology, while at the same time rendering that technology invisible. We do not want our preservice teachers or the children they will teach to focus on and learn about the technology. We want them to use it to learn with and through and we want them to use it as they need it for their specific learning goals.

Back to Integration homepage