What creates my hands-in-the-air hubris that THIS kind of integration has been the answer the whole time goes back to my private school experiences and my biology content area sensitivities. I had an integrated English and social studies class through the ninth grade. We wrote essays. And we wrote more essays. And we wrote essays until we were so good that by the time we matriculated to 11th and 12th grade some of us got in trouble for suspected plagiarism. Beyond that, however, I have to say that this last century's belief in compartmentalized specialization has done nothing to change how the human brain is, essentially, an integrationalist organ. Humans are social creatures; young humans are motivated by the community in which they exist. Drowning young minds and spirits in schools > 1000 people while introducing them to the "cubicle nature" of modern life--where subjects are discretely walled off--just isn't working. I find the nature of the PLC initiative a very hopeful prospect for staunching the loss of all that teenage energy and brilliance that we need as a society. We live in an imperfect world. Our attempts, by nature, are imperfect. But a more "wholistic" view of public education can be a nice, bright puncture-hole in a darkened curtain.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Everything Old is New Again (on Amy Galloway's visit and PLC)
Even from my "newbie" standpoint at the edge of Alaska's educational system, there are some current initiatives that make me want to jump up-and-down while hollering both "Hurray!" and "Well. . .DUH!!" Listening to Amy Galloway's talk about integrating English and social studies inspired that feeling. Galloway (and Sprankle) absolutely deserve accolades for everything about their program, especially their chutzpah in seizing the opportunity to build on a powerful, pre-existing professional synergy. We all should aspire to ask for the chance to go to the next level. It's professional self-advocacy. Don't wait to get tapped, just go for it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
First, thanks for starting the ball rolling...I'm impressed you think so clearly at 5:41 in the morning! I'm sorry that Beth could not be there last night due to a schedule conflict, but she is every bit as energetic and creative as Amy...which I'm sure you surmised by the presentation. A huge part of their success is based on the fact that they started this themselves, on their own initiative. Team teaching can be a delicate balance of egos and philosophies, and forced entry into this realm often ends in disaster. Bottom line, though, as you point out, teaching in a vacuum just doesn't make sense. Our brains function much better when things are in appropriate contexts. Even if we are not working with others in our school settings to accomplish this, we can each work toward this individually by designing lessons that incorporate other disciplines. Of course, the expertise of other teachers is a nice touch, but not absolutely necessary as a first step. And, as you also point out, the fact that their students write, and write, and write some more is a focal point in their efforts. I'm sure data would support their successes in time...and the reality is that programs such as this often sink or swim on gathered evidence. For my money, their popularity with students while maintaining rigor and high standards speaks for itself.
I agree that team teaching just makes sense; integrating curriculum eliminates duplication of work by students and provides more authentic opportunities for learning and assessment. The concept of students learning to be better thinkers as a result of more intensive assignments is something I’ve already been working with this year. I started my year in full force, only to realize that after three weeks, I had given myself a seemingly insurmountable workload of grading, without a corresponding increase in student learning. Now, I am measuring more carefully the value of each assignment and lesson in order to maximize the impact on students.
Amy’s practice of teaching based on the analytical framework makes sense and is something I can incorporate into my American Literature course. It provides a strong core of topics that are applicable to the literature we cover over the course of the year, while tying them to key social-political ideals. While we do not have block English and American History courses at Juneau-Douglas high school, I believe I could approach the social studies department about possible collaboration on key units. We have the structure in place that would allow for teaming, but the time is currently dedicated to our Professional Learning Communities, which are focused on other topics at this time. At the semester I can suggest that teaming between disciplines be included as part of those groups.
It was exciting to hear of a successful program based on an interdisciplinary approach here in Alaska. My school district has been focused on looking to the Lower 48 for successful programs with creative approaches to instruction. They should be looking North instead.
One of the difficulties I faced when trying to create interdisciplinary units centered around student schedules. Because Amy and Beth have a blocked class, they share all the students in the period. Often schedules allow only partial sharing, which means a large percentage of the class cannot benefit from the shared teaching. This often discourages the teamed teaching approach.
Post a Comment