Defining the Difference: Comparing Integrated and Traditional Single-Subject Lessons |
| |
| Authors: | Ksenia S Zhbanova Audrey C Rule Sarah E Montgomery Lynn E Nielsen |
| |
| Institution: | (1) Department of Curriculum and Instruction, 618 Schindler Education Center, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa 50614-0606, USA |
| |
| Abstract: | Early childhood curricula should be authentic and child-centered, however, many teachers still rely on direct instruction
lessons. To better define how an integrated curriculum meets the needs of students, this study examined teacher talk and actions
during instructional activities with first and second graders under two conditions: (1) subject-integrated social studies
lessons of an integrated curriculum unit (experimental condition); and (2) single subject-focused mathematics lessons of a
traditional separate subject curriculum (control condition). The mixed-methods study sought to define and compare characteristics
of both curriculum approaches. Fourteen hours of observations were collected in each setting. In the integrated curriculum
setting, the teacher was a facilitator of teamwork, offering choices, and giving praise; students made choices, decisions,
and worked collaboratively. In the traditional setting, the teacher delivered direct instruction and controlled behavior;
students followed directions, recalled knowledge, and worked individually. Less teacher energy was expended for behavior management
in the integrated curriculum setting, indicating intrinsic motivation of students. Implementation of integrated curricula
is recommended because of the student-centered focus that results in greater motivation, ownership, and teamwork, along with
deeper knowledge connections. Because many factors hinder implementation, teachers need support when first teaching with this
approach. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录！ |
|
