Does Interdisciplinary Instruction Impact Student Success?
Needs Assessment:
When teaching at the elementary level, instruction is not departmentalized like it is at the secondary level. Rigor for secondary students continues to increase through the expectation of critical thinking, however, the manner in which information is given to students is not changing. When students are in history class, they have tunnel vision for only historical dates, important people, and significant locations for events in our past. When students are in science, they only see scientific information through the eyes of a scientist. When in reading, literature seems yet another subject on its own island. Students are not connecting and interacting with these subjects simultaneously, therefore, they do not transfer information from one subject to another. Educators need to look at ways to help students find connections that will increase learning, increase motivation, promote critical thinking, develop strategies for transferring knowledge across curriculum subjects, and construct meaning in an authentic manner. If interdisciplinary instruction is used consistently, students should begin thinking holistically and gain a global perspective instead of viewing information with tunnel vision.
I began looking into interdisciplinary instruction after a class discussion in my Language Arts/Reading class one day last spring. We were frontloading information about Mark Twain. Students were required to research information about Twain’s background, his literary works, and his main contribution to literature. Basically, they were tasked with answering the question, “Why do we still read and analyze Mark Twain’s literary work over one hundred years after his death?” The results were dismal. Students could tell me facts about his life, but no one was able to connect why his satirical writing made such an impact on life during this time in our history. The fact that our country was experiencing one of its darkest eras during the time his writing was released did not phase my students. The Civil War was the driving force for many of his pieces, and he wanted to remind adults what life was really like when they were kids, when life was simplier and the world was one big adventure. It took much probing for my students to make any connection from their history class, which just studied the Civil War, to the literature I was frontloading. At that moment, I realized what a disservice we do to our students by having each subject departmentalized with no cross-over for them to grasp hold of to make vital connections.
This discovery made me reflect on what we really want our students accomplishing when they are absorbing the information we provide. Is it more important to have our students memorize all the facts and dates of various historical events and/or author’s work from a given time period, or it is more important to have our students be able to apply the knowledge they learn in those subjects, make connections across the curriculum, and then think critically as to how they fit together like a puzzle? Once this connection is made, students can then begin to problem solve holistically and begin to actively construct meaning of concepts and themes in an authentic manner. At this point, the rigor is truly being increased and our students are thinking and making connections. Now it was time to put data and research behind the concept of interdisciplinary instruction.
While disseminating MAP data in the spring last year, I began looking for patterns in student weaknesses. Our English as a Second Language (ESL) students in particular seem to struggle with academic vocabulary, words such as evaluate, significant, and perserverance. These are terms used in all areas of academics, and students should know these words and how to apply them to critical thinking. I decided to survey my students using an academic word list, words used in all subjects (Appendix A). The survey simply required students to sort words into any 4 categories and label them accordingly. Sixty percent of my ESL students placed the words into subject categories. Words like “evaluate” were placed into the science category, and words like “predict” were placed in the reading category. I had other students do the same thing, but my ESL students gave me the results I had expected based on the MAP data. After sorting these words, I pulled my ESL students into my small group and asked how these words apply to other subjects. Only one out of ten students was able to tell me how the word “predict” applies to science and the word is known as “hypothesis” in that subject. Nine of my ten subject students still struggled to make the connection. “Interdisciplinary/cross-curricular teaching is often seen as a way to address some of the recurring problems in education, such as fragmentation and isolated skill instruction. It is seen as a way to support goals such as transfer of learning, teaching students to think and reason, and providing a curriculum more relevant to students” (Marzano, 1991; Perkins, 1991). When students can see the relevance, instruction becomes focused and students improve performance by thinking holistic rather than in bits and pieces.
Objectives and Vision of the Action Research Project
Based on the results from my needs assessment, an action research project was born. My vision was to show how interdisciplinary instruction positively impacts student improvement. “Interdisciplinary/cross-curricular teaching involves a conscious effort to apply knowledge, principles, and/or values to more than one academic discipline simultaneously. The disciplines may be related through a central theme, issue, problem, process, topic, or experience” (Jacobs, 1989). In my case, the use of common vocabulary was a reasonable starting point. I disseminated MAP vocabulary data to serve as a baseline for my results. Of my ten ESL students, the average score from MAP was 192. The norm for an eighth grader is 220. That is a 28 point achievement gap. My objective is to close that gap by 50% in a nine week period by having our four core subjects plan together using common vocabulary and common concepts. At the end of the nine weeks, the goal average will be 206.
Review of the Literature and Action Research Strategy
If educators do not change instruction to accommodate the expected rigor for college readiness, our students will lack the critical thinking skills needed in the 21st Century. “According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, while students are learning the basic information in core subject areas, they are not learning to apply their knowledge effectively in thinking and reasoning” (Applebee, Langer, & Mullis, 1989). Standardized testing has only increased this issue. Students are trained to choose the correct answer, but they are unable to critically explain their thinking behind why they chose that answer. In the technology driven world we live in, there is little value in memorization. The focus has shifted and the importance is now on finding relevant information to help support thinking and applying that knowledge to help problem solve and construct deeper meaning. “Interdisciplinary/cross-curricular teaching can increase students' motivation for learning and their level of engagement. In contrast to learning skills in isolation, when students participate in interdisciplinary experiences they see the value of what they are learning and become more actively engaged” (Resnick, 1989). Best practice is all about engagement. If students are not engaged and they do not see the relevance of the lesson, retention of knowledge will decrease drastically. This is where intervention practices often fail. My ESL students are usually the ones pulled from class to receive additional tutoring/interventions. During the intervention session, the teacher often gives test taking strategies and students practice these strategies on standardized test practice passages. No critical thinking, no discussions, no authentic learning. MaryEllen Vogt stated it best when she said,
“In the past, students who struggled to learn were frequently excluded from participating in activities that led to exploration, discovery, and critical thinking. With thematic instruction, however, these students can be fully included. For example, prior to introducing a piece of literature or informational text, it is beneficial to provide additional support for students who lack background knowledge, or who have difficulty understanding selection vocabulary and concepts. Teachers or specialists may provide this background information and preteach potentially troublesome words or concepts. Other class members who possess a good deal of background information about the theme may join the group and share information. This "support in advance" enables the students who struggle to fully participate in class discussions, writing, sharing, and reading. Instead of being excluded, they are now class members who have a chance to succeed.”
The research further confirmed my enthusiasm for choosing this topic for my action research project. Based on the data collected and the information found in the research, my ten ESL students were monitored using formative assessments, benchmark assessments, and the end of the year MAP testing to measure growth. My Focus Group was made up of one teacher per core subject in eighth grade. Together, we shared and collaborated to create common vocabulary to spiral through our instruction for the final nine weeks of the 2010-2011 school year. Since the results were favorable, the entire eighth grade team decided to put interdisciplinary instruction into place for the 2011-2012 school year, again with the focus being on common vocabulary and common concepts, such as cause and effect relationships.
Articulate the Vision
After data was collected, the first step was to take this information to my principal, so we could make the decision on whether to proceed with our plan to open interdisciplinary instruction up to our grade level. The results were not as favorable as we had hoped, however, each student did show growth of some sort. The average growth over the nine week period was 200, instead of the desired 206. Therefore, she still agreed to let us proceed. The next step was to communicate my action research findings to my other grade level team members. Educators need to see the steps the researcher took to get results, otherwise, the researcher is not going to seem like a reliable source. I shared the actual research findings and quotes I mentioned above. Highly esteemed authors like Marzano express support for interdisciplinary instruction because it helps create the map of knowledge for students instead of segregating concepts and themes, making it difficult for students to learn how to solve problems globally. This information was in the powerpoint. I then showed student data from last year when I first started my research plan. My research started with only ESL students in my Read180 class. But my focus group of teachers planned according to areas of weakness, primarily vocabulary. Out of the initial group of chosen students, 10 were monitored and data was collected. I created growth charts to present on the powerpoint to display the growth of student improvement. Since we are taking a new approach to my action research this year, I also included desired results for the first nine weeks of the 2011-2012 school year.
Manage the Organization
Once we opened the action research up to the grade level, new responsibilities were established. Team leads agreed to meet once a week for a brief reflection session. The whole grade level agreed to put the common vocabulary and common concepts in their daily lesson plans. Each subject connected the words and/or concepts to at least one other subject while discussing it within their own discipline. We also aligned literature to reflect the historical events being studied in our history classes. At the end of the nine weeks, we came together and shared data. While sharing data, we protected the rights of our students by only using data and information pertaining to the results of this action plan. Confidentiality and professionalism remained at the highest of our priorities. During this meeting, we reflected and evaluated our current plan, made adjustments as needed, and decided to proceed to the next nine weeks with a specific focus for common vocabulary and concepts.
Manage Operations
In the beginning, the main strategy was to keep the focus small and data manageable. However, because four subject areas were having to meet often and collect data, the action research became very overwhelming for everyone involved. Members of my Focus Group (four core teachers) became frustrated with the process within the first three weeks of the process. At that time, it was decided that I would handle all the data collecting and the MAP scores would be the final determining factor on whether interdisciplinary instruction, especially dealing with vocabulary, truly impacts student performance in a positive way. Once each subject area started seeing improvement, they agreed to continue with our plan to the end of the year. Even though our results were not quite as favorable as we had hoped, they still showed growth considering the short amount of time we were able to work with our students. Because of these results, our Focus Group decided to move forward and implement interdisciplinary instruction across our grade level for the current year. Our first priority was developing common academic vocabulary (Appendix B). Then, as a grade level, we shared our nine week plans per subject and looked for common threads to pull throughout the grade level. We created a concept map in order to see what each subject is teaching so we can maximize instruction and encourage critical thinking (Appendix C). The only conflict has been keeping all teachers on the same page. We have maybe three out of the sixteen teachers on our grade level resistanting compliance of our agreed upon concept map. I met individually with these teachers to help support them in our efforts to make this a grade level initiative. I plan to conduct informal walkthroughs to help hold everyone accountable for this instruction.
Respond to Community Interest and Needs
Interdisciplinary instruction will serve all students because it is a change in the delivery of instruction. It is a way to help students retain information and actively construct meaning in a critical manner. There are no additional accommodations or modifications needed for special needs students. All students will benefit from hearing, exploring, evaluating, and critiquing vocabulary and concepts throughout the grade level on an on-going basis. Being able to think critically from one subject to the next and apply that knowledge to draw conclusions and think holistically benefits all students, and therefore, benefits all stakeholders. In order to achieve college readiness, all students must be able to apply and transfer knowledge in order to problem solve from a 21st Century global perspective.
