Cross-curricular in Primary Education

Cross curricular in Primary Education

Cross curricular learning is described by Bartlett and Burton (2016) as learning that combines more than one subject and skill together. This definition gives a basic overview to the complexity that is cross curricular as it doesn’t give any detail on how to implement it. Although its definition can give guidance on the topic, it could be misinterpreted as substituting pen and paper for an iPad in order to make a lesson cross curricular. Savage (2011) advances the definition by explaining that cross curricular learning involves the combination of knowledge, skills and understanding gained from different subject areas in order to better the learning. These definitions, merged, give a wider overview of cross curricular. The authors of both definitions have large quantities of credibility and reliability as they are both academics who specialise in education, meaning that these definitions can be assumed accurate.

Cross curricular learning and pedagogy have become a vital part to the education reform in Wales, with Donaldson (2015) calling the National Curriculum out of date, as it doesn’t meet the needs of the students anymore. Spooner (2014, cited in Kerry, 2015) also adds that by teaching in a cross curricular approach, it makes the learner central to the learning rather than the content. These sources highlight that the idea of cross curricular in primary education is very important as they suggest that it will enhance the education of pupils and also give them valuable skills that they can successfully transfer. Moreover, Spooner’s evidence comes from a small scale Chilean context (Kerry, 2015), which arises questions about her reliability because of the sample size. However, Sak et al. (2016) argues in Spooner’s favour by saying that multifaceted learning, otherwise known as cross-curricular learning, enhances child-centeredness. In addition, Barnes (2011) also shines a light on why cross curricular learning is highly important. He highlights that we live in world whereby we experience everything around us is different ways, at the same time, and so we should reflect this in our teaching and learning in order to prepare children for the ‘real world’. This idea suggests that we subconsciously already have the skills to be able to teach and learn in a cross curricular manor and so we need to be more confident and open-minded about the concept. 

“Tell me, and I will forget. Show me, and I may remember. Involve me, and I will understand”

(Confucius, ca. 450 BC, cited in Bouvin et al., 2005)

This quote indicates that for a long period of time, even as far back as ancient times, cross curricular has been a theory that many support and have advocated. Even Plowden’s report (1967) recognises that we can’t teach separate subjects to students, so why has it taken us so long to implement a theory that many have supported for such a long time?

Apple, 2018

In 2015, PISA released its latest findings and showed that Wales scored the lowest behind its other UK counterparts (OECD, 2015). In the same year, Professor Graham Donaldson released his proposed curriculum for Wales, that had cross curricular learning at the heart. This indicates that a low score during PISA could have prompted the Welsh Government to enforce drastic change to its education system, and accept the entirety of Donaldson’s curriculum. Similarly, technology is such an important part of modern day and has the ability to enhance the education system (Donaldson, 2015: ICT Steering Group, 2013). Within the Donaldson curriculum, Digital Competence is a key cross curricular responsibility that every teacher must enforce in their classroom (Donaldson, 2015). Therefore, the major overhaul of the curriculum in Wales, and introducing large new concepts like the Digital Competence Framework and cross curricular learning, allows them to be implemented seamlessly together.

So the idea of cross curricular approaches? What is that?

One suggested approach to cross curricular learning in primary schools is the idea of Areas of Learning and Experiences (Coe, 2010: Donaldson, 2015: Greenwood, 2015). This suggest that by categorising learning topics in this manor, rather than individual subjects, teachers won’t be drawn to teaching separate subjects. Rather, they might be encouraged to accumulate parts of the curriculum, from multiple areas of learning, in order to deliver a lesson. Coe (2010) highlights that the areas of learning should not be taught individually, in order to gain a wider concept of the curriculum and to connect with the entire experience rather than the confides of a single subject. Donaldson (2015) makes a specific point about the use of ‘Experience’ in the title, highlighting that it is to refresh and invigorate the imaginations of the students in order for them to think the highest level of themselves and what they can be.  In addition, the emphasis on experience suggest that rather than children just learning from the teacher, they should experience the curriculum themselves. It implies that they should engage actively with the curriculum in a multitude of ways in order to gain the necessary skills.

Kerry (2015) suggests that cross curricular learning should be topic based learning that is rooted in the children’s interests. For example, during my work experience in a school, they were doing a topic on Queen Victoria and they looked into the history of her reign. I accompanied them of a trip to Cardiff Castle for a meet and greet with ‘Queen Victoria’ in order to find out about life in that time period. This highlights that the children would be keen to learn and motivated to learn because they had an input into choosing the topic (Barnes, 2011: Greenwood, 2013). Kerry (2015) also adds that the topic based learning would expand based on the needs of the children (i.e. what they still need to know), which would be identified from previous assessment. This indicates that the teacher would be basing their lessons around what the children need in order to progress further, rather than just following a lesson plan or the curriculum rigidly. The teacher would continuously assess the children during the course of the topic in order to alter the lessons, making sure that they met the needs of the child in order to progress fully through the curriculum (Kerry, 2015: Bartlett and Burton, 2016). Trevor Kerry was a headteacher that implemented cross curricular learning into his school, because he believed in the theory. He produced a book explaining cross curricular techniques, but did not conduct any studies that could further validate his work. Although he is an academic in the field of education, and he brought in other education academics to write in his book, primary research and study could add reliability to his work.  

This type of formative assessment, that Kerry discusses, does allow the teacher to understand the full scope of the child’s knowledge and may allow the child to feel more relaxed and positive about the assessment process (Bartlett and Burton, 2016). I know when I was at school, the idea of a formal assessment or written exam was frightening and I would crumble under the pressure, and so the idea of regular informal assessments undertaken by the teacher would appeal more to someone like me. The idea of formative assessment allows the teacher to understand whether their students are achieving all the necessary skills, and what their strengths and weaknesses are, from all aspects of the curriculum (Yan and Cheng, 2015). However, the idea of formative assessment is not without its limitations (Bartlett and Burton, 2016). Sometimes the dialogue between student and teacher may be misinterpreted on both sides and so both might become confused and not give an honest reflection of their knowledge (Black, 2009). Similarly, the student might not engage fully due to fear of coming across as foolish (Black, 2009), something that I can relate to. Even as a university student, I still struggle to engage with questions asked by lecturers for fear of acting ‘dull’ in front of my peers.

“Planning is essential if teaching is to be transformed into learning” (Barnes, 2011, p.232)

This quote from Barnes is just one of the many things that makes good cross curricular practice. Planning is needed to ensure that an activity or topic will have beneficial impact upon the child’s development and will make sure that the teacher is equipped with the full knowledge to be able to deliver a strong lesson (Butt, 2008). Barnes (2011, p.232) further adds a check list of things to include within the planning process:

·      ‘Inclusion and participation

·      recognizing, allowing and nurturing creativity

·      subject-based knowledge and skills

·      a sense of progression in all learning

·      meaningful and shared experiences

·      strong and positive relations with the community and locality

·      safe and stimulating spaces for learning’.

Although this list shows signs of good cross curricular planning, there are a few limitations of it. For instance, recognising and nurturing creativity. We can’t make children be creative, teachers should create an environment that has the ability to foster children’s creativity if they choose to be creative (Saracho, 2012). We shouldn’t force their creativity or control it, using cross curricular allows children’s to explore their creativity because as explained previously, it is more autonomous (Barnes, 2018: Kerry, 2015).

In addition, Pollard (2010) explains that teachers should be able to react well to children’s spontaneity by using cross-curricular resources (subjects and knowledge) in order to give answers to their questions. This suggests that teachers should learn with and from the children in order to better their teaching.  

Overall, cross curricular approaches can be used in primary schools by teachers that are confident and who have a solid background knowledge. They should deliver lessons that are based around the children’s interests and that are only building upon previously gained knowledge and skills.

References:

·       Apple (2018) iPad Pro. Available at: https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-ipad/ipad-pro/12.9-inch-display-256gb-space-gray-wifi-cellular (Accessed on: 08.12.2018).

·       Bartlett, S. and Burton, D. (2016) Introduction to Education Studies. London: SAGE.

·       Barnes, J. (2011) Cross-Curricular Learning 3-14 (2nd ed.). London: SAGE.

·       Barnes, J. (2018) Applying Cross-Curricular Approaches Creatively. Abingdon: Routledge.

·       Black, P. (2009) 'Formative Assessment Issues Across the Curriculum: The Theory and the Practice’, TESOL Quarterly: A Journal for Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages and of Standard English as a Second Dialect, 43(3), p. 519-524.

·       Bouvin, N.O. and Brodersen, C. and Hansen, F.A. and Iversen, O.S. and NØrregaard, P. (2005) Tools of Contextualiztion: Extending the Classroom to the Field. Boulder, Colorado, 08-10 June. New York: ACM.

·       Butt, G. (2008) Lesson Planning. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.

·       Coe, J. (2010) ‘Areas of learning’, Education 3-13, 38(4), p. 395-402.

·       Donaldson, G. (2015) ‘Successful Futures’. Review of Curriculum and Assessment Arrangements in Wales. Available at: http://gov.wales/docs/dcells/publications/150225-successful-futures-en.pdf (Accessed on: 11.11.2018).

·       Greenwood, R. (2013) ‘Subject-based and cross-curricular approaches within the revised primary curriculum in Northern Ireland: teachers’ concerns and preferred approaches’, Education 3-13, 41(4), p. 443-458.

·       ICT Steering Group (2013) The ICT Steering Group’s Report To The Welsh Government. Available at: http://learning.gov.wales/docs/learningwales/publications/131003-ict-steering-group-report-en.pdf (Accessed: 13.11.2018)

·       Kerry, T. (2015) Cross-curricular teaching in the primary school: Planning and facilitating imaginative lessons. London: Routledge.

·       OECD (2015) Programme For International Student Assessment (PISA) Results from PISA 2015: United Kingdom. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA-2015-United-Kingdom.pdf (Accessed: 11.11.2018).

·       Plowden, Lady Bridget. (1967) Children and Their Primary Schools: A Report of the Central Advisory Council for Education, Volume 1. London: HMSO.

·       Pollard, A. (2010) Professionalism and Pedagogy: A contemporary opportunity: A commentary by TLRP and GTCE. London: TLRP.

·       Sak, R. and Erden, F.T. and Morrison, G.S. (2016) ‘Child-centred education: preschool teachers’ beliefs and self-reported practices’, Early Child Development and Care, 186(8), p. 1185-1202.

·       Saracho, O. (2012) ‘Creativity theories and related teachers’ beliefs’, Early Child Development and Care, 182(1), p. 35-44.

·       Savage, J. (2011) Cross-Curricular Approaches to teaching and learning in Secondary School. London: Routledge.

·       Yan, Z. and Cheng, E.C.K. (2015) ‘Primary teachers' attitudes, intentions and practices regarding formative assessment’, Teaching and Teacher Education, 45(1), p. 128-136.