The Interdisciplinary Map....is it really new??

Here is my Interdisciplinary Map.I tried to show that the main “theme” content was in place during the early days  of my teaching career (1980) and that the collaboration that was used drew upon the strengths of the people around you.

What was very very important were the skills each person had, but also the links that each teacher had in a social and professional context:  a friend or colleague, who could be relied upon (sometimes -put upon) to add to the termly “theme”.

This “theme” the overarching TOPIC which was broken down by the 7 curriculum areas that existed in New Zealand then was jointly planned and executed.(As an aside the 7 curriculum areas were individually updated and the unpacking of these was a lot simpler to do as a staff)

The Arts(Music Dance ,Drama) ,Social Sciences,Technology ,Science, English and Maths were then integrated and the learning was teased out through both knowing the needs of the students but also looking to bring on board a wider range of skills -the Teachers as learners as well.

The graphic is my reflection on the shift from the “80’ through to the present day.

The middle section of the Harekeke (flax) shows the New Zealand Curriculum as it was released and the right hand side shows the digital shift.

I did feel watching the American models of this new Interdisciplinary “ approach that there may be some element of “kickback’ from teachers who were and are now very keen to distance themselves from the prescriptive schooling structure in the United States that occurred during the same time scales in my map.No offence intended.

In my teaching context -a hard technology classroom this approach suits design work collaboration and personal interest to create right down to the ground. It is the use of the digital applications and design applications that I am now working towards with my students. Projects are individualised ,though there is scope for collaboration. Historical cultural and geographical links are explored.

I have children keen to explore and make ,there is a design room and a complete workshop,and we create together. These elements are linked to the comments below from the ACRLog blog site.

“Two of these elements can be controlled: (a) favorable attitudes and personality qualities toward interdisciplinary engagement and (b) common goals determined between the involved parties. The third element—(c) workplace conditions—is largely out of the collaborators’ control but still impacts the partnership. When all three facets come together, we believe successful collaboration can occur. In the event that one facet is absent or lacking, we believe that collaboration can still function but may be difficult to sustain.”

ACRLog welcomes a guest post from Laura MacLeod Mulligan, M.L.S., Information Services Librarian, and Dr. Adam J. Kuban, Assistant Professor of Journalism, both at Ball State University.

In looking carefully I wondered if we have just altered our jargon again -could this be “edspeak”- cross pollination, Multi faceted,data mining, systems thinking,interdisciplinary integration,combining domains,.......but I still prefer to use the language I use with my students:

Critical thinking

Creativity

Collaborate

Communicate.