MENC: The National Association for Music Education

Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Retrospect and Prospect Author(s): Leon H. Burton Reviewed work(s): Source: Music Educators Journal, Vol. 87, No. 5, Special Focus: Interdisciplinary Curriculum (Mar., 2001), pp. 17-21+66 Published by: MENC: The National Association for Music Education Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3399703 . Accessed: 29/11/2011 20:47
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

MENC: The National Association for Music Education is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Music Educators Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

INTERDISCIPLINARY

CURRICULUM

M: INTERDISPLI CURRICUL

PROSPECT RETROSPECT AND

in New research interdisciplinary studies providesfreshinsightsinto waysoffostering constructive communication fruitful exchange and among the disciplines.

he education pendulum swings again! It swings back and forth, again and again. At the apex of each swing, educational leaders take note of trends that help to improve teaching and learning and curriculum design. These periodic swings inspire further examination of educational theories and practices in view of current research. As the authors in this special focus issue suggest, the interest now being expressed in interdisciplinary curriculum is not a new initiative, but a continuing effort to explore new possibilities from an expanding research base. The Council of Arts Accrediting Associations' March 1994 report stated: "The proliferation of interdisciplinaryprograms in the past three decades may seem to reflect a new, even revolutionary,approach to education, but the underlying motivation is as old as the ancient ideal of the unity of knowledge."1

What constitutesa

of "disciplineknowledge" hasmuch dowiththe to task designing of

interdisciplinary programs.

This representsquite a progression from some earlier beliefs about integration, a first cousin to interdisciplinary curriculum.James Mursell,a psychologist and music educator,and one of our leading authors in music education in earlieryears, stated in his book Music Education: Principles and Programs that "integrationhas to do, not primarily with subject matter, but H. for Leon Burton, editor thisspecial focus with people and their lives."2 He guest of at of issue,is professor education University viewed curriculum integration as an in Hawaii Honolulu is a member itsCur- effect to be produced in people, not a and of riculum Research Development and Group. way of organizing the curriculum.

Today, integration is generally viewed as a way to organizecurriculum. A poll was conducted among members of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD), chief state school officers, deans of schools of education, and others in 1988 by ASCD, and results were reported in its 1989 publication Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Design and Implementation; the poll found that curriculum integration was the number-one issue in American education.3 Because schools have reported implementing integrated curriculum programs both prior to and after 1988, one might assume that such programshave been operating successfully throughout the country. But educational literature on the subject of "quality" curriculum integration in recent years indicates that there is still much to be done in developing effective interdisciplinary programs (for suggested definitions of terms, see the EssentialTerminologysidebar). The ASCD publication posited that there are two major problems with integrated programs:(1) the potpourriproblem(i.e., random samplings of knowledge, lack of focus, and absence of structures of knowledge) and (2) thepolarityproblem(i.e., terri17

MARCH

2001

torial claims by specialists in knowledge areas).4 To avoid these problems, it was suggested that effective interdisciplinary programs (a) have carefully conceived design features: scope and sequence, a cognitive taxonomy to encourage thinking skills, behavioral indicators of attitudinal change, and a solid evaluation scheme; and (b) use both discipline-based and interdisciplinary experiences in order to have staying power. Philip H. Phenix, in Realms of

EssentialTerminology
These definitions provideperspectiveson terms from ASCD's InterdiscipliVA: Association for (Alexandria, Designand Implementation nary Curriculum: and Curriculum Development, 1989) and CAAA's "Briefing Supervision Paperof the Council of Arts AccreditingAssociations,"March, 1994 (Reston, VA: Council of Arts AccreditingAssociations). Interdisciplinary * "A knowledge view and curriculum approach that consciously applies methodology and language from more than one discipline to examine a centraltheme, issue, problem, topic, or experience"(ASCD, p. 8). * "Anadjectivedescribingthe interactionamong two or more different disciplines. This interaction may range from simple communication of ideas to the mutual integration of organizing concepts, methodology, procedures, epistemology, terminology, data, and organization of researchand education in a fairly large field. An examination of how the ideals of the Enlightenment had influence on and were synthesized in eighteenth-cenAn tury literatureand dance would be interdisciplinary. interdisciplinary group consists of persons trained in different fields of knowledge (disciplines) with differentconcepts, methods, data, and terms organizedinto a common effort on a common problem with continuous communication (CAAA, p. 3). among the participants" Crossdisciplinary * "Viewing one discipline from the perspectiveof another; for example, the physics of music and the history of math"(ASCD, p. 8). * "Impositionof the approachesand axioms of one discipline on another.A literaturecourse that analyzeda novel by utilizing the musical structureof exposition, development, and recapitulationwould be crossdisciplinary" (CAAA, p. 2). Multidisciplinary * "The juxtapositionof severaldisciplines focused on one problem with no direct attempt to integrate"(ASCD, p. 8). * "Juxtaposition variousdisciplines, sometimes with no apparentconnecof tion between them (for example, music plus mathematics plus history). The distributionof course work in the humanities, social sciences, and scicurriculacould be described as multiences found in most undergraduate (CAAA,p. 2). disciplinary" Pluridisciplinary * "The juxtaposition of disciplines assumed to be more or less related;for example, math and physics, Frenchand Latin"(ASCD, p. 8). of * "Juxtaposition disciplines assumed to be more or less related (for exam= or ple, mathematics-physics, French-Latin-Greek 'classicalhumanities'in A collection of courses satisfyingdistribution requirementsin the France). humanitieswould most likely be pluridisciplinary" (CAAA, p. 2). Transdisciplinary * "Beyond the scope of the disciplines; that is, to start with a problem and bring to bear knowledgefrom the disciplines"(ASCD, p. 8). * "Establishing a common system of axioms for a set of disciplines. For example, anthropology considered as 'the science of human beings and their accomplishments"' (CAAA,p. 3).

of Meaning:A Philosophy the Curriculumfor GeneralEducation,noted long

ago that "understanding the disciplines is therefore essential to good teaching, for the disciplines are the key to knowledge and methods of inquiry that have demonstrated their fruitfulness in learning."5 He believed that it is possible to use knowledge from the disciplines in connection with studies that cut across severaldisciplines. Thus, a social studies course might draw upon authoritative materials from the disciplinesof history, economics, sociology, political science, and literature. Similarly, a course in generalscience or in the arts and modern civilization could make use of disciplined knowledge from the relevant sciences and arts, respectively.6 Phenix also made some very important observations that continue to have value for us today: The difficulty with cross-disciplinary studies is that they offer a temptation to shallow, non-disciplinedthinking because of the mixture of methods and concepts involved. They require more knowledge and skill, greater care, and better mastery of materials than do studies within a particular discipline, where the lines of productive thought may be kept more directly and continually in view.7 Phenix's belief, stated more than

thirty years ago, holds great value for those who design interdisciplinary curriculum programs for schools 18

MUSIC

EDUCATORS

JOURNAL

today. He recognized that designing interdisciplinarycurriculum programs is far more difficult than designing a curriculumprogramin one discipline. The word disciplineis embedded in each of the definitions in the Essential Terminology sidebar. Yet this word lacks consistency of meaning among those who design interdisciplinary curriculum programs. However, what constitutes a "disciplineof knowledge" has much to do with the task of designing interdisciplinary programs. One theory of a discipline of knowledge that some have subscribed to in the past is based on the work of Arthur R. King and John A. Brownell in The Curriculum and the Disciplines A of Knowledge: Theoryof Curriculum Practice.8 King and Brownell offer ten characteristics a discipline of knowlof edge, each of which has implications for both music curriculum and interdisciplinarycurriculumdesign: * a community of people with sharedinterests,values, and goals * an expressionof the human imagination * a domain in the intellectuallife * a traditionwith its own history of events and ideas * a mode of inquiry-a set of principles and proceduresfor understanding the domain * a conceptual structure-a set of interrelated concepts or key ideas * a specializedlanguageand/or a set of symbols * a heritageof literatureand a communication network * a valuativestance with an implicit view of human beings and their place in the world * an instructivecommunity with its own ways of drawing new members into the group.9 A consensus about what constitutes a discipline of knowledge should eliminate some of the issues that often cloud interdisciplinary curriculumdialog. For example, if, as King and Brownell contend, all disciplines contain a set of interrelated or concepts key ideas, and it becomes known what these mean for each of the disciplines being addressed, then this knowledge should provide a systematic way to
MARCH 2001

Frameworks Knowledge
These examples of knowledge frameworkscan be used to identify possible linkagesbetween two disciplines-in this case, languageartsand music. Language Arts Knowledge Framework Productive Receptive and Processes: speaking,writing, listening, reading etc. sounds, words, sentences, phrases,paragraphs, Components/Elements: letters, diaries,journals,essays,digests, articles,reports,speeches, Repertoire: etc. StructuralConcepts: anecdote, cliche, conventions, irony, motif, episodic, etc. AestheticConcepts: surprise, momentum, unity, symmetry, intensity, genre, etc. fluency,expression,inflection, diction, artistry,etc. Performance Concepts: Behavioral etc. receiver,processor,writer,analyzer,researcher, Knowledge: Technical letters,spelling, punctuation, vocabulary,etc. Knowledge: Music Knowledge Framework tone, Components/Elements: loudness, duration, and timbre Structural Concepts: rhythm, harmony,tonality,texture,form, melody, etc. AestheticConcepts: momentum, anticipation,cimax, growth and decay,etc. articulation, balance, blend, phrasing, attack-release, Pfnrtnance Concepts: etc. BehavioralKnowledge: singing, playing instruments, listening, composing, etc. Technical notation, tablatures,conducting patterns, key signaKnowledge: tures, etc.

of Disciplines Knowledge

communicate with colleagues from other disciplines about interdisciplinary matters. The structures of the disciplines must be known and understood before authentic connections and linkages can be made. Relationships among content areas, processes, and products need to be explored in the context of the disciplines from which they have been drawn. The adoption of a theory of a discipline of knowledge, such as the one drawn from King and Brownell's work, should be a prerequisiteto discussing interdisciplinary curriculum design with colleagues from other disciplines. Such a theory will reveal clearly that music is a discipline of knowledge equal in depth, breadth, structure,rigor,and quality to the sciences, social sciences, and other humanities. This will also provide a basis for discussing how relationships

between the different disciplines might be established. If those who wish to collaboratein designing interdisciplinaryprogramsdo not come to an agreement on a theory of a discipline of knowledge, they will not be able to find common ground for discussion. For the purpose of identifying possible touch points, linkages, and interactiverelationships,see the examples in the Knowledge Frameworks sidebar. If these frameworks(or others) and the vast content areas they subsume are accepted as adequate representations of the language arts and music disciplines, then colleagues working together would have a common foundation to identify possible touch points and interactive relationships between the two disciplines. This inquiry process is essential and should be used for all disciplines targeted for
19

inclusion in an interdisciplinary cur- sary at appropriatetimes, however, to riculum program. As posited by the present a sequence of learnings in a ASCD study, the traditionalprocedure particular discipline, even though of selecting a theme and then using a there may be no connections with other disciplines. potpourri approach to find content from the disciplines to toss into the curriculum kettle may support the theme, but it may not establish connections between content in the disciplines. Contrived and forced linkages are not likely to ensure the success of interdisciplinarycurriculum efforts. A kind of commonality must be embraced among the disciplines to ensure the forging of authentic connections between them; otherwise, an interdisciplinary approach may not prove successful. The following list contains "possibilities" to consider when establishing authentic interactive relationships between language arts and music: * Composition: use of a symbol (notational) system to express feelings and to create images, reflections, Curriculum Integration Severalmembersof the Curriculum abstractions,and impressions * Patterning of elements: words, Researchand Development Group at sentences, and paragraphs; the University of Hawaii view "curphrases, riculum integration"as being synonyloudness, duration, pitch, and timbre * Performanceconcepts:inflection, mous with interdisciplinary curriculum design and contend that it should expression, projection, fluency, phrasbe approached through the following ing, punctuation, artistry,and nuance * Aesthetic concepts: anticipation, levelsof integration: Thematic integration traditionally tension-relaxation, unity, symmetry, has meant selecting a theme-such as climax, calm, variety, convergence, and resolution commufood, safety, internationalism, * Structural concepts:plot, theme, nication, or transportation-and then subplot, motif, mood, form, tone, searchingschool subjectsfor knowledge meter, dialog, and exposition-develop- and skills believed to be of help to students in understanding the theme. ment-recapitulation * Modes of participation:performer, Themes become the curriculum orgacomposer-creator, improviser,analyzer, nizers,and a potpourriapproach-ranand dom samplings of knowledge and receiver-listener, critic-evaluator. Another major problem with some skill-is used to drive the development curriculumapproach- of a curriculum design. As suggested interdisciplinary es has been the belief that all content earlier, this approach usually helps in any discipline can be integrated learners understand a selected theme, with the content in any other discibut does little to show connections pline. The ASCD publication points betweenthe disciplines. out that both discipline-based and It was soon learned that a higher must be level of integration was essential to interdisciplinary experiences used for a program to have staying move beyond the thematic level in thus, a dual approach is essen- order to bring the disciplines together power; tial. The plea here is to integrate conin different kinds of interactive relatent and processesfrom differentdisci- tionships that are deemed essential to plines only when there is a valid rea- preservingeach discipline's scope and son for doing so, and only when there sequence and unique learning styles. are obvious connections and touch Although thematic integration continbetween them. It may be neces- ues to be important to the overall points
20

Bothdiscipline-based andinterdisciplinary must experiences beused to for a program have power. staying

development process, it is no longer accepted as an end in itself. is Knowledge integration viewed as a level and is achieved when higher interactive and connective relationships (also referredto as touch points and linkages) are established between the knowledge and skills in two or more disciplines (or related school subjects). Early on, curriculum developers learned that they would experience difficulties if they assumed that the knowledge and skills of all disciplines or school subjectscould be integrated. But when areas of knowledge and skill are unique to an individual discipline, such areasmust be presented even if no authentic linkagescan be established. In acknowledging this fact, developers found that a dual approach is essential to curriculum design efforts. As a result, knowledge integration is attempted only when logical and direct linkages to knowledge in other disciplines or school subjects can be established. Sequences of learning within the disciplines that need to be presented at appropriate times take priority over integrated approaches. A major problem today with interdisciplinarycurriculum programs involves teachersunschooled in some of the relevant disciplines who attempt to present knowledge and skills unique to disciplines in which they have little or no expertise. Learner-initiated integration, the third and highest level, is believed to be the most important because it relates to the employment of higherlevel thinking skills throughout life, and it happens when, independent of formal instruction, learners see connections. Hence, curriculumprograms should be designed to guide learners to independently integrate new information with old information. All curriculum programs should lead students to discover connections: (a) to learn to ask the correct questions to find connections; (b) to value independent thinking, finding their own solutions to problems; (c) to develop sequential understandings in separate areasof knowledge and skills; and (d) to establish thought patternsor mindsets that lead them to look for linkages and connective relationshipsacross all areasof learning.
EDUCATORS JOURNAL

MUSIC

General Observations
The question must be asked, "Is an interdisciplinary curriculum program educationally superior to a noninterdisciplinary approach?" It would be easy to hop on board a desired bandwagon and ride it through to retirement while holding on to a belief devoid of conclusive, convincing research data. A September 1998 report by the National Association of SecondarySchool Principalsstates: The advantages interdisciof plinarytraining,which requires an investment of time and resources can initially, be helpful in today'sclassrooms given the diversebackgrounds the stuof dents.With a singlecurriculum, it is sometimes difficultto meet the cultural economicneeds and of middlelevel and high school students. The teacher is also facedwith havingto present the curriculum contentto a groupof young peoplewho havevarious styles.10 learning This reportalso states that an interdisciplinarycurriculumskills approach through teaching and learning teams will bring the following benefits: * Basic skills are taught that apply to real life situations, allowing students to make connections. * Students are encouraged to work in groups, promoting a sense of community and classroomunity. * Studentswith differentability levels work together. * Transitionsfrom class to class and from middle school to high school are eased. * Students work in groups and teachers in teams, resulting in higher expectations and standardsset for the quality of work. * Teachers,by working cooperativewith students in a team approach, ly experience fewer disciplinary problems. * Teachersare able to set up teaching and learning centers in the classroom, as well as reinforce and enrich instruction. * Teachers may experience increasedcreativityin collaboratingwith others in nontraditional academic combinations. * Resource-room teachers have
MARCH 2001

opportunities to work directly with teachersin classrooms. * Teachersare viewed as coaches or facilitatorswho guide learning. * Block scheduling makes possible many creative opportunities for students and faculty. * Class size is more manageable. * Curriculum content is taught through lectures, discussions, projects, guest speakers,and group visits to historicalplaces such as museums. * Students work together to determine what the content and activities will be, as well as how student performance will be evaluated. * Students participate in selecting themes, which promotes questioning, discovery,and a new way for students to look at curriculum. * Instead of education being perceived as "teaching is talking" and "learningis listening,"a new paradigm is presentedthat allows for "teachingis listening and facilitating"and "learning is talking." * Teachers consider and employ a number of instructional strategies, modalities, and patterns for grouping students as curriculum and classroom activitiesare initiated. * Student self-disciplineis better. * Teachers get to know students better. *Classroom communication improves. * Classroom climate becomes more positive. * Ideasfrom studentsarewelcomed. * Students develop a better attitude towardschool. * Teachersfeel less isolated, having more opportunitiesto be collegial. * High expectations for quality work are employed. * Teacher requests for classroom materialsand supplies are given highest consideration. * Teacherscan visually plan a lesson around a theme. * Math, science, and social studies teachers coteach the program, with arts and humanities teachersproviding input. * Resources,commitment, enthusiasm, and support of the administration and the community are required for successfulinterdisciplinary curriculum instruction.1

I encourage you to review the above list carefully in light of your own experiences. Are these benefits achieved solely through interdisciplinary curriculum approaches,or could most of what is listed be achieved equally well in noninterdisciplinary curriculum approaches? This list of benefits did not stem from the interdisciplinary curriculum approach exactly, but rather from conditions in certain schools that permitted teachers to work in different ways with appropriate resources.Everybenefit listed is certainly something to be desired in a school program. As a former elementary, middle school, and high school teacher in different subjects, I find that all but a few of the listed benefits could be accomplished by a good teacher in a self-contained classroom. Obviously, the collegiality, collaboration, and team-planning time that come with interdisciplinarywork are pluses, but given the same amounts of planning time and resources,teachers who teach in a noninterdisciplinary curriculum program might accomplish the same goals. The intent here is not to denigrate attempts to promote the design and implementation of interdisciplinary programsbut, rather,to promote what interdisciplinary implies: finding authentic interactive connections betweenthe disciplinesthat will make a difference in teaching and learning. curriculum programs Interdisciplinary cannot serve as a panacea for today's educational ills. Let us proceed cautiously with a valid and ongoing research design that will test new visions for interdisciplinary curriculum and thus provide substantive data for the future.All music educatorsneed to watch carefullyand give full attention to what researchtells us today and in the coming months and years. The articles in this special focus series offer readersa range of perspectives on interdisciplinarycurriculum. The authors of each article have made no effort to collaborateand arriveat a consensus on any aspect of the subject. These pieces are intended to clarcontinuedonpage 66 21

This Focus Issue Special

Iz

Study with Hungarian master teachers and _~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ distilnguished Anerican facullltyin the oldest Degrees/Certificates offered: Kodaily-inspired * M.M. in Music Education program in North * Kodaly Specialist Certificate America.

_=~~

Revolutionize Your Teaching!

_~

and Retrospect Prospect

continued fom page 21
ify what constitutes a discipline of knowledge and to discuss ways in which disciplines might relate to each other, definitions of key terms, current research on the subject (or lack thereof), examples of programs currently being implemented, and issues that music educators should be concerned about when interdisciplinary programs are promoted in schools. The articles provide valuable insights into the subject of integration, and they can also serve as "think pieces" for music teachers engaged in dialogue and in planning with colleagues from other disciplines.

* KodailySummer Certificate

Kodily Summer Institute

July 2-13, 2001 The M.M. degree may be completed in one year. Application deadline: May 1, 2001 $5,000 Kodaly Fellowships are available for 2000-2001. Fellowship deadline: March 1, 2001

Notes
?i^ ."i:5L I^;i;l :II1 &1i; =&^ LliJ&s a\I ??I' 1~

|s111^1^ M"ia:, 2^ ^1 1L:

rii_? ?_

^If m_I~ w

_ II~

1. Council of Arts Accrediting Associations, Briefing Paper, March 1994, 1. 2. James Mursell, Music Education:Principles and Programs (Morristown, NJ: SilverBurdett, 1956), 307. 3. Heidi Hayes Jacobs, ed., Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Design and Implementation (Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1989), 3. 4. Ibid., 2. 5. Philip Phenix, Realms of Meaning: A for Philosophyof the Curriculum GeneralEducation (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964), 316-17. 6. Ibid., 319. 7. Ibid. 8. Arthur R. King and John A. Brownell, The Curriculumand the Disciplines of Knowledge: A 7heory of Curriculum Practice (New York:John Wiley and Sons, 1966), 69-95. 9. Ibid., 68, 71, 74, 75, 77, 81, 84, 86, 87. For an elaboration of each of the ten characteristics in relation to music, see Leon of Knowledge Burton, "A Discipline Approach to Promoting Music as a Universal and Vital I.anguagc of All Cultures and times," InternationalJournal of Music Education 30 (1997): 44-54. 10. National Association of Secondary School Principals, Curriculum Report 28 (Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals, September 1998), 1-2. 11. Ibid., 2, 4. ?

Music Makes the Difference

Music, Brain Development, and Learning
This second book in the Music Makes the Differenceseries provides importantreference materialsthat can be used in efforts to maintain qualitymusic programs and promote music education. Features recent discussions and studies documenting the value of music education, includingessays that have appeared in well-known education periodicals and research journals. Provides up-to-date informationon printand on-line resources relatedto music, braindevelopment, and learning.The book sections include Music and Young Children.Academic Achievement.The IntrinsicValue of Music Education.and Advocacy.2000. ISBN1-56545-129-5. members #1668 $12.50/10.00 MENC
ResourcesOrderform on To order, use the MENC page 71.

I 66

,
MUSIC EDUCATORS JOURNAL