How could cross-curricular learning impact on Primary Education?

        

        In Donaldson’s (2015) ‘Successful Futures’, the review recommends that literacy, numeracy and digital competence should be held as the three main cross – curriculum Responsibilities (Donaldson, 2015, p.41) and to not be seen as disregarded or marginalised, as it has in the past (Donaldson, 2015, p.35). He disputes that the curriculum structure needs to both allow as well as ensure that children and young people “develop high levels of competence in these aspects and apply them across the curriculum” as they progress throughout education (Donaldson, 2015, p.40). Correspondingly, he adds that the national curriculum that stands today along with its assessment arrangements are no longer meeting the needs of the many diverse learners in Wales (Donaldson, 2015, p.11).

        Comparably, Power (2002, p.103) claims that schools need to embrace and be open to cross – curriculum learning, and try stay away from those reforms “that position subjects in ways that hark back to some imagined past, rather than forwards to more globalised times” as with the world is endlessly changing alongside the rapid technological developments being encouraged. This impacts both society and the economy tremendously; meaning that many argue that education and schools should equip their children correctly with the right knowledge for this unpredictable future. With cross – curricular learning, children and young people are able to connect with each other and share ideas as we as experience the world around us differently (Barnes, 2011, p.70). “Cross curricular approaches mirror and maximise this valuable diversity” (Barnes, 2011, p.70) allowing this to take place.

        Relatedly, Kerry (2015, p.15) disputes that as we live in a rapidly growing information age, we need to accept that some knowledge “will be beyond the capacity of the human brain”, meaning that in the future, the important skills that need to be acquired will be in “evaluating and applying knowledge”, showing its links to collaboration within education and how working through collaboration, processes can be achieved and applicable.

            Moreover, aside from these three cross – curricula learning areas there are six Areas of Learning and Experience in Wales: (Donaldson, 2015, p.39)

Ø  Expressive Arts

Ø  Health and well – being

Ø  Humanities

Ø  Language, literacy and communication

Ø  Mathematics and numeracy

Ø  Science and technology

           

        These learning and experiences should certainly not be seen as “watertight compartments” but rather as a process of systematising these diverse intentions in children and young people’s education (Donaldson, 2015). While they are seen as independent areas of learning, they should not be perceived as “timetabling devices”, as they can translate these experiences and capabilities into every day living and activities (Donaldson, 2015). “The approach should help to ensure breadth and encourage appropriate decisions about ‘balance’ across a child or young person’s learning at any time, for example by removing distinction between ‘core’ and ‘foundation’ subjects” (Donaldson, 2015, p.39).

            To add to this argument, since 1967, it was discussed that learning should not be delivered through the division and separation of subjects as Plowden (1967, p.555) reasoned that, throughout their conversations and observations concerning the curriculum, they found that children’s learning does not fit into subject categories. Furthermore, this marginalisation of subjects and its structured ways of thinking is subsiding children’s knowledge (Eisner, 1996).

            Alternatively, Fuchsman (2009) testifies against the implementation of cross – curricular learning, as he believes that during project work titles are usually given out where ideas and ‘chunks of knowledge’ are shared. He argues that “learning is not deep enough and is lacking compared if these topics were taught in single disciplines”, giving value and importance to single segmented subjects across the curriculum structure (Fuchsman, 2009). In agreement, Professor Paterson (2017) declares, due to the new curriculum instigated in Scotland, it could cause an affect to pupils learning because of its “cross – curricular nature”. She, along with other critics, opinion that children and young people will be at a steep disadvantage if they continue to learn in a cross – curricular way, as they will only be learning “superficial” matters which will not be explored in the appropriate depth that is needed.

            Lastly, with regards, to assessments, Kerry (2015) is concerned that cross – curricula assessments are changing and that they are not ensuring, nor certifying students that the studies they are learning are indeed faithful to their disciplines, likewise “that those disciplines are used in an insightful and balanced way” (Kerry, 2015). Dean (2001) is also alarmed by this and states that subjects are unfortunately being “watered down” and not given the prominence that is necessary.

        Nonetheless, cross - curricular learning is becoming one of significance. On the 1st December, a peer and I created a short and snappy stop motion animation clip, using a toy bear, play-dough and an iPad. This activity was cross - curricular due to the fact that technology was used to create the clip, we inserted music in the background to set the scene and we had to count the seconds between every snap shot, as well as check the angles and positioning of the materials used. This is an example video of the short clip we created: 

 

            
        To conclude, cross – curricular education allows learning to be more relevant and applicable to everyday living, which can be enjoyable. Children are able to both build and reinforce key concept matters and able to be consistent in learning between subject areas (Barnes, 2011; Chard, 2000; Dean, 2001). During Pestalozzi’s (1746 – 1827) finding, he wanted children to learn through activity and arrive at their own personal answers, exhibiting that this cross – curricular approach was something he agreed with. Moreover, these methods have been argued to provide high degrees of motivation and enthusiasm in children throughout their education (Barnes, 2011). Ultimately, disregarding all beliefs, any alterations and transformations to the curriculum should undoubtedly be implemented with both education, and most importantly the children’s prospects in mind (Lawson, et al, 2007).

Reference List:

Barnes, J. (2011). ‘Cross-curricular learning’ 3-14 (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, [Calif.] ; London: SAGE.

Dean, J. (2001). ‘Organising Learning in the Primary Classroom’ (3rd edn). London: Routledge.

Donaldson, G. (2015). ‘Successful futures’: Independent review of curriculum and assessment arrangements in Wales. Wales

Eisner, E. (1996). ‘Cognition and the Curriculum’ Re-considered (2nd Edn). London. PCP.

Fuschman, S. (2009). ‘Re-thinking integration in integrated studies’. Issues in Integration Studies. 27: 70-85.

Kerry, T. (2015). ‘Cross-curricular teaching in the primary school’ : Planning and facilitating imaginative lessons (Second ed.). London ; New York: Routledge.

Lawes, S., Ledda, M., McGoven, C., Patterson, S., Perks, D. & Standish, A. (2007) The Corruption of the Curriculum. London: Civitas

Paterson, L. (2017). The Edinburgh History of Education in Scotland. Journal of Scottish Historical Studies, 37 (1), pp.106 - 108

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

Power, (2002)