Cross-Curricular Teaching and Learning in the Secondary School... Humanities

History, Geography, Religious Studies and Citizenship

Richard Harris, Simon Harrison, Richard McFahn

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9780415561884
• eBook ISBN: 9781136733185
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

What is the role of the humanities in the modern school? Should geography, history, RE and Citizenship teachers remain faithful to long-standing subject cultures and pedagogies? Or is there another way to consider how the curriculum, and the notion of individual subjects and teachers' pedagogy, could be constructed?

Drawing on case studies taken from a range of innovative secondary schools, and interrogating the use of cross-curricular approaches in UK schools, Cross-Curricular Teaching and Learning in Humanities constructs a research based pedagogy with practical steps for students and teachers as they consider how cross-curricular approaches can be implemented in their own subject areas.

Key features include:

• Clear theoretical frameworks for cross-curricular processes of teaching and learning in the humanities
• Lively and engaging text that blends key issues with stories of current practice
• An analysis of the use of assessment, enquiry, and pupil talk as key components in building a cross-curricular approach to the humanities
• Practical and reflective tasks that enable to reader to apply their reading to day to day practice, alongside links to professional standards
• Summaries of key research linked to suggestions for further reading
• Professional development activities to promote cross-curricular dialogue

Part of the Cross-Curricular Teaching and Learning in the Secondary School series, this timely interdisciplinary textbook is essential reading for all students on Initial Teacher Training courses and practising teachers looking to holistically introduce cross-curricular themes and practices in secondary Humanities teaching.

CHAPTER
1
	What are the Humanities and what is the Context for Cross-Curricular Teaching and Learning?

Key Objectives

By the end of this chapter you will have:

• explored the reasons why there has been a recent move towards greater cross-curricularity;
• explored the extent to which the subjects are similar by looking at the nature and purpose of each subject;
• compared and contrasted what is in the National Curriculum for each subject with reference to the importance statements, concepts, processes, range and breadth of content.

Teachers of the humanities subjects are generally, in our experience, very enthusiastic and passionate about their subjects. This can provoke well-intentioned rivalry between subjects, which, especially at ‘options’ time, can become a little more intense, as the subjects are often seen as being in competition with each other. Yet what does really separate us? As an interesting exercise, at the start of a PGCE teacher-training course, the tutors of the history, geography and RE trainees combined their groups to explore the links between the subject areas. The initial starting point however was to ask the trainees to work in their subject groups and to write down all their preconceptions and assumptions about the other subjects! This provoked much hilarity as all the stereotypes came out – we could write an entire chapter based on the outcomes, but the following just gives you a flavour of the responses: geography ‘sponsored by Crayola’ was a common theme amongst history and RE trainees; history was all about ‘essays and dusty books’ according to the geographers and RE students; whereas RE was seen as a ‘doss’ subject by the others! However the next task provoked a different response. This time the trainees were placed in mixed subject groups and told to talk to each other about their subjects, what they were about, why they were important and the things pupils should know and understand. This time the discussions were punctuated by lots of ‘Oh, we do that as well!’

We suspect similar discussions could occur in departments and faculties in numerous other schools. Although all the authors are history teachers by training, we have worked in humanities faculties with colleagues from these other subject areas. And at times, it is clear that there are misunderstandings between teachers of different subjects.

This brief case study exemplifies these challenges.

Case Study 1.1: Richard Harris Reflects on the Challenges of Working Across the Humanities Subjects

I remember clearly trying to explain an exercise using sources to two geography colleagues. The task was deceptively simple. Pupils were to be given a number of contemporary accounts of the death of Wat Tyler during the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381, and would use the information from these accounts to write their own account of what happened. The problem was that the accounts differed in important details and the pupils would have to start to grapple with issues such as comparing sources, examining the provenance of the sources and so forth to create and justify the best account they could. In short it was a challenging exercise that would really force the pupils to work with evidence in a historical way. My geography colleagues nodded sagely when the task was explained to them and then asked for the ‘correct’ answers to help them mark the work when done. I explained to them that there was no correct answer and that pupils would have to come up with the best-reasoned answer they could, using their developing understanding of how to work with evidence. My colleagues looked at each other quizzically then looked at me and asked again for the ‘correct answer’ (as if I was teasing them by deliberately withholding it). It was evident that they held misconceptions about history and they did not fully understand the historical procedural knowledge the task was designed to engender. This is not to denigrate my colleagues but to illustrate the fact that, as humanities teachers, we need to understand our subjects and each other’s subjects more deeply if we are to explore meaningful ways of combining the subjects to enhance the pupils’ learning experience. I am sure many of my colleagues have wondered at my ignorance of geography and RE!

The focus of this chapter is to explore this issue – that is, the ways in which the humanities subjects are genuinely linked – and therefore start to explore how these links may be best exploited.

A Few Points of Clarification

Defining what is a ‘humanities’ subject can be surprisingly difficult. This was seen in the early development stages of the (now defunct) 14–19 Diploma in Humanities and Social Sciences, where the number of subjects that were included within this framework varied from meeting to meeting! However, for the sake of this book, where the focus is on KS3, our attention is on those subjects which are compulsory and entail human activity at a societal level. We therefore deal with citizenship, geography, history and religious education.

We also wish to emphasise that subjects matter. Collectively the humanities matter because they are the subjects that provide the ‘humane’ element of the curriculum as they provide an insight into the wealth of human behaviour, and as such are an essential part of anyone’s education. Individual subjects are also the basis for ‘disciplined’ thinking; thus it is important that the individual humanities subjects are recognisable within the curriculum. As Gardner (2007) explains, there is a difference between subject matter and discipline. Subject matter is to do with the accumulation of substantive knowledge – that is, the what, how, where, when associated with each subject area – whereas ‘Disciplines represent a radically different phenomenon. A discipline constitutes a distinctive way of thinking about the world’ (Gardner, 2007: 27). This is where it becomes important that subject specialists are available to teach their subjects, as they are best placed to educate others in the ways of thinking associated with their particular disciplines. In many ways this is to be expected; subject specialists normally have greater enthusiasm for their subject areas, their subject knowledge is stronger and crucially their understanding of the subject, its nature and purpose, is more sophisticated, all of which means they are best placed to teach others.

Not all school subjects however are disciplines. History can be considered a discipline in the sense that it is a discrete subject that can be studied at degree level, and has distinctive concepts and processes which underpin the way the subject is understood (although these may be subject to dispute). A set of second order concepts has been developed in history – these shape the way we look at the past and understand it; thus cause and effect, change and continuity, chronological understanding and significance are ideas we use to create an understanding of the past. In some ways geography can also be considered a discipline. Like history it can be studied at degree level, although the subject has so many connections with other areas, such as the sciences, that many would argue it is not as distinct a discipline as history; indeed arguments about whether geography is an arts or science subject illustrate the extent of this debate (e.g. Kent, 2002). Other subjects, like citizenship, draw upon other disciplines for their knowledge and ways of working; thus citizenship is based upon subjects such as law, politics and economics, while religious education could draw upon a number of disparate fields such as sociology, theology and philosophy. Subjects which lack a disciplinary basis, like citizenship and religious education, should still be in a school curriculum as they provide important insights into human activity and are therefore worth studying, and require specialist teaching.

This presents a tension for those of us involved in education, especially at secondary school level. There are widely recognised benefits to subject-specialist teaching, but at the same time there is a growing trend towards cross-curricular approaches to teaching, which is also seen as beneficial. Gardner (2007) cites the importance of interdisciplinary thinking but raises two important caveats. Firstly, nobody can engage in interdisciplinary thinking without an understanding of the disciplines they are drawing upon to generate new meaning. Secondly, as Gardner (2007: 55) explains:

Courses may well and appropriately involve both history and the arts. One can read about the battles of the Spanish Civil War in a history text and one can also look at the painting Guernica, or read the novels of André Malraux or Ernest Hemingway, without making any particular effort to link or compare these sources. We might term this approach ‘disciplinary juxtaposition’ – a failure to realise the illumination that may accrue when different perspectives are synergistically joined.

The message is clear. Subjects matter, but much can be gained from bringing these together. This can only happen successfully where careful attention is paid to the value of each subject and ensuring that meaningful rather than artificial links are made between subjects.

The Move Towards Greater Cross-Curricular Teaching

Cross-curricular teaching is not new, but recently there has been a greater push towards this model as a means of structuring the learning experiences of young people. Although it is not the norm in schools, it is increasingly prevalent. A survey carried out by the Historical Association (Burn and Harris, 2009) found that in Year 7 approximately 85 per cent of schools continued to offer discrete subject teaching in the different humanities subjects, whilst nearly 7 per cent taught an integrated humanities programme, and a slightly larger number offered alternative curriculum approaches. The latter encompassed a vast array of programmes, such as ‘Opening Minds’, ‘Learning to Learn’, ‘Building Learning Power’, ‘Fusion Curriculum’ and so forth.

The impetus for the move towards alternative curriculum arrangements has several sources. Government agencies have been crucial in supporting schools in developing new curricular arrangements by giving them greater freedom to innovate or through new initiatives. Additionally, other interested parties have sought to offer schools support in developing new curricular programmes.

The Role of Government Agencies and New Initiatives

The introduction of the new National Curriculum in 2008 provided schools with the opportunity to adopt different approaches to the curriculum. Although coverage of subjects’ content, concepts and processes is statutory, there is no obligation on schools to address this via subject teaching; instead these could be addressed through the wholecurriculum dimensions as outlined in the ‘Big picture’ (QCA, 2008a). Thus issues like identity and cultural diversity, community participation, the global dimension and sustainable development are supposed to permeate the curriculum and have clear links to the humanities subjects.

In addition, the focus on personalised learning and the introduction of Personal Learning and Thinking Skills (PLTS) mean that schools have been looking to provide different educational experiences for young people. The new PLTS framework emphasises the development of learners who are independent enquirers, creative thinkers, reflective learners, teamworkers, self-managers and effective participators. Clearly this could be achieved within a ‘traditional’ curriculum, but it does put more onuses on the process of learning, which could be radically different from what many schools currently employ.

The introduction of diplomas, with their emphasis on applied learning, has implications for teaching at KS3. Applied learning is defined as ‘acquiring knowledge and skills through tasks or contexts that have many of the characteristics of real work’ (QCA, 2008c: 2). The intention is that learning is grounded in ‘real-life’ contexts, but the inclusion of PLTS means there is a strong emphasis on the learning process and the development of particular competences. This in turn means that if schools are to embrace diplomas successfully, they must consider how they prepare students at KS3. Obviously the success and future of diplomas has yet to be settled, especially within the humanities, but their existence raises questions about how students are to be taught.

The Role of Other Interested Parties

At the same time, the development of programmes like the RSA’s Opening Minds curriculum and Claxton’s Building Learning Power offers schools models of practice that could be adopted. Such approaches were developed as a reaction to concerns about the growing disengagement of youngsters from education and criticisms of a curriculum that was seen as irrelevant. For example, the Opening Minds programme focuses on the development of competences within five areas: citizenship, learning, managing information, managing situations and relating to people. The emphasis is very much on understanding and doing rather than transmission of knowledge, and is designed to equip pupils with the competences that are deemed important for the twenty-first century. Again, as with PLTS, there is an emphasis on the process of learning rather than what is learned. These competences are developed through units of work, which are designed to ensure the statutory elements of the National Curriculum are met. Understanding how well these approaches work is important, because according to the RSA’s own 2008 impact report, most schools adopt a competency model within the humanities subjects. This report (admittedly a very self-interested one) claims that such approaches have a major positive impact on pupils’ experience of education and their attainment. There does seem to be some merit in what such courses are able to achieve, but this does not mean they are universally successful. A recent Ofsted (2009a) report provides an evaluation of the impact of the new KS3 curriculum, including the development of competency-based courses. Although they recognised many benefits

subject inspectors also identified emerging problems with the courses. These included the loss of subject content and subject skills development; lack of continuity from primary school experience; lack of rigour and challenge; uneven quality of teaching and artificial ‘links’ or themes. These problems were especially manifested where courses had been given insufficient planning time and where the component subject departments were not fully involved in planning.

(Ofsted, 2009: 12).

Summary

It is clear that there has been greater attention recently on the development of cross-curricular courses, and that in many schools the humanities is seen as an...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• List of abbreviations
• Acknowledgements
• 1. What are the humanities and what is the context for cross-curricular teaching and learning?
• 2. Cross-curricular approaches to the humanities: how might a school shape its curriculum?
• 3. Approaches to teaching and learning in the humanities and beyond
• 4. Promoting enquiry and independent learning
• 5. Using talk to support thinking in the humanities
• 6. Teaching controversial and sensitive topics
• 7. Assessment and progression within the humanities
• 8. Future directions
• References
• Index