Rationale: Interdisciplinary teams provide varied instructional strategies, and a balanced curriculum base on the needs of students, recognizing that learning occurs I context, not in isolation. The importance of cohesiveness is paramount to middle school students.
When interdisciplinary units are used, students take a more active role, help clarify the effective and ineffective parts of the unit, talk about the units in ways that help validate the experiences, and see the interconnectedness of the world (Strubbe, 1990).
From Florida Schoolyear 200 Project- Middle School Subcommittee (1994) regarding interdisciplinary teams:
-Curriculum presented in experiential contexts helps students learn content skills in relation to
one another
-Teachers can better organize time and space to best utilize materials
-Teachers are better able to identify student needs
-Allows a climate that addresses and values both cognitive and non-cognitive objectives.
- Teams with a large block of time can experiment with creative ways of organizing
-Provides a common planning time; Amany heads are better than one@
-As middle schools increase in size and diversity, teams create a feeling of closeness and
belonging
Interdisciplinary teaming allows teachers to have control over the amount of time spent in a particular area. In fact, all classes do not need to meet the same number of periods per week for the same amount of time each week (NMSA, This We Believe, p. 17).
Benefits to students (Clark & Clark, 1993, pp. 124-125):
-Provides a more comfortable transition from elementary to middle school
-Allows teachers to focus collectively on the individual needs of their students
-Enables the creation of positive, nurturing environments for learning
-Enhance school environments that facilitate the development of positive attitudes, greater interest in
subject matter, sense of personal freedom, and sense of self-reliance
-Promotes a climate fostering more positive relations among culturally diverse students
-Promotes an atmosphere that influences students to behave in more positive ways
-Contributes to efforts to reduce dropouts
-Promotes insight into the logical relationships between branches of knowledge
-Increases opportunities for communication between teachers and teaches, students and teachers,
and students and students
-Provides better and more communication between the home and school
-Provide small communities for learning within the larger school buildings, a core academic program,
and empowerment for teachers and administrators in making decisions about the experiences of
middle grades students (Carnegie Report)
Selections from Research Reports
Interdisciplinary team organization provides support and empowerment for teachers and students and creates a sense of ownership in the school's vision (Keefe, Valentine, Clark, & Irvin, 1993, p. 37).
Teaming (Raebeck, pp. 60-61), is perhaps the most critical element of a transformational middle level program, and should include:
A strong interdisciplinary component
Daily team teacher planning time
Staff involvement in team staffing procedures
A designated leader or contact person
Team representation on the major committee(s)
Full range of student ability levels on each team
Defined team zones, areas, or houses in building
Manageable student numbers
Flexible staffing, and mixing of team members, if needed
Much discussion, time, and training prior to implementation
Team accountability and a team observation process
George & Shewey (1994) report that 84% of the respondents in their survey reported that a strong student recognition program provided through interdisciplinary teams has contributed to the long term effectiveness of their middle school program.
George & Shewey (1994) report that 85% of the respondents in their survey reported that an interdisciplinary team organization where teachers share students, space and schedule has contributed to the long term effectiveness of their middle school program.
Selected References
Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development=s Task Force on Education of Young
Adolescents. (1989). Turning Points: Preparing American Youth for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, a program of the Carnegie Corporation of New York.
Clark, S. & Clark, D. (1994). Restructuring the Middle Level School: Implications for
School Leaders. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Florida Schoolyear 2000 Project - Middle School Subcommittee (1994). Center for Educational Technology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida.
George, P., & Shewey, K. (1994). New Evidence for the Middle School. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.
Keefe, J., Valentine, J., Clark, D., & Irvin, J. (1993). Leadership in Middle Level
Education, Volume II: Leadership in Successfully Restructuring Middle Level
Schools. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
Raebeck, B. (1992). Transforming Middle Schools: A Guide to Whole-School Change.
Lancaster, PA: Technomic.
Strubbe, M. (January, 1990). Are interdisciplinary units worthwhile? Ask Students! Middle School Journal 21, 3: 36-38.
This We Believe. (1992). Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.