Curriculum integration is a complex topic because every aspect of education is involved. It is not simply putting together content from different subject areas. If one is contemplating interdisciplinary approaches, many of the fundamental questions of education must be considered. This chapter begins to explore these questions.

The first section will address questions such as what is integrated curriculum and why it should be used. This consideration will include a brief look at the history of integrated curriculum and research on integrated curriculum in education.

The second section examines current directions in education, primarily within Ontario and the United States, and provides examples of current tensions and emerging patterns. The accountability issues of standards, assessment, and evaluation are discussed within the context of integrated curriculum. What knowledge and skills are worth knowing and doing as this new century unfolds is also considered in this light. The remainder of this section addresses new views of how we learn and the implications of new ways to understand learning and knowing, in relation to how we should teach and assess students.

The third section illustrates two models for planning an interdisciplinary curriculum. Both a standards-based model and a problem-based model are provided, along with recommendations for implementation and a sample of applying the models in practice. This section also describes seven examples of integrated curriculum that are being implemented successfully in classrooms today. These include both primary and secondary school examples, ranging from one or a few teachers to 60, and from integrating a few disciplines to a fully integrated program. This section provides a practical illustration of the scope of application and complexity that integrated curriculum can address.

The fourth section provides a list of commonly asked questions and the answers. These questions are relevant to both administrators and teachers because they address issues of concern from both an institutional and individual level and offer many tested and practical suggestions.

The next two sections list other resources available on integrated curriculum.

Why Integrate the Curriculum?

We are living in a complex age, and life has never been segmented into disciplines. Living is experienced as an integrated whole. To live successfully, one needs skills that cut across the disciplines. For example, consider the skills and knowledge necessary for so seemingly simple an act as grocery shopping for a nutritious, balanced, and economical diet. Before one even begins to shop, there are some essential things the shopper must know and be able to do. How do you know the difference between nutritional and junk foods? The ability to read and understand labels on food products is crucial to making nutritional choices. To select the correct amount of each product, the number of people to be served and the recommended proportions of the four food groups need to be considered. In order to buy economically, one must be able to calculate the difference in prices between seemingly similar products. Finally, one needs interpersonal skills to be able to ask for help from grocery personnel when it is needed.

Today, fundamental change is occurring in every aspect of life. Technological advances have thrust us into a global world where many of our tried and true assumptions are being challenged. The very definitions of such fundamentals as family, health care, and economy are shifting. The cutting-edge jobs are going to people who can think outside of traditional "boxes." Employers increasingly are looking to hire generalists with "soft skills" such as leadership and change management. They want sophisticated problem solvers who can think critically and thus deal with ill-structured, complex problems. They want self-directed people who are willing and able to continually learn new things. In many cases, the technological skills needed in a job are changing so rapidly that schools can't keep up. Employers also are finding that it is the soft skills that make the difference between a successful and unsuccessful employee.

Education is also changing fundamentally. What is worth knowing? How can we make curriculum relevant? How do schools produce the type of productive citizens needed in this new century? How can students be encouraged to become self-directed, critical, and creative thinkers who excel at problem solving? How can we move toward making "success for all" a reality?

To address these questions many educators are turning toward curriculum that is situated in a real-life context. This type of curriculum tends to be student-centered and experiential and revolve around problem solving, making many of these efforts interdisciplinary by nature.

Integrated curriculum is an approach that can address many current issues. It can, for example,

• Reduce duplication of skills and concepts in different subject areas.
• Increase relevance for the learner, given a real-life context.
• Allow for the learner to see the big picture, rather than just the fragmented parts.
• Allow for teaching interdisciplinary life skills for the 21st century.
• Focus on skills that can be transferred to other disciplines and to life.

Integration by itself, however, is no panacea. A curriculum can be totally integrated in its content and still leave the learners disinterested if it is delivered in a lifeless manner. What makes a difference in an integrated approach is not only what is taught but how it is taught. Integrated curriculum is usually delivered with strategies such as active learning, experiential learning, problem solving, and real-life contexts.

What Is Integrated Curriculum?

One of the problems with integrated curriculum is that it can mean many things to different people. Integrated curriculum is about making meaningful connections between topics or skills that are usually addressed in different subject areas. However, over time there have been many different definitions, describing approaches that varied philosophically. To complicate things further, integrated approaches can range from a small unit of study in one classroom to a fully integrated day in an entire school.

Many theorists argue that levels of integration can be found on a continuum (see, for example, Burns, 1995; Drake, 1998; Fogarty, 1991; Jacobs, 1989). At the lowest level, teachers have begun to integrate the curriculum in several ways.

Fusion, for example, is when a specific theme or skill is fused into separate subject areas. Technology across the curriculum is often dealt with in this way. Another example of a lower level of integration is when various subdisciplines are integrated. Integrating biology, chemistry, and physics, for example, is now common even at the university level.

In Ontario, grades 1 to 9 were officially required to use an integrated, outcome-based approach in The Common Curriculum (1993, 1995). During those years, I observed many educators planning for integrated approaches and was personally involved in several ventures. Based on these experiences, I developed a continuum of three approaches that I saw people adopting (Drake, 1993). The three approaches were multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary. They are represented in three integrated curriculum models that show each model's approach and conceptual framework (see Figure 1.1). A brief description of each model is provided below.

[Note: This figure is not available for electronic dissemination.]

Multidisciplinary

In a multidisciplinary approach, two or more subject areas are organized around the same theme or topic. In elementary school, this often occurs when learning centers are utilized. The topic may be pioneers, and students rotate through a math center, language center, and visual art center. At each one they explore the topic of pioneers via an activity grounded in the curriculum subject area.

In secondary schools, a common theme is often studied in various subject-based classrooms. For example, teachers of all subject areas at Skyview High School in Smithfield, Utah, and North Cache 8–9 Center in Richmond, Utah, have agreed to integrate the public health issue of physical activity into their lesson plans (Eckman, 2000). They undertook this integration in concert with the Utah Department of Health. Social studies was to look at policymaking procedures, and English was to write editorials and public service announcements about the issue. In math class students learned graphing, plotting, percentages, and ratios as they pertain to collecting health data. Sociology and psychology students were to implement and test planned intervention.

Another popular multidisciplinary approach is to view the content through a number of disciplinary lenses. This usually involves a problem or an issue. Students systematically ask, for example, how a scientist, an artist, or a mathematician would approach this problem.

There is an attempt at making explicit connections across subject areas. This often happens in a culminating activity. For example, in an integrated arts unit, students have studied visual arts, drama, and music separately but have connected the skills they learned in a final musical performance (Sturch, 1996).

Interdisciplinary

In this approach, interdisciplinary skills are the organizing center for two or more subject areas. These are process skills such as research, literacy, or numeracy skills. Connections are also made with content through the teaching of concepts that cut across subject areas.

A good example of this is in a schoolwide grade 7–8 unit, four to six weeks long, developed by teachers from Peter Muhlenburg Middle School, Woodstock, Va. (Burns, 1995). The focus of study was "survival in a changing world." All subject areas were involved in the unit, including a foreign language, agriculture, and life management. All teachers focused on problem solving, decision making, and communication, and selected the concepts that were most compatible with their course content.

This approach lends itself very well to planning with standards and performance assessment because the standards for each discipline are clearly set out. They can be "reclustered" into interdisciplinary clusters that fit together naturally. The culminating activity is also usually performance-based and is grounded in the standards taught throughout the unit.

Transdisciplinary

In the transdisciplinary approach there is a real-life context, and student needs act as the organizing center. The disciplines are not considered in the initial planning stages. The assumption is that most or all disciplines are embedded in the topic of study and can be isolated if so desired.

The Kids Around Town (KAT) Project, a pilot local-government education program in Pennsylvania, is a good example of a curriculum organized around a real-life context (Rappoport & Kletzien, 1996). Fifth-graders select a public policy issue that affects them locally. The issue, such as litter in a local park, is the catalyst for study and analysis, planning strategies, and actions. The goal is for students to understand the process of formulating public policy. There is no textbook; the program emphasizes multiple information sources and multiple solutions.

Project-based learning often fits this category. Such an approach was used, for example, by Dot Schuler, who teaches 2nd grade at Grafton Elementary School, Grafton, Ill. (Fleming, in press). Her students studied water for six weeks. To begin, the students brainstormed for ideas to create a web. As the ideas were shared, the students and Dot decided on a name for a category to group the ideas in. For example, when children shared the words "shark, bass, catfish," they would decide to call the category "things that live in water." If the students named "pipes, buckets, puddles," the category might be called "places to find water." Personal stories were recorded and placed in the listening center, along with a movie box portraying each child's illustrations for his or her story. Schuler posed open-ended questions, and the children published the responses on charts as a reference for the rest of the project.

Students were exposed to numerous real-life "water" contexts in the community, such as the local water park and the Grafton Water Works. Investigations were created from the students' questions. Two class books focusing on alliteration and descriptive essays were written featuring descriptions from students' personal experiences and knowledge. Three class math books were made featuring two-step story problems, number words, and fractions. The application of curricular skills abounded; some occurred naturally, others were taught systematically. Other examples of project-based learning can be found at Schuler's Web site, http://www.plantnet.com/dschuler/.

The work of Beane (1993) is another wonderful example of transdisciplinary curriculum because it draws on the needs and concerns of the student. He begins the curriculum planning with two fundamental questions:

1. What questions and concerns do you have about yourself?
2. What questions and concerns do you have about your world?

The themes of study emerge from the answers students give to these questions. Although Beane begins with the students' interests and needs, he does not abandon the disciplines. For him, disciplines are used as resources to explore the theme and to create teaching and learning activities. The Alpha Program in Section III offers a detailed example of this approach.

Figure 1.1 offers a framework through which to reflect on the concept of a continuum. Although this framework was developed in 1993, for the most part it still holds true. As we gain more experience with integration, however, the boundaries between subjects become more and more blurred. A pitfall to using a continuum is that it can be value-laden (Hargreaves et al., 1996). In reality, one approach is not superior to another. However, one may be more appropriate than another in certain circumstances.

Pursuing the Interdisciplinary Approach

Multidisciplinary curriculum is perhaps the easiest way to begin integrating the curriculum. For many teachers, transdisciplinary curriculum is experienced as the most natural way to develop meaningful and relevant curriculum. Yet we are living in an age of accountability, when the standards movement and a focused interest in assessment are not likely to go away quickly or quietly. For this reason, the interdisciplinary approach appears to fit best with current realities. However, it is the most challenging approach for teachers to develop and deliver, as it goes against the grain of long-held practices. Over time some teachers have demonstrated that they can plan with standards in ways that result in relevant and meaningful interdisciplinary curriculum.

This Curriculum Handbook chapter will focus on the interdisciplinary approach. Powell (1999) asserts that interdisciplinary approaches might still be delivered in a traditional format whereby the teacher lectures and the students passively receive knowledge. Integrative approaches, on the other hand, promote an active learning model in which students construct knowledge in a democratic classroom.

In this chapter, however, all integrated curriculum delivery is assumed to be student-centered in classrooms that feature active integrative learning. The words interdisciplinary and integrated will be used interchangeably. Similarly, I define the term "standards" broadly to include such ideas as competencies, expectations, and outcomes. Standards, in my definition, include both content standards and performance standards. The intent of this chapter is to provide a way to plan curriculum that satisfies current demands for the attainment of standards and also offers benefits of an integrated curriculum.

Research in Education

In the last decade, a lot has been written on integrated curriculum. Articles tend to discuss the theory and merits of integration, describe the process, or provide case studies. Czerniak and colleagues (1999), for example, review the literature on integrated curriculum and offer an excellent look at the state of the art. They discuss several issues: the lack of an operational definition of integrated curriculum, the role of integration in school curriculum, advantages and disadvantages, and problems associated with implementation. The authors also lament the lack of empirical studies in the field.

A dialogue on interdisciplinary curriculum theory has continued over the past few years. Integrated curriculum has been attacked as not rigorous enough (Case, 1994). Rigor can be created when three criteria are present: substance, relevance, and coherence (Martin-Kniep, Feige, & Soodak, 1995). The content needs to be significant, and teachers need to be grounded in their subject fields. A relevant curriculum is one that is interpreted by practicing teachers as skill-building for future careers and providing awareness of students' social and political contexts (Hargreaves & Moore, 2000). Hargreaves and Moore note that integrated curriculum, rather than being superficial, can be rigorous and demanding of both the students and teacher.

History of Integrated Curriculum

It is useful to know that interdisciplinary curriculum is not just a fad. For more than a century, there have been a number of forays into the realm of integrated curriculum. The following brief historical account is based on the excellent work of Wraga (1996, 1997) found in the Annual Review of Research for School Leaders.

By the late 1800s, educators were wrestling with many of the same concerns we now face more than a century later. Three pressing issues gave rise to discussions on the pros and cons of integrated curriculum and instruction:

1. What should be taught, given the vast increase in available knowledge?
2. What should be taught, given the greater number of students who now need to be educated?
3. How can schools be responsible for developing moral character unless the curriculum is connected to real life?

In the late 1800s, these discussions were at the theory level only. Resistance to integrated approaches was attributed to similar reasons as are touted today. They included:

• Varying definitions for varying degrees of integration, ranging from simple connections between subjects to integrating students' experience with the larger world.
• The importance of making the school experience applicable to life.
• The domination of the disciplines as an obstacle to integration.

In 1900, John Dewey proposed: "Relate the school to life, and all studies are of necessity correlated" (Dewey, 1900, p. 91). Dewey experimented with an experiential approach, proposing experiences of growth for students. Problem solving through the scientific method was at the core of this process. His philosophy has been largely associated with the progressive education movement; however, Dewey did not agree with all the movement's tenets, arguing for more rigor through the scientific method.

By the 1930s, three progressive approaches emerged: the project method, the experience curriculum, and the activity movement. These approaches, however, tended to be extremely child-centered and emphasized activity for activity's sake. Curriculum organizations emerged to bring more rigor to progressive approaches. Statewide curriculum development projects were undertaken in Virginia, Arkansas, Kentucky, Texas, Georgia, and Tennessee. It was determined that 80 percent of schools in the United States had some form of interdisciplinary curriculum.

At the same time, general education advocates promoted "common learning." Such experiences included problem solving, critical thinking, and analytical research. "Core curriculum" emerged from general education. In core curriculum, learning activities and knowledge were organized around personal and social issues. It involved block timing and team teaching. Core curriculum remained popular during the 1940s and '50s. In 1955, ASCD issued a report identifying the following competencies for a core teacher using an interdisciplinary approach: understanding the adolescent, democratic leadership skills, student counseling skills, and the ability to apply subject knowledge to exploring personal and social issues.

Integrated curriculum approaches were largely forgotten during the Sputnik crisis in the late '50s. At this time, the educational world was plunged into a rigid, discipline-based approach with a special emphasis on math and sciences. Two innovations, however, left the door open for discussions on integrated approaches: team teaching and the emergence of middle schools.

By the late 1980s there were new calls for reform in papers such as Caught in the Middle (California State Department of Education, 1987) and Turning Points (Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1989). These papers focused on making school relevant for students. Attention turned again to integrated curriculum.

Seeking Academic Success

Case studies tend to tell the same story: Students do well in integrated studies; they are engaged in the study; and they learn skills beyond the set curriculum. Unfortunately, this does not convince those who want to have "hard data" that curriculum integration works before they will venture forward. There is, however, encouraging research to support curriculum integration efforts. Some of this research is presented here.

The Eight-Year Study, done in the 1930s, offers the most dramatic example of what can happen in high schools if integrated curriculum is taught (Aikin, 1942). Thirty secondary schools and 1,475 students participated in this study. Researchers investigated how well students would do in higher education if they were educated in schools that were student-centered and learned the skills and social orientation for a democratic way of life.

In the study, schools were given the freedom to decide how they would present curriculum to students. Colleges and universities dropped admission requirements, subject and credit prescriptions, and, in most cases, entrance exams. This facilitated the high schools' adoption of innovative programs to deliver the curriculum. Matched pairs of students (in the study and from a traditional school not in the study) were compared on 18 variables including academic honors, grade average, objective thinking, cocurricular activities and community involvement. The graduates of the 30 schools did "somewhat better" than the comparison group (Aikin, 1942, p. 112). The graduates from the most experimental schools, where interdisciplinary work was an important characteristic, were "strikingly more successful" (p. 113) than their matches in all other schools in the study. On the other hand, the graduates from the least innovative schools showed no differences from the comparison group.

This study has had little influence in the educational community — perhaps because the project ended just at the beginning of World War II. It is unfortunate, since there was never again such large-scale research. Quantitative studies of integration projects are hard to come by. For some, this is because confusion surrounds what qualifies as an interdisciplinary program. For others, quantitative approaches do not fit what they are trying to measure.

Given the current domination of standardized tests, people want to know the relationship between integrated approaches and success on such tests. Unfortunately, there is still little evidence on how students fare on standardized tests. As districts move into more systematic interdisciplinary programs, however, data are becoming available. The following are some examples:

1. Burns (1994) reports that Interdisciplinary Teamed Instruction had positive effects on student performance, particularly for lower-achieving students in four sites. By 1998, three of these sites, which used interdisciplinary instruction for more than two years, reported an overall upward trend in standardized test scores (Burns, in press).
2. Caine and Caine (1997) also report an upward trend in standardized test scores in two case studies of elementary schools.
3. Twenty-eight of the 100 middle schools that were examined as effective reported specific results demonstrating improved scores on standardized tests (George & Oldaker, 1985).
4. Students enrolled in a three-year integrated science program performed 4 percentiles higher, which is marginally significant, than 121 matched students not in the program (University of Alabama Center for Communication and Educational Technology, 1997).
5. Lieberman and Hoody (1998) offer solid evidence that integrated environmental programs work. A significant improvement in student performance in reading, writing, math, science, and social studies was documented across 40 American schools.
6. More than 100 3rd grade students who took an integrated science and literature course did significantly better on all literacy measures than children in a literature-only group. Children in the literature-only group did significantly better than the children in the control group (traditional classroom), except on standardized reading tests. The literature and science group did significantly better than either of the other two groups on science concepts (Guthrie et al., 1998).
7. At Radnor Middle School in Pennsylvania, about one-fifth of the grade 7 students study the watershed all year in a fully integrated program. Over the nine years of the program, these students have shown consistently the greatest writing improvement, compared with the students in the traditional classroom. Their standardized test scores are equal to or better than the other students' (Sadowski, 1995).
8. Green (1991) reports increased student interest and achievement scores on the NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) for students in California who participated in thematic units.
9. A powerful example of the potential of interdisciplinary curriculum is International High School, New York (Sadowski, 1995), Here, interdisciplinary curriculum is taught all day. The school has a graduation rate of over 95 percent, and over 90 percent of graduates go on to college. Virtually all students pass the New York Regency Competency tests in all subjects. This is extraordinary when you consider that the 450 students have been in the United States for less than four years and have low English proficiency scores.

Other Benefits to Students

Vars (1996) reviewed more than 100 programs that took place between 1956 and 1995. At that time, he concluded that integrative approaches are beneficial to students in many ways. Beane (1995) also echoed this conclusion. Vars (2000a) restated the accuracy of his 1996 claim:

Although there may not be much data yet on links between interdisciplinary education and standardized tests, there is abundant evidence of other benefits. Much of this evidence is anecdotal, but the evidence mounts. An overview of these benefits can be found in Creating Integrated Curriculum: Proven Ways to Increase Student Learning (Drake, 1998). Studies cited in this book claim that interdisciplinary work

• Increased learning.
• Led to greater personal growth.
• Boosted self-motivation.
• Increased the ability to apply concepts.
• Led to better understanding of science concepts.
• Increased student motivation.
• Led students to become more responsible human beings.
• Fostered better writing skills.
• Increased positive attitudes toward reading.
• Enhanced self-confidence.
• Increased student cooperation.
• Reduced disruptive behavior.
• Reduced math anxiety.
• Increased use of higher thinking skills.
• Improved the quality of work.

Given these potential results including academic success, it is little wonder that teachers who use interdisciplinary methods are convinced that they are an effective, if not better, way to learn.

The Process of Integration

Much of the literature revolves around the process of integration. Rebecca Burn's Dissolving the Boundaries (1995) is an excellent research-based resource. She discusses various definitions of integration, assessing the readiness of the school culture, and preparing teams for integration. This is a good resource for anyone who wants to facilitate the process of curriculum integration, as it offers a step-by-step process for preparing people to plan for curriculum. The process of integration, along with current research and applications of several models of integration, are offered in Creating Integrated Curriculum: Proven Ways to Increase Student Learning (Drake, 1998).

Two factors are often discussed as integral to integrated curriculum: teaming and block scheduling. Teaming has many advantages. According to data from 155 middle schools, common planning time was crucial to success (Flowers, Mertens, & Mulhall, 1999). Those involved believed that teaming

• Improved school climate.
• Improved work climate.
• Increased parental contact.
• Increased job satisfaction.

Block scheduling has also been touted as necessary to integrate curriculum properly and is a central component of core curriculum. Certainly, schools that integrate usually do change the schedule to allow for more time in the classroom. Vars (1996) offers the following advantages to block scheduling:

• Teachers have fewer pupils for longer periods.
• Pupils have fewer teachers.
• The same teacher teaches one group of students two or more subject areas.

These advantages lead to better opportunities for creative teaching and learning activities, time to provide for individual differences, greater security for the student, and more opportunity for teacher-student planning and cooperative evaluation.

Vars (2000b) also offers the experiences of Betty Bickford, a teacher from Lincoln, Maine. She found she can integrate within a 40-minute classroom period. She followed Beane's model (1993) and began with student questions. They worked on the theme of relationships and demonstrated the results of their research in a PowerPoint presentation given in a game format. Students developed assessment rubrics and assessed how well the unit aligned with district curriculum and Maine's Learning Results.

In summary, the research supports integrated approaches. Students do at least as well, or better, on standardized tests than students in regular programs. The added benefits make teaching and learning a more exciting and engaging enterprise. As we enter an era of data-driven decision making, we can expect that more empirical studies will be added to the knowledge base.

Works Cited

Aikin, W. M. (1942). The story of the eight-year study. New York: Harper.

Beane, J. (1993). A middle school curriculum: From rhetoric to reality. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.

Beane, J. (1995). Curriculum integration and the disciplines of knowledge. Phi Delta Kappan, 76 (8), 616–622.

Burns, R. C. (1994). Interdisciplinary teamed instruction: Development and pilot test. Charleston, WV: Appalachia Educational Laboratory. (ED 384–456)

Burns, R. C. (1995). Dissolving the boundaries: Planning for curriculum integration in middle and secondary schools. Charleston, WV: Appalachia Educational Laboratory.

Burns, R. C. (in press). Interdisciplinary teamed instruction. In J. T. Klein (Ed.), Integrated and interdisciplinary curriculum across K–16. New York: The College Board.

Caine, R., & Caine, G. (1997). Education on the edge of possibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

California State Department of Education. (1987). Caught in the middle. Sacramento, CA: Author.

Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development. (1989). Turning points: Preparing American youth for the 21st century. Washington, DC: Carnegie Corporation.

Case, R. (1994). Our crude handling of curriculum reform: The case of curriculum integration. Canadian Journal of Education,19(1), 80–93.

Czerniak, C. M., Weber, W. B., Sandmann, A., & Adhern, J. (1999). A literature review of science and mathematics integration. School Science and Mathematics, 99(8), 421–430.

Dewey J. (1956/1902/1900). The child and the curriculum/The school and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Drake, S. M. (1993). Planning integrated curriculum: The call to adventure. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Drake, S. M. (1998). Creating integrated curriculum: Proven ways to increase student learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Eckman, A. (2000, Spring). Tackling real world issues. Curriculum Update, 4–5.

Fogarty, R. (1991). The mindful school: How to integrate the curricula. Palatine, IL: SkyLight.

Fleming, D. S. (in press). A teacher's guide to project-based learning. Charleston, WV: Appalachia Educational Laboratory.

Flowers, N., Mertens, S. B., & Mulhall, P. F. (1999). The impact of teaming: Five research-based outcomes. Middle School Journal, 31(2), 57–60.

George, P. S., & Oldaker, L. L. (1985). Evidence for the middle school. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.

Greene, L. C. (1991, October). Science-centered curriculum in elementary school. Educational Leadership, 49(2), 42–51.

Guthrie, J. T., Van Meta, P., Hancock, G. R., Alao, S., Anderson, E., & McCann, A. A. (1998). Does concept-oriented reading instruction increase strategy use and conceptual learning from text? Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 261–278.

Hargreaves, A., & Moore, S. (2000). Curriculum integration and classroom relevance: A study of teachers' practice. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 15(2), 89–112.

Hargreaves. A., Earl, L., & Ryan, J. (1996). Schooling for change: Reinventing education for early adolescents. London: Falmer Press.

Jacobs, H. H. (Ed.). (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and development. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Lieberman, G. A., & Hoody, L. L. (1998). Closing the achievement gap: Using the environment as an integrating context for learning. San Diego, CA: State Education and Environment Roundtable.

Martin-Kniep, G. O., Feige, D. M., & Soodak, L. C. (1995). Curriculum integration: An expanded view of an abused idea. Journal of Supervision and Curriculum, 10(3), 227–249.

Ontario Ministry of Education (1993, 1995). The common curriculum: policies and outcomes, grades 1–9. Toronto: Ministry of Education and Training, Government of Ontario.

Powell, R. R. (1999). Reflections on integrative curriculum: A conversation with Camille Barr and Molly Maloy. Middle School Journal, 31(2), 25–34.

Rappoport, A. L., & Kletzien, S. (1996, May). Kids around town: Civic lessons leave impressions. Educational Leadership, 53(8), 26–29.

Sadowski, M. (1995). Moving beyond traditional subjects requires teachers to abandon their "comfort zones." The Harvard Education Letter, 11(2), 1–6.

Sturch, J. E. (1996). The arts quest: Integrating drama, music and visual arts. Orbit, 27(1), 36–37.

University of Alabama Center for Communication and Educational Technology. (1997). Summary report of the Integrated Science Student Impact Study. Birmingham, AL: Author.

Vars, G. F. (1996). Effects of interdisciplinary curriculum and instruction. In P. Hlebowitch & W. Wraga (Eds.), Annual review of research for school leaders (pp. 148–164). New York: Scholastic.

Vars, G. F. (2000a). Editorial comment: On research, high-stakes testing, and core philosophy. The Core Teacher, 50(3), 1.

Vars, G. F. (2000b). "Relationships" unit makes English classes more integrative and democratic. The Core Teacher, 51, 3.

Wraga, W. (1996). A century of interdisciplinary curricula in American schools. In P. Hlebowitch & W. Wraga (Eds.), Annual review of research for school leaders (pp. 118–145). New York: Scholastic.

Wraga, W. (1997). Patterns of interdisciplinary curriculum organization and professional knowledge of the curriculum field. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 12(2), 98–117.