Rethinking Curriculum Integration by Expanding the Debate

Abstract

This paper analyses discussions on curriculum integration. Three questions guide the analysis. The first asks how curriculum integration is defined. The second examines the rationales for and against integration. The third assesses the effects of combining curriculums in middle schools. Discourse analyses reveal that curriculum integration describes combining ideas and generating knowledge. Advocates suggest it is useful for educating the whole child, addressing crises, and producing social change. Detractors insist it is unscientific and biased, and that by focusing on individual students, integrated programs have a divisive rather than unifying effect. Analyses also suggest that discussions represent a struggle for control over what is taught in public schools, and that the perspectives of middle school educators are generally not included.